Policy’s Logic Outpaces Allegations of Sexism

Citing a high probability of neck injury in combat or the event of pilot ejection, the British Royal Air Force (RAF), in an instance inconsistent with the service’s penchant for political correctness and identity politics, has set forth that women do not weigh enough to fly the F-35 Lightning II fighter jet.

At present, owing to inescapable physiological realities, only pilots weighing more than 150-pounds (68-kilograms) are cleared to wear the Gen III F-35 helmet—a five-pound (2.27-kilogram), $400,000 (£331,960) technological marvel that allows pilots—among other impressive capabilities—to “see through” the F-35’s fuselage while in flight.

The information collected by the Lightning II’s complex sensor systems—to include aircraft and flight-environment, targeting, infrared, and night-vision data—are routed to the Gen III helmet and projected before F-35 pilots’ eyes—thereby ostensibly compensating for the aircraft’s dearths of speed and maneuverability and justifying, to some degree, it’s tremendous cost.

Citing safety concerns that remain despite the existence of a new, Gen III Lite helmet, RAF Air Chief Marshal Sir Mike Wigston stated: "The lighter helmet that would allow lighter aircrew—not just women—to fly the F-35, [but] we would have challenges in clearing it in safety terms, because it does not give the pilot the protection that the other helmet has now.”

Sir Wigston added: "As it stands there are sufficient safety grounds for us to say 'that is the minimum weight limit for Lightning and whether you are a man or a woman or anybody, that is what applies.’”

The safety concerns come to light one year after a controversial policy dubbed positive discrimination was instituted for purpose of prioritizing women and what the U.K. calls BAME candidates—Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic people—in RAF training programs.

The positive discrimination policy has occasioned harsh criticism of the RAF by both liberal and conservative factions within the U.K. and the nation’s Parliament. Democratic socialist Labor Party parliamentarian Kevan Jones of North Durham, England decried the air chief marshal for narrowing the list of potential fighter pilot candidates, stating: "You're reducing your pool down straight away, aren't you? Because if women are lighter, which they generally are, they're not going to be able to ever fly. The only alternative is you either stop them flying or ask them to go and put some weight on.”

Conversely, a select parliamentary committee asserted the RAF’s decision to choose candidates based on race or gender was patently illegal.

"There has clearly been a lack of integrity at the top of the RAF," Chairman Tobias Ellwood averred. "Your legal team said it would break the law if you pursued this policy. This was a formal directive from the top.”

Notwithstanding the policy’s high-profile and deeply divisive nature, the RAF maintains positive discrimination was never formalized, and that it has in no way impacted the service’s operational readiness or capabilities.

FMI: www.lockheedmartin.com