Kathleen Parker is recognizing sex difference and arguing that her gender is superior.
Let’s begin with a working (and provable) premise: Women, if allowed to be fully equal to men, will bring peace to the planet. This is not so far-fetched a notion. One, men have been at it for thousands of years, resulting in millions and millions of corpses...
Parker is voicing her opposition to the feminist dogma that our two sexes are always equal. She's suggesting men are warriors, not women. And she's also suggesting that women are naturally more peaceful than men.
And there's some truth to this! Women are not biologically suited to war-making, not really. In the modern age, of course, Hillary Clinton can press a nuclear button as easily as Harry Truman. You don't have to be big and strong to press a button (or pull a trigger).
Technology has, in many ways, equalized us. Birth control would be another example of this. Yet our two sexes remain quite different, even mysterious to each other. Many of us, both men and women, object to the idea of drafting women for combat.
Our two sexes are quite different, actually, and modern feminists can be glib about how equal we are. But we should not make the even dumber mistake--the Parker mistake--of assuming one gender is good and the other is bad.
It's hard to object to the argument that we'd all be better off with love in our hearts, as opposed to war. Yet women are not immune to war-like emotions such as anger or hatred or pride. And it's a silly mistake to assume that Hillary Clinton, because she is a woman, is nice or gentle or sweet.