Rule Britannia, not Britannia.

Above is a most unusual photograph of double Olympic Gold Medallist, Miss Laura Trott, striking a pose as Britannia, the mythical female personification of our island nation.
Of course, British Gazette readers will immediately notice a slight error on the part of the photographer, he has “Britannia” [Miss Trott] holding a wooden spear, not a trident. Presumably one was not available.
The image however splendidly encapsulates all this organ wants to say about the idea that British women should be allowed the same dubious privilege about being allowed to participate in front line combat that has been extended to American women. For the British army this means cavalry [armoured] and infantry regiments.
The British Gazette is opposed to such a policy.
We do not oppose it on the grounds that women lack the courage to undertake such a role. Far from it; one need only remind oneself of the extraordinary courage displayed by those women who were dropped into France as agents of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) during World War Two. The Editor as a boy was privileged to know one of these ladies – now dead.
Nor do we doubt that women have strength and stamina. Miss Trott’s two gold medals is testimony that they have.
There are three principal reasons why the British Gazette does not believe that women should form part of front line fighting forces:
1. Chivalry: men and women were created equal but different. There are clear physical and psychological differences between the sexes. Differences that either, according to your point of view, evolved naturally over geological periods of time or were created over a very short period of time by God.
2. Psychological. This is an aspect which will be well understood by most police officers and criminal lawyers. An essential aspect of being an infantry man is controlled aggression. When faced with having to engage an enemy at close quarters – which can mean resort to the bayonet – aggression has to be summoned to enable one to do this. This has to be done immediately. It is also equally important to be able to “turn the aggression off.” It is a fact that women react differently to physically threatening and physical confrontations than men. Women are slower to reach the point where physical aggression takes place. They are naturally less aggressive. There is an obvious biological reason for this: children. As well as being slower to reach the point of physical aggression, once there, it is very difficult for a woman to “turn it off.” Again, there is a clear biological and evolutionary reason for this: when – in the thousands of years that elapsed between the evolution of the early humans and civilisation, a group of women were threatened by a wild animal – as they picked berries whilst guarding their children – it was necessary for nature (or God if you prefer) to ensure a hysterical level of aggression that would ensure that the women would attack the creature uncontrollably – to make up for the lack of body mass and physical strength when compared with men – who in this scenario would be away from the cave hunting.Above is a computer generated image based on fossil evidence of a sabre tooth cat – one of the creatures that threatened our ancestors. The animal was as big as a horse!
3. Strength and in particular, upper body strength. Here Miss Trott provides us with an excellent example of a young woman who is physically strong and possesses great stamina, but who through the simple fact of her size, would not be able to fight off an attack from a man the size of her fellow Olympian Gold Medallist, Anthony Joshua, the heavyweight boxer.Of course, Mr Joshua will be absolutely horrified at the very idea of a boxing match between him and Miss Trott! It would be a very foolhardy member of the politically correct brigade who would dare put the suggestion to Mr Joshua. Mr Miliband, take note!
Of course, readers will point out that such a suggestion would be absolutely preposterous and this organ would of course agree. And yet, were Miss Trott ever to become Private Trott of the Paratroop Regiment does such as Mr Miliband really believe he could conclude an agreement with any opposing force that each side’s soldiers would always be evenly matched?
Given that Mr Miliband and his fellow travellers believe that this country can be powered by wind turbines in the North Sea, photovoltaic cells on the roofs of his wealthy friends and that the CO2 from his Range Rover is warming up the planet and threatens to make it uninhabitable for human life, presumably so!