(Musical break.)

MS. ERBE: Hello, I'm Bonnie Erbe. Welcome to To the Contrary, a discussion of news and social trends from diverse perspectives. Up first, women in combat.

(Begin video segment.)

MS. ERBE: This week, First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden announced a national initiative to support and honor military families. The Joining Forces Initiative will address health care, employment and educational opportunities for service members' spouses and children. This announcement comes as the status of female soldiers in war zones is destined for major change. A congressional study commission recommended an end to the military ban on women in combat. About 26,000 women serve in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and close to a quarter of a million women have been deployed since 2001. Despite the policy, female soldiers are fighting on the frontlines, even without adequate combat training. U.S. Democratic Senator Kay Hagan and Democratic Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez, both members of their respective Armed Services Committees, are calling for the integration of female soldiers in infantry units.

REP. LORETTA SANCHEZ (D-CA): Women say, hey, we're already there and we're not getting credit for it. That's the first thing. And certainly I've heard from some of the men who say, oh, they're not strong enough. Look, I'm not advocating that they're strong or not strong. I'm saying some women can do this. If I'm a commander in the field and I want to get a job done, I'm going to put my best people on it that have the skill set that's required to get that mission done. And if it's a woman, then I would put that woman in there over a man if she's going to be better at that job for that particular task. So all these men who are like worried somehow or another we're going to become an all-woman soldier military or something, that's not what we're trying to do here.

(End video segment.)

MS. ERBE: So, Right Honorable Kim Campbell, former Canadian prime minister and defense minister, welcome back to the panel.

MS. CAMPBELL: Thank you.

MS. ERBE: Should - you have had women in combat in Canada for 22 years now. Should America have women in combat?

MS. CAMPBELL: Well, I think you have to. I mean, this is not World War II and the battle of the Bulge and following the artillery over the battlefield of Northern France. This is the 21st century with modern warfare. Women are in combat. But just to give you a simple example - and there are many, many more. But both of our countries we are fighting in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan we're fighting an insurgency. Men can put on a burqa, can hide and move through. Male soldiers can't challenge those people. They can't say, I think that's a man. I want to search him. A woman soldier can. Women can interact with the other women. There are many things they can do. But also a lot of the war is high-tech. It's strategic. It's tactical. It's not necessarily brute force. But, yes, there should be physical qualifications. Yes, all of those - nothing should be done to weaken fighting capacity but women can play important roles in today's warfare.

MS. WOOD: Well, sadly I think women are already in combat. And it might not be the battle of the Bulge. It's now street fighting in places like Afghanistan. I think the other question that we have to ask is should women be forced into combat? And those questions both raise red flags.

MS. ERBE: Well - and we'll get to you guys in a second - but you - Canada doesn't force women.

MS. CAMPBELL: We don't force. And, in fact, the percentage is quite small compared to women in the forces. But they have an important role to play. And I think actually women are interested in doing it. If there are specific jobs that they feel they're able to do and that they're invited to do - but they're still breaking on those barriers, but I think today there's a greater need for diversity of all sorts among our fighting men and women. And I think the women - they're doing it. They should get the recognition for it.

MS. ERBE: Danielle, that's another question. Are we at the point where we can afford not to have women in combat? We don't have enough war male bodies to fill our one point something million service corps.

MS. BELTON: This is about reflecting reality. You have women drivers. You have women pilots. No woman who's serving, you know, in Afghanistan it's going to go - if they see a firefight happening, if they see a fellow soldier in trouble go, you know what, I can't pick up that gun and help you right now because I'm a woman and I'm not supposed to be in combat. That is not the reality of their situation. So our rules need to reflect that. It's not so much about reshaping the military or making some big drastic change. It's about making the military fit what the current situation is.

MS. SETMAYER: Okay. First of all, we're talking about - when we say combat, we're talking about direct ground combat, infantry units, women out there in the trenches with the Marines and Army infantry units. That should not - I'm not in agreement with that. Women are already in certain types of combat roles already. They're allowed on recon missions with Marines because they have - you know, for female detainee searches and things like that. So they're attached. They do logistics.

MS. ERBE: Should be there pilots?

MS. SETMAYER: Yes. They're fighter pilots. I mean, there are roles for women in, I guess, combat in that respect. But we're talking direct ground combat troops. Absolutely not.

MS. CAMPBELL: In Canada we have women commanding tank battalions in Canada. It's - if they can do it, if they're trained to do it, these are our -

MS. WOOD: I guess my question was how do you have a fairness which is what people on the other side are saying that women should be in combat should have here when we're not saying that we're going to draft - if we had a draft, why wouldn't women and men equally be drafted? Why is it just women who want to be combat? Why shouldn't it be everybody, if that's what we're going to say here? And, secondly, look, I mean, women, whether they choose to do it on purpose or not on purpose, we can spend a lot of money training them to be fighter pilots and a whole host of other things. They get pregnant. And let's keep in mind who our combat troops are. They're not people who are over 40. They're 18 and about 20s.

MS. ERBE: Okay. Okay.

MS. CAMPBELL: But, you know, there was a study done in the American military, Dokowitz (ph), the advisory committee heard this study. In the American forces they lose more effective time from men per capita for sports related injuries than for women for pregnancy leave. So it's all this kind of myth that women are going to get pregnant. The men put themselves out of commission in all sorts of ways.

MS. WOOD: If you're putting more women in combat and I think that you might see that change.

MS. CAMPBELL: We're not all for using contraception. (Laughter.)

MS. SETMAYER: But there are things that you have to consider when you put women on the frontlines in the real combat that we're talking about here, roles, direct ground combat. A, I don't care what anybody says. I mean, I was an athlete. I think women are fantastic. But this physical strength issue is an issue, A. B, culturally - I mean, it is a distraction. And we are in the middle of two wars, three now if we count Libya. We cannot afford to have - to compromise troop readiness and effectiveness integrating women into combat, infantry units as a social experiment right now for the sake of diversity to make people feel good. We cannot do this. And, you know, if you ask - ask the Special Forces guys -

MS. BELTON: I don't see it as a social experiment. I mean, women are already there in the military.

MS. SETMAYER: Not in that capacity. Not at that level.

MS. CAMPBELL: But in many other countries they are and it's not a problem. I mean, this is a military.

(Cross talk.)

MS. CAMPBELL: In Libya it's the French who are in there.

MS. SETMAYER: Barely.

MS. CAMPBELL: No. Excuse me, they're in there. And, you know, I just think that that's - I hear this all the time. It's the same argument against gays in the military, you know, that somehow is going to compromise combat effectiveness and it's a way of excluding people. And other countries have shown that that's not the case.

(Cross talk.)

MS. ERBE: I want to get back to two issues here: first, the strength issue, and secondly, the desire issue, in other words you - is it fair to let women say, oh, I do or I don't want to go into combat. I don't think that's really an issue unless you're seeking promotions and you ask for it, right? There are men who go into the military and don't necessarily want or have to go into combat.

MS. SETMAYER: Well, they test differently for it.

MS. WOOD: That's right. That's right. And also men - (inaudible).

MS. ERBE: But wait a second. Well, we don't have a draft right now. It doesn't look like anytime soon there's going to be a need for one so that's kind of a - you're saying it won't work and there's already proof that it is working because that's how it's going in the military now.

MS. WOOD: No. First of all, it's not happening right now. We don't have women - I mean, when we say combat, yes, I said it's street or hand-to-hand sometimes in Afghanistan, I mean, the policing type of force which ends up being combat. But that's not the same as sending ground troops as we did in Iraq. And we haven't experimented with that yet. And I want to say - look, I think there's a lot of miss out there about how well this has worked. Everybody always points to Israel. Israelis don't put women in combat at that level. So, I mean - and they have tested this a lot longer than almost anybody else, any other country that I know of and they said it didn't work when they did. And they still have women in the military.

MS. ERBE: Israel is - no offense - having spent time there and been there three times, Israel is a much more chauvinistic country than we are and less progressive.

MS. WOOD: They've been more open to women in the military than we have.

MS. BELTON: My point is if you can meet the requirement and you can do the work, who are we to tell a woman that she can't do it if she can meet that standard? Who are we to say you can't?

MS. WOOD (?): And who are we to say you don't have to?

MS. ERBE: Wait. Wait. One at a time.

MS. BELTON: If you can meet that physical standard, if you have proven you can do the work, if your goal is to move up within the brass in the military and the easiest way to move up is to prove your medal in combat, who are you to say that that person can't do that job?

MS. ERBE: Let me ask you this. In Canada, has there been video on Canadian television of women's bodies blown up in the field?

MS. CAMPBELL: We have all of the deaths coming home are covered. They're not hidden as they are here. But the big reason not for having women in combat was in fact because the belief in the United States was, or by American politicians, that Americans would not accept the sight of body bags coming back with women in them. Body bags have been coming back from both Iraq and Afghanistan with women and men. Americans have not risen up and gotten excited about it. And I think that was really the more important consideration that people understand that they make the choice, they go and do it and they pay the price and they serve. And the real question is they should be honored and they should have the opportunity to serve. We'll probably never have 50-50 because in most countries - and it's our tradition - one of the jobs that women have in terms of protecting their community is producing the next generation. But now, we have a situation where we have a different view of the demography, a different view - I mean, children survive. The birth rate doesn't have to be so high to protect our populations. And we have opportunities for women to serve in ways that they didn't. Women have always died in wars. They've always - and mostly they didn't get a chance to fire a shot in anger because they were simply unarmed civilians whatever they were doing. My mother was in uniform in World War II. She tracked U-boats in the North Atlantic in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and wore the uniform and was very proud to be the in the Canadian Navy. So women have been doing this for many, many years. The point is that war has changed. The skills needed have changed. And every country needs to make the best use of people. Women will not want to be in combat in the same proportion as men probably. But those who want to and can should not be barred and they should be recognized for what they do.

MS. ERBE: All right. From women at war to children at work.

Teens should earn less but be able to work more. That's the message from lawmakers in several statehouses as Republicans propose sweeping changes to child labor laws that stand to have a greater impact on teen girls than boys. Maine, Missouri and Utah are the states where GOP lawmakers are pushing a variety of changes in minimum wage laws. Some would allow employers to pay teens less. Others would allow them to work until 11:00 p.m. on school nights. Supporters say teens could save more for college and increase spending power. But opponents say, nay, if teens earn less than the minimum wage. Maine lawmakers want to drop the minimum wage to $5.25 an hour for teens, $2 less than the federal minimum. Such changes are likely to affect female teens disproportionately. Last year, 300,000 teen girls earned below minimum versus 176,000 teen boys.

Good idea? Bad idea? Genevieve Wood?

MS. WOOD: I've been working since I was about 14-years-old. I think it's a good idea. I think a lot of our teens -

MS. ERBE: But both dropping the wage by $2 plus, working school nights until 11:00 p.m.?

MS. WOOD: I don't remember what minimum wage was when I was doing it, but I don't even think it was $5.25 an hour. I don't think that's a problem. I think we let - people states out to be able to experiment with that. And, frankly, yes, you can work until - a lot of kids are staying up to 11:00 p.m. at night playing video games and on their iPhone and everything else. They probably could be a little bit more productive. And, again, they're not making them do it. This is an option for businesses and parents and teenagers.

MS. SETMAYER: I mean, I don't see anything wrong with that. When I was in high school, I worked all through high school. And I was an athlete. I was in the orchestrate. I was captain of the volleyball team and I worked.

MS. WOOD (?): And you stayed out of trouble.

MS. SETMAYER: That's right. And here I am now. But I don't see anything wrong with that. And as far as other - you know, some states they're asking for - you know, schools have to get work - you know, they grant the work permits and this and that. Parents should be allowed to say, if the kid wants to get a job and they can set those hours and they feel it's okay, then let the kid work. I don't see anything wrong with that option.

MS. ERBE: If a kid's going to school and working until 11:00 p.m. at night, exactly when is homework getting done?

MS. SETMAYER: But don't take the job then if it's going to have you working until 11:00 p.m. Get a different job.

MS. WOOD: I did that. I did that. I worked at a yogurt shop in high school, you know, went to work at like 4:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m. in the afternoon. We closed at 10:00 p.m. and by the time you got out, it was 11:00 p.m. But you planned for it. It wasn't every single night.

MS. BELTON: I think the thing that we have to watch for with this is that when you're dealing with kids who come from poor families, where they're not just working necessarily to save money for college. They're working to help mom and dad out. And I you are working until 11:00 p.m. at night to help out the family, you're not necessarily having the time to focus on school. You're not having that time to focus on a career or a future. And then also there's a question of paying a kid less. I mean, you do the same amount of work. And if you're putting the same amount of energy into it, why should you get a smaller amount of money than an adult would get for the same exact job? That just makes absolutely no sense to me. I mean, if you do the work, you should get the pay for it.

MS. SETMAYER: Well, kids have different responsibilities than adults do. Do you know what I mean?

MS. BELTON: I mean, if you're both flipping the same burger at McDonalds.

MS. SETMAYER: Maybe so but if you want them to hire, if you want these lower wage jobs to hire teenagers and give them the opportunity to work, then that - (inaudible).

MS. BELTON: But they're always hired teenagers.

MS. SETMAYER: Maybe not. I mean, the minimum wage argument has always been -

MS. BELTON: McDonalds was hiring kids when I was there.

MS. SETMAYER: Yes, but the minimum wage argument was about small businesses and who they're going to hire versus who they're not going to hire because it affects their bottom line. So, I mean, I think that's a business decision.

MS. CAMPBELL: But I thought minimum wage is what we paid kids, not a sub-minimum wage. I mean, it makes me sad. I think in a democracy our focus should be on making sure that kids got an education both so they can be citizens or they can be constructive members of the economy. But I recognize that in some families, you know, maybe they need another bread winner. And how do you protect those kids from being exploited? And I think that in the same way people used to argue that women shouldn't get paid the same as men because for a whole variety of reasons. And the bottom line should be are they doing the same job as adult workers? If they get a job where accommodations are made they're not expected to take the same responsibilities or be as productive as somebody else, maybe there's an argument. But it worries me that just by virtue of your age you're automatically going to be paid less, I think that's the job -

MS. ERBE: So do you think this will end up having kids exploited when these laws are -

MS. CAMPBELL: You know, one of the values of a federal country - you know, Canada is a federal country too - is that your federal units, the states or the provinces can experiment. It's not like the whole country does it but some people can try out a policy, see how it works, you look at the data and you say, oh, maybe this is something we should all do or let's learn the lesson and not make that mistake. So I think there's something to be said for trying things out. But I really do think that the labor should be rewarded for what it is, not by the age of the person or the sex of the person that's doing it.

MS. WOOD: And it also will be the experience. And let's not kid ourselves. Those 15-year-olds don't have the same experience as even a 21-year-old, right? And you look - I think you can learn a lot of on the job. We definitely don't want to take away from the reading, writing and arithmetic, but there's probably a lot of things that kids learn on the job, including how to get along with others, management skills, dealing with money. There's a lot you can learn there that frankly sitting in a classroom doesn't teach you. That's why we do internships.

MS. BELTON: Well, my concern is that we're talking about minimum wage. I mean, if you have an adult and you have experience, you should get paid more for your experience. Minimum wage is a minimum for a reason. It's for entry-level workers. It's for young workers who are trying to get their foot up, to get their first start.

MS. ERBE: Do you think this will be used disproportionately against - California's not one of the states, neither is Florida. But, in fact, it's mainly colder northern states that are doing it. But could they use it in California, Texas, Florida to have immigrant kids, whether legal or illegal, you know, picking fruit or picking vegetables.

MS. BELTON: Well, that's also my larger concern is with poor kids. I mean, my mother - you know, she came from a very large rural family. You know, those kids - you went to work to help out. You know, they didn't have a lot of money coming in. You live in the segregated South and wanted to pitch in. If you're coming from a place of poverty and you have kids, teenage kids who can help out with the household, they're going to want to get a job to help mom and dad out. They're going to want to make that difference for their family. The problem is I feel like we're making things so difficult for people in life. I mean, you're a child. You're trying to get your education. You're trying to get yourself together. You want to have a better life for yourself as an adult. If we're already - if there's already such a huge burden there, you know, if you take -

MS. WOOD: But I think this is going to open up opportunities for kids. Guys, I mean, look, if you're lowering the dollar amount, there's a better chance more kids are going to get these jobs if they want them and if their parents are okay with their having them. So, again, we've got a lot of choice here, choice in the marketplace. And we'll see - as you said, we'll see how it works. Maybe it will be a catastrophe. I doubt it but I think we have to see how it works.

MS. SETMAYER: Well, we're also not talking about forcing kids to work in the steel mill until God forsaken hours for $2 an hour. I mean, we're just talking about really minimal changes here, an extra hour or being able to work during - instead of limiting it to 20 hours a week, maybe 40 in the summers. I mean, this is just a minimal change and we need to keep it in perspective.

MS. ERBE: All right. Behind the headlines: fitness expert Jillian Michaels. She's called America's toughest trainer. With her in-your-face personality, she whips overweight adults into shape each week on NBC's "The Biggest Loser." But Michaels believes health encompasses more than just exercise and nutrition. She wants to help women and girls adjust their mental health too. To the Contrary spoke with Michaels about her new book, "America's Weight Problem" and her own journey to self-acceptance.

(Begin video segment.)

JILLIAN MICHAELS [Fitness Trainer, "The Biggest Loser]: It is about gaining perspective on successes and failures and learning how to see failures as entry points for learning and integral points of success - I'm sorry - an integral part of success versus, oh, I failed. This is validation that I'm not capable. It requires an attitude shift. But to have that attitude shift, you need the knowledge first of how to approach setbacks and tragedies so that you can learn to transmute life's hardships into peace, power, strength, wisdom.

MS. ERBE: Michaels stars in her own workout DVDs and is a best selling author. But she's better known for being the tough no-nonsense trainer from the TV shows "The Bigger Loser" and "Losing It with Jillian." Before her fitness fame, Michaels says she struggled with her own weight and self-esteem.

MS. MICHAELS: For me it has been a constant building process, a constant reinvention of myself. And, number one, always look at your failures and your setbacks as entry points to become stronger, versus validation that you are not good enough. Go back to a place in your life where you felt strong. Make lists of things about yourself that you love, that you appreciate, and you post them around your house. You have to cultivate these feelings of strength because it's like a seed. You nurture it and it grows.

MS. ERBE: In her new book, "Unlimited," Michaels says in order for women to feel fulfilled, they must be willing to take risks.

MS. MICHAELS: We're taught to be diplomats and to follow a set of rules that 99 percent of the time we didn't even create. We don't even know why we follow them. And I think we have become such a product of socialization much to our detriment. And we wake every morning and it's like, is this really all there is? You know, you go to the job that you were told you had to take because it's the responsible thing to do, even though it doesn't fulfill you, even though it doesn't make you happy. You know, you put everyone's needs in front of you because that's what you were taught to do by your mother or your family or your church or whatever it might be because that's what a good woman does. That's just crap. And in your heart it doesn't feel right. It doesn't feel true. You're not happy. So I think that what we need to do is break some of these rules, question them, make rules of our own based on our own authentic truth and authentic happiness.

MS. ERBE: While mental health is important, the fitness guru encourages women and girls to keep fit too. Two out of three adults and one out of three kids and teens are overweight or obese. She says she doesn't compromise on her own diet.

MS. MICHAELS: I do not eat chemical food. I do not. It is unacceptable, period. I don't eat trans fat. I don't eat high-fructose corn syrup. I don't eat MSG. I don't eat artificial colors. I don't eat artificial sweeteners. I don't eat poison, period, ever. And, you know, the whole concept of everything is okay in moderation is propaganda that has been put forth by big food and it's something that I will never buy into. I don't think there's a time that your kid needs to go to McDonalds, ever. Poison has no place in our food supply and I have a zero tolerance policy for it.

(End video segment.)

MS. ERBE: I don't watch her show but in that video I wanted to know what was she screaming at those people and why weren't they punching her in the face. (Laughter.)

MS. SETMAYER: Well, she's successful. I mean, it works for folks. I think she's fantastic. I think she's awesome. A lot of what she says it's very inspirational. And, you know, some people would they get on her case if it were man that was in your face like that. I think just because she's a woman, she's assertive, she doesn't take any crap, and I love it because I can relate to that. But, you know, what she's doing and as someone who - I've struggled with my weight over the last couple of years and I've already dropped 30 pounds and I've got more to go and I'm working on that. But it's important - it's amazing how much of your self-worth you find in your appearance and your weight and the way society views you, especially as a woman. It's disempowering when you are when you feel as though you're not in good shape or you feel like you're the fattest person in the room. And Jillian Michaels does a really good job of taking that feeling and translating that into empowerment for women, the way she goes about, you know, empowering women through her methods. I think she's fantastic.

MS. ERBE: Thoughts?

MS. CAMPBELL: Losing weight is one of the hardest things in the world to do. And I think the people on that show are extremely overweight and maybe it's a good (thing ?) to watch. But I also think that you might think that some of her anger is abusive. But I also think that many of these people are not used to having somebody care enough about them to get so angry when they don't do what they're supposed to do. And, maybe, you know, the expression "tough love" is easily used. But, you know, I think it's very, very hard. And losing weight is a long-term commitment. And I think she just - what she's saying to these people, you know -

MS. ERBE: Wake up.

MS. CAMPBELL: Wake up. You have to do this. And I care enough about you to let you touch my emotions and get angry that you didn't do what I wanted you to do this week.

MS. SETMAYER: Because it's never derogatory. It's motivational.

MS. ERBE (?): Yes, right.

MS. SETMAYER: Not everyone responds well to that but it seems to work.

MS. BELTON: And the thing that speaks to her whole goal of encouraging people to take risks, I think that far too often we're afraid to step outside of ourselves and take a true assessment of what we need to work on and really ask for people for help, for advice, you know, what we need to do to be the best people that we can be. So I really appreciate her speaking to that point because so many of us hold back in our lives for fear of confronting that true part of ourselves.

MS. ERBE: Do you think breaking the rules that she talked about has anything to do with it?

MS. WOOD: Well, I like her in general. I like her rah-rah, whatever. I don't know that I agree with her entire philosophy of life, you know, don't put anybody else ahead of yourself. I mean, everybody should do that, not just women. So, I mean, there's a little of the me, me, me kind of thing which I find a little bit annoying. But, in general, look. I think she's somebody who obviously had a problem of her own. She overcame it. And she's looking, I want to help other people do the same thing. And I think that's a good thing.

MS. ERBE: All right. That's it for this edition of To the Contrary. Next week, chivalry in the 21st century. Please join us on the web for "To the Contrary Extra." Whether your views are in agreement or to the contrary, please join us next time.

(END)