Further debate on Medved and women soldiers

I got an e-mail from someone who works for Michael Medved disagreeing with my criticism of him:

Hey Lawrence,

Have you ever heard Michael’s radio show? You don’t seem familiar with his actual views. He has spoken many times of his opposition to women in combat. In his speech he was obviously referring to the fact that armed women are currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Sorry to confuse you with the truth.

Dan Sytman
Medved Show

Here’s my reply:

Dear Mr. Sytman:

I’m not familiar with Mr. Medved’s program. My reply to you is obvious. If a person says many times that he’s against X, and then gives a speech, later re-published as an article, in which he gives an extravagant statement in favor of X, then it seems to me he can be fairly criticized for saying he supports X. If Mr. Medved is against women in combat, then why did he approve of women in combat in his speech?

The fact that women are currently serving in Afghanistan and Iraq doesn’t change the issue. If Medved were serious about opposing women in combat, then he would still be against it, even if they were currently serving in combat (which, I remind you, they are not). Also, contrary to what you are implying, he was not merely acknowledging the service of women soldiers, as an established fact he doesn’t particularly like but can’t change; he was calling for women to serve in combat on a regular basis, which they do not do now. Here again is what he said:

And what will solve the problem of Islamo-fascist terrorism, I’m sorry to say, is not understanding, negotiation, conferences, social workers, daisies, or anything other than the heroic violence of brave men and women with guns, fighting selflessly for their country—this greatest nation on God’s green earth.

This goes way beyond respecting and honoring women in the armed forces. He is saying that the only way we can defeat our enemies is through the “heroic violence of brave … women with guns, fighting selflessly for their country.”

For you to say that Mr. Medved opposes putting women in combat is self-evidently untrue.

Thank you for writing.

Lawrence Auster

A reader writes about the above:

That response from Dan Sytman was pretty snappy. “What, you don’t listen to Medved? You don’t know his views?! Why, they’re obvious, and true. What he said in this case doesn’t count.”

For Sytman’s amazing reply to my above e-mail, click here.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 01, 2005 07:12 PM | Send