Two events this week that have sparked some passionate debate in Britain. The first was the death of 26 year old Sarah Bryant, now infamous for being the first British servicewoman to be killed in Afghanistan when she and three others died in a roadside bomb attack.
The tragic death of such a young woman inevitably debate centered around should women be sent to serve in conflicts with the suggestion from some being that they should be given jobs 'behind the lines'.
The nature of the war in Afghanistan is that there is no front line, as soon as you land you are in the thick of it so regardless of if you are infantry or intelligence, you are equally in peril.
If the armed forces are prepared to sign up young women, and there are women prepared to do the job, then they must show equality when it comes to the less publicised areas of their chosen career.
Britain has lost 106 members of its armed forces in Afghanistan and although the Prime Minister pays lip service to the dead and injured each week, this death seems to have struck a chord that the deaths of 105 men never seemed to chime.
To a grieving parent or child, whether it is their mother, father, son or daughter that dies at the hand of the Taliban, it is just as much a life altering catastrophe.
You either have equality and ask everyone to do the same job with the same consequences or don't let women into the job in the first place if you don't want to see them getting killed.
To the Government and newspapers like the Murdoch owned Sun, that were so gung-ho to send our men and women there and are shouting the loudest on this topic, i say too late. You got what you wanted so deal with the consequences.