Again, if Don's position is so wrong, why can't it be attacked on the merits, instead of on his gender?

Where did I say I thought my opinion was more valuable on account of my gender? You're the one who keeps bringing gender into this.

If you think someone's opinion is ignorant and patronizing, there are perfectly good words to explain as such: ignorant and patronizing.

Actually, it seems the sole premise of YOUR objection is the presence of a penis, instead of a vagina. I'm not the one using someone's gender to attack their credibility on an issue.

Let's adjust the parameters of your question a bit. Let's say that the soldier is a male (as most soldiers are). Let's say that, in response to his unit being attacked, he responds in a way which is ethically questionable. Let's say that a woman (who are not the majority of soldiers) explains to him why, despite the…

Here here!

"Being a man, I haven't haven't directly experienced someone condescendingly explaining something to me based on the assumption that my gender determines my innate intelligence."