Some of it might come across as sexist but you have to remember that he talks from experience of having seen women picked as the best of the candidates train in the army.

Empower the couple/people, they will make better choices..

I think the solution lies in not getting gender into the mix and leaving people to figure out what they want to do. Quite a few companies, including mine, have 12 weeks of leave for the primary care giver(PCG). PCG can be a father,mother,grandparent(who gained custody for various reasons) of a newborn/adopted/foster child. It includes people thrust into PCG position because of unfortunate fatalities/complications..

The 12 weeks can be split up as well. If the mother decides to go back to work in 6 weeks as her career demands it, the father gets to apply for a 12-6 = 6 weeks of balance from his employer. The couple can decide how they want it to work.

While a major part of parental leave is exercised by mothers, it is good to have the option where fathers can step in if mother cannot (whatever the reasons..) or split in some way to share the burden. I took 4 weeks off for both of my tots..

While the Vice Chief Air Marshal is a moron for his tone and lack of sensitivity, the fact of the matter is, if a pregnancy will result in 10-12 months of paid vacation (I know Canada has a 12 month policy) for the mother, it is unfair. Unless in the unfortunate incidents(death, disability etc during pregnancy) anything more than 3-4 months is being unfair….

I want to disagree with people who claim men do not help out — let the men who talk like this take care of a baby for just a week — it is a rash generalization. Quite a few fathers do very well. Away from India very many dads(desis too) step up and do more equally as the moms. Unless we are talking of jerks and not fathers, it is a rash generalization..

Secondly, at the cost of sounding like a MCP, I agree with some of the points. A standing army (again, any branch) can hardly afford to have enlisted men going on a leave for extended period of 10(+?) months. Especially given the severe shortage of officers Indian armed forces are facing, this is a highly dangerous situation. Plus, unlike ranks in Army (or possibly Navy), piloting a fighter places severe physical demands on the pilot, the stresses you can hardly expect a pregnant woman to undergo. And that has nothing to do with the debate whether women are stronger/weaker than men.

I know that the “officer shortage” argument goes both ways, that the women officers would be one of the answers. Also, there are ways to go around the incapacity of a woman to fly during pregnancy. But looking from this angle, most of his comments hardly sound misogynistic to me, if only a bit exaggerated.

Can’t say I agree with this. The chain of command in the armed forces is set up such that missions are not dependent on the availability of a single person. The second in command is fully trained to pick up the threads and complete the exercise. Sorry, but the argument that you’ll suddenly become pregnant and not be able to complete your duties is not correct. Anyone can fall sick or have an accident and take a day off!

Our media isn’t exactly a know-it-all thing. esp with anchors like the one in that debate.