Sweden’s army neuters itself

In a pathetically obvious attempt to make me snark, Snart sends a link to this story: Army castrates heraldic lion.

Protests from female soldiers have led to the Swedish military removing the penis of a heraldic lion depicted on the Nordic Battlegroup’s coat of arms.

The armed forces agreed to emasculate the lion after a group of women from the rapid reaction force lodged a complaint to the European Court of Justice.

Be happy, Snart. When I read this, I muttered a big fat, What the hell? Why did the female soldiers complain? Was it Puritanism, prudery, political correctness? Anti-patriarchy? Did the artistic emasculation - the army’s “tradition commission” was “forced to cut off the lion’s willy with the aid of a computer” - symbolize Sweden’s status as a neutral country? And how on earth did this case get all the way to The Hague?

The article notes that “the army was eventually happy to make the changes in the interests of gender equality.” Now I’m even more baffled. In the interests of equality, why neuter the lion? I understand the desire for a symbol that includes both men and women, but this excision doesn’t make the lion inclusive. It’s still obviously male - it has a mane. Why didn’t the women want to add a fierce lioness to the coat of arms?

But as I fretted about all this, my eye was drawn to another headline on the page, and I forgot all about the lion. Woman catches fire during hemorrhoid operation.

Maybe I should have titled this post, “Sweden: Trouble Down Below.”