1st female Beefeater at Tower of London

Associated Press via Yahoo news ^ | 9-3-2007 | By ROBERT BARR

[Beaker]

Congratulations to her!

[JillValentine]

Agree. She seems like a fun girl, someone you could enjoy a beer with. Not a feminazi at all.

[StormEye]

"A woman joined the protectors of the Crown Jewels on Monday as one of the famed Beefeaters of the Tower of London, becoming the first female Yeoman Warder since the corps of Tower guards was created in 1485."

What a shame. Apparently there is no institution the PC Nazis won't ruin.

[britemp]

‘What a shame. Apparently there is no institution the PC Nazis won’t ruin.’

That’s right, they planted her in the British Army 25 years ago for just this occasion. . . . .

Tinfoil hat too toght today? :)

[StormEye]

"That’s right, they planted her in the British Army 25 years ago for just this occasion. . . . .

Tinfoil hat too toght today? :)"

The word is spelled "tight". (I know it's just a typo
but some people need correcting. Like you, who think that women must be included in every traditional male instiution just to statisfy your warped sense egalitarianism. Have some of my tin foil, won't you?)

[britemp]

‘Like you, who think that women must be included in every traditional male instiution just to statisfy your warped sense egalitarianism. Have some of my tin foil, won’t you?)’

No thanks, you can keep your misogyny to yourself.

PS - the word is spelled ‘institution’, not ‘instiution’. Some people just need correcting. . . . . :D

[WorkingClassFilth]

She’s in the slot because she’s a female and to imagine that no qualified male was available is ridiculous. To break 500+ years of highly visible tradition is the goal.

[dbwz]

She’s in the slot because she’s a female and to imagine that no qualified male was available is ridiculous. To break 500+ years of highly visible tradition is the goal.

No, not ridiculous. Being a guy doesn't automatically qualify you as much as being a gal doesn't automatically disqualify you.

[billbears]

and to imagine that no qualified male was available is ridiculous

She outdid five other qualified males so she must be doing something right. And she did her 22 years in Her Majesty's service so I see nothing wrong with this.

[Vanders9]

The tradition isnt that the beefeaters are always men. The tradition is that they are senior non-coms that must have done 22 years unblemished service to the crown in the Army, Marines or RAF (but not the navy, curiously enough).

Can you imagine how much flak would have been attracted if she had been refused the position on the grounds she was a woman? I personally want to prove the left are the real elitists...I see no percentage in giving them ammunition so they can try and prove otherwise.

[WorkingClassFilth]

When a woman is placed into any position of public visibility for the first time - especially when it is a traditional male role - it is always a political act.

From the article: "Moira Cameron, a Warrant Officer Class 2 who joined the army at age 20, was selected over five men who also applied for the vacancy."

Her service record would naturally be combed and curried accordingly in an effort to deflect the obvious criticism, but the certain (but denied) fact remains that the selection process was pointed in one direction from the beginning. The idea that no male candidate was acceptable is, in the light of British military vigor today, quite preposterous.

Of course, you are free to believe she's a wonderful candidate as much as you are free to believe all of the Police Chief and Fire Chief slots across the country in Northern, urban, leftist strongholds are given with high frequency to women (quite often to women with a little of the bull in them...if you know what I mean).

Thanks, but I'll pass on the Soma tablets today.

[billbears]

Her service record would naturally be combed and curried accordingly in an effort to deflect the obvious criticism, but the certain (but denied) fact remains that the selection process was pointed in one direction from the beginning. The idea that no male candidate was acceptable is, in the light of British military vigor today, quite preposterous

By God, we should just go back to Salic law too right? After all what's a woman doing sitting on the throne? Wasn't a male candidate acceptable for the throne? D#mn uppity women...

[WorkingClassFilth]

Your reasoning makes no sense and your counter argument is a non sequitor.

This woman was an accountant for her military career. This alone, speaks volumes for a mind willing to think. Forgetting the idea of a charge given to a trusted warrior caste and a centuries old tradition of faithfulness, let’s just do what feels good right now, eh?

Erasing sexual distinctions, even in a symbolic role, is to debase meaning, tradition and culture, but, hey, by all means enjoy your brave new world!

[billbears]

Your reasoning makes no sense and your counter argument is a non sequitor

Actually it's not. Your argument is based on age old custom. That a woman shouldn't be a Yeoman Warder. The same argument Salic law made about hereditary law when it came to the thrones of Europe.

This woman was an accountant for her military career. This alone, speaks volumes for a mind willing to think.

What does it matter what she did for her 22 years? She gave service to Her Majesty. Can you say all the 35-36 men who are Yeoman Warders gave a different form of service? The fact that she's an accountant I think is good in a fashion itself. Memorizing all the information one needs to know about the Tower would take an analytical mind. Or would you rather have a man of lower intelligence trying to remember everything to answer tourist questions just because he's a man?

Forgetting the idea of a charge given to a trusted warrior caste and a centuries old tradition of faithfulness, let’s just do what feels good right now, eh

And we're back to your original argument. Which in effect proves my retort was not a non sequitor. Your only concern is that she's a woman. What would you have said in the mid 1500s as women came to a role by law that had been reserved for men?

[WorkingClassFilth]

The Beefeaters were a bodyguard. While much more ceremonial today, the core idea is that of seasoned, proven warriors faithful to the Crown keeping the symbols of the monarchy safe. Western democracies in decline might try to buck nature and spit on history and tradition, but common sense informs most of us that women are not suitable for combat no matter what PC whim suggests. Selecting a woman accountant for this role is just plain silly in its own right.

Equating modern politically correct machinations with the advent of a female monarch is also specious and false since the lineage of a rightful queen and absence of a male heir is pretty well cut and dried - even 500 years ago (or 4,000 years for that matter). One issue is based on right and/or lineage. The other merely denies original intent, basic human nature, cultural tradition and seeks to impose change without any right, natural basis or legitimate cultural claim. In short, apples and oranges.

The best this Beefeater (Ooooh no! Perhaps this archaic name should be changed, too, to discourage red meat consumption!) will do is to have her photo taken, her posting cited in academic references advocating more cultural dilution and, ultimately, become an attraction herself.

[billbears]

Western democracies in decline might try to buck nature and spit on history and tradition, but common sense informs most of us that women are not suitable for combat no matter what PC whim suggests.

Really?

Equating modern politically correct machinations with the advent of a female monarch is also specious and false since the lineage of a rightful queen and absence of a male heir is pretty well cut and dried - even 500 years ago

May want to look into why Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is called the Duke of Normandy and Duke of Lancaster (hint..Salic Law)

One issue is based on right and/or lineage. The other merely denies original intent, basic human nature, cultural tradition and seeks to impose change without any right, natural basis or legitimate cultural claim.

Original intent?!? Women only should hold certain roles eh? Except that before Lady Jane Grey there hadn't been a female monarch. In fact Salic Law (a custom of original intent and cultural tradition) not only prevented women from being the monarch but also that succession couldn't pass through the female.

[Caesar Soze]

Oh gosh ... they dress a woman up in a funny outfit and make her a tour guide, and suddenly Western Civilization is collapsing. I hope they don't put her in charge of feeding the Tower's birds, that could be the end of us all.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I ain't saying it guys. Forget it.

Rest of poster's comment removed by Moderator

[WorkingClassFilth]

There is an important rule in life. More than 2 SD’s from the central value is errancy - nothing more. Women aren’t combat soldier material no matter how much the PC left would like to invent such mythology by endlessly parading aberrant exceptions. Next you’ll be arguing that sexual characteristics are simply cultural, too.

The big point here is not that women have held Monarchic office, because, ultimately, they essentially remain place holders for the next male heir. Additionally, affairs of governance require reins of power to transition more or less smoothly from one generation to the next. It is, therefore, critical to national survival that national leadership roles are filled.

In the case under consideration, no such equation exists. What is under dispute are the traditions that uphold and gird a cultural heritage. The fact that this is largely a symbolic role today makes it attractive for certain elements in society to target it and force change. Note, please, that this candidate was selected - meaning we don’t know the whole story. In addition to the obvious departure from the intent, tradition and purpose of the Beefeaters, she apparently is qualified only because of her 22 years as an NCO accountant.

So, we now are at a point when the a bodyguard is well served by recruiting women and accountants. You submit that the historic ascension of the role is justification via some vague equivalence. Your reasoning would persuade many, I’m sure, since it is present in one form or another in everyday news, education and mass media.

I remain, however, totally unconvinced of any of your assertions. History wasn’t fought and won by women, friend, no matter how many times one might watch movies like ‘G.I. Jane’ or read stirring accounts of women posing as pirates or soldiers in feminist literature.

[billbears]

The big point here is not that women have held Monarchic office, because, ultimately, they essentially remain place holders for the next male heir.

LOL, oh me...okay whatever you choose to believe. Here's the words from a woman that held the Crown for 40 years and brought her nation through one of the most trying times that nation had faced up to that time

My loving people, we have been persuaded by some, that are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes, for fear of treachery; but I assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people. Let tyrants fear; I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good will of my subjects. And therefore I am come amongst you at this time, not as for my recreation or sport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live or die amongst you all; to lay down, for my God, and for my kingdom, and for my people, my honor and my blood, even the dust. I know I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart of a king, and of a king of England, too; and think foul scorn that Parma or Spain, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realms: to which, rather than any dishonor should grow by me, I myself will take up arms; I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field. I know already, by your forwardness, that you have deserved rewards and crowns; and we do assure you, on the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. In the mean my lieutenant general shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble and worthy subject; not doubting by your obedience to my general, by your concord in the camp, and by your valor in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over the enemies of my God, of my kingdom, and of my people.

And we'll not even discuss practically the whole of the 19th Century. Victorian era? Wasn't named after Prince Albert you know. Neither one of those women were 'place holders' for the next male heir. Especially Elizabeth I. The more I read about King James the less I like the man.

In addition to the obvious departure from the intent, tradition and purpose of the Beefeaters, she apparently is qualified only because of her 22 years as an NCO accountant

She was in Her Majesty's service for 22 years. I'm sure she wasn't thinking 'Hmmmm 22 years from now, I'm going to allow someone to nominate me for a position as Yeoman Warder because I'm going to strike a blow for femininity!!' There is nothing in the code that says it has to be a certain position. Would you say the same if it was a male accountant? Or is that one of those womanly positions....

You submit that the historic ascension of the role is justification via some vague equivalence

Vague equivalence? Salic law wasn't vague and it was intended to do what you apparently advocate. Keep them dern women folk down in their 'proper' position eh? Considering Elizabeth I's stirring speech and standing against a power that should have soundly whipped England, you best be glad she was there. Else you may be speaking Spanish