A friend of mine was a MP in the US Army. Was deployed to Iraq multiple times. Came home with PTSD. Did sweeps, went out on patrols. Another friend was a corpsman in the Navy. Same story. They did what the majority of guys do over there. Worry about insurgents, go out on patrols or with convoys, were fired upon by insurgents, carried overloaded packs that weighed up to 80 lbs., walked the streets and saw the poverty, the mistreatment of animals and women, and came home different people than when they went. The difference between them and 70% of the US military members over there is that they represent 30% of the forces that are female. That's right, female corpsmen (aka. medics) and military police (sometimes known as shore patrol for the sailors). One of them recently shared a link for an article written, supposedly, by a female marine. Now, I'll be frank, even when I was in we didn't have much respect for the WMs. We called them WMs, for crying outloud. I was a sailor. Once a sailor, always a sailor. Once a Marine, always a Marine. Once a WM, always a whiny marine. Oh, I mean Woman Marine. The name alone cries dumb whiny bitch who doesn't belong in the military. Now, let me make this clear. I served with Marines that happened to be female who scared the begeebees out of me, and I by nature seem to intimidate a lot of people. I knew a WM who served in Vietnam and when she was in her 40s kicked the crap out of 4 redneck girls that were twice her size, more than capable of jumping about any man let alone woman. The Commandant of the Marine Corps would've been proud. She was the epitome of Marine, not WM. So I read this article, blog, commentary, and thought while the b*tch might have some valid points from HER point of view, she's one of "those" women. I've already blogged about how women hold each other down, needle each other, whiny bullsh*t that I have little tolerance for. If you can't help lift each other up, then sit down and shut up. But military women, we're a different animal. We don't like the games, but there are still a minority that do play them. We get our asses handed to us because the reality is that although most men view you as equal, we are all too keen and overexposed to those men that whine that we can't perform and only acknowledge that we can if we do double what they can. Eighty pound pack a problem? Really? We carry children from the backseat of a car to a bed, while juggling a purse that weighs an additional 5 to 20 pounds because of all the crap we have to carry for the husband, the children and of course ourselves. An eighty pound kid is worse than a pack--lumpy awkward weight, aka. dead weight, in a sound sleep--that kicks you in just the right place as you struggle to unlock the door to the house. But there are those men that wouldn't give us any credit unless it was 160 lbs. pack. That's just the facts jack. We'll never make some people happy, and we don't need some whiny b*tch marine who really didn't want to be there making statements to the contrary and feeding into their tiny views of the world and women.
First and foremost, this woman claimed, that she's proud of her service. Yea, right. She deployed. There are a lot of the guys that have a hard time being proud of their service after a deployment. So let's call a spade a spade. She isn't really proud, and I will not refer to her as a Marine. Sure she made it through boot camp and earned a globe and eagle. That's technically a Marine, but since she thinks that women need to be more to be considered equal, then she should've done more to be considered equal. By her own words, she's not truly a Marine. She didn't outperform the male counterparts of her branch. She didn't even try. By her own words, a woman can't pull an 80 lbs pack all day. Well, no honey, you can't, and because of her own limitations she would scar all women. But "those" women really do tend to do this. You're either like them, and they are of course the majority of women in their own little minds, or you're the odd duck butch dyke woman. Neither of which are true. Women that want to serve, truly choose to serve, are there because they want to be. We've groomed women to not believe in ourselves over centuries and the first woman to show the world, yes the world, that we can achieve anything and more than a man, was Queen Elizabeth I. She was a warrior, lead her troops, against a Spanish invasion. A true leader who rode up to the front lines to the shores of England in spite of concern for her safety--she was her father's daughter after all. Ironic, when we consider that Henry VIII was probably the most womanizing of all kings of Europe to date at the time. She never married and considered herself married to England, her people. She proved a woman could be a military leader, a fair and just leader, and brought England into the empire it would remain until the 1900s. There were and still are naysayers to the abilities of women. A shallow insignificant group that limit themselves and others. If you're happy being a housewife, then this is great! If you're not, then this is not so great. There's nothing wrong with being a housewife, but it's a complete waste if a woman aspires to be more, has the intellect, talent, strength and desire to be achieve more. What this woman is doing is simple. She's projecting her own limitations onto others, and the last time I spoke with any Marine of the male persuasion this is simply not acceptable. So why would this female think it would be of her? The Marines embrace that team mentality more than any other branch of service, intricately linked by the bond of the Marine Corps, so I question whether this woman ever learned what it was to truly be a Marine. The real problem she illustrates is THE major problem with women in combat. The women that join even though they truly don't want to be there. If you don't want to be in the military, then don't join. But unlike the men that join that didn't want to be there, she has being a woman to blame instead of herself. Take some responsibility. The men have to. If they hated it, they hated it--not every guy they served with. She uses other women as the scapegoat for her own limitations, and unlike the men if they tried that sorry ass excuse, she can get people to side with her limited ideas because women are still not truly 100% equal with everyone.
The woman is obviously not very well informed either. Women have been proven over and over to be better shooters, and particularly snipers, not by the USA by any means. But by Russia, the Israelis, and other various factions. The truth is that the original assassins, the Chinese version that the Japanese used to develop Ninjas, were women. Chinese society allows for women to be referred to in the male nominative if they earn it. Several hundred years ago, women earned that by being gifted assassins. I'm always loathe of anyone that toots off certain "facts" but doesn't bother to do any research at all. Moving on.
Body strength and weight really do not play a factor in today's warfare. A M16 is not that complicated, heavy or difficult to shoot...ok, depending on how much of an idiot you are. We all have seen in recent years that pretty much any idiot can figure out how to use a gun. Carrying an 80 lbs. pack? Covered that. You can get used to carrying any weight. African women carry that much weight or more on their heads, balancing it in two baskets. Also, in hand to hand combat, we know that various forms of martial arts are the most effective. We don't train most of the men this either. We also know that in a wrestling match the person with the lower center of gravity can generally gain the upper hand if properly trained in comparison to their opponent. Interestingly, women have a lower center of gravity, we are better balanced, by nature. We've been told for generations upon generations that we are weaker, but the reality is that we have more muscle strength in our abdomens allowing for more strength in our upper legs, better balancing, and all things in training equal, we can get the upper hand on even a man that is larger than us. Plus, if you don't believe all that because it's simply above and beyond your own personal beliefs, there's the argument that trumps all. Men have nuts. Yes, no matter what, men have their Achille's heel right between their legs completely unprotected. In hand to hand close contact, grab, twist, pull. I don't care how much training that guy has; depending upon the force used, he'll be incapacitated or be in flight mode. Again, this woman simply hasn't done her homework. She's making excuses why she couldn't. Whine, whine, whine.
OK, so most of this I have placed on her. It's just a fact. I joined the Navy. I was originally planning on joining the Army as a Warrant Officer flying helicopters. The next opportunity for shipping for training was several months away. It was really only 9 months, but at 21, nine months sounded like FOREVER, whereas now, nine months seems like a blink of an eye. I told the Army Officer recruiter that I would have to think on it and get back to him. On my way out, a United States Marine in full dress blues, caught me and asked if I was planning on joining the military. I was thinking about it. Now let me give you a full visual, I was dressed to the nines because I worked at an upscale clothing store, sorority pin, high heels, perfect hair and makeup. This Marine proceeds to put me in front of VCR, pushes play, asks me to push rewind when it finishes and come see him. The video was of WM boot camp. Seemed pretty normal at first, marching, cadence, then a little rough housing, some yelling, then mud---lots of crawling through mud, more rough housing, then finally closing up with a woman, at least I'm pretty sure the Marine Corps thought she was a woman, showing a bunch of female recruits how to put on their makeup "the Marine Corps" way. Yes, the "Marine Corps" way. I pushed the rewind button and got up to walk back into the main room. The Marine recruiter jumped up, big grin ear to ear, "So what did you think?"
What did I think? What did I think?!?! "I think you have lost your mind Marine! Do I look like someone who wants to crawl through mud and needs to be taught how to put on my makeup?" A burst of laughter ensued from another Marine and two sailors, all in their dress blues uniforms. Nope. I knew I didn't want to be a Marine. Did this woman join when she was 17 and had little to know idea what or who she was? Who watches one of those videos and doesn't know that is or isn't for me? There are three (4 if you count the Coast Guard) other branches to choose from. I obviously based on that video decided that the Army was probably not for me either. I can complain that the Navy video failed to show the fire fighting required in boot camp, but hey, I never had to fight an actual fire, by the grace of God, while I was in the Navy. No harm, no foul. I can imagine that if I hadn't seen that video and I had gotten into the Marine Corps and crawled through mud and had some dude looking woman teaching me how to put on my makeup....well, I might have been a little anti-being in the military. Not for other women though--just for me. I was in the Navy though, and I look back at it with very fond memories. Every branch of service is different, although we all serve the same purpose. Maybe this woman just didn't belong in the Marine Corps. Maybe she just didn't belong in the military. Regardless, maybe she should shut the hell up about what she didn't like because it was her issue with it, not all women's issue with it.
In a lot of her whine, she goes on and on about how the lack of unit cohesion and how women's problems, emotional, PMS, our periods cause all these issues. Funny how it didn't cause most of us those issues. She cites stuff she knows nothing about. She wasn't a corpsmen or medic, so she's shooting in the dark about her own perceived excuses of why women shouldn't be in the field. There's issues with men in the field also, and let's be realistic for those people who would agree with this whiner. Women go hunting and camping all the time. I'll admit it's not for me, but I know plenty of women that like that kind of stuff. They go "roughing it" all the time and they love it. I'm a pansy, or at least they tease me that I am. I'm good with that. I didn't join the Marine Corps because I'm a pansy too. This woman didn't want to "rough it", makes up excuses why women shouldn't "rough it", and then toots them off as applicable to all women that want to serve. It's bullsh*t. As far as unit cohesion, she used the US Navy as an example. Saying her unit had a woman get pregnant, blah, blah, blah, but then saying that the US Navy ships were a great example and how we had all those issues when women were added to the combat ships and units. Now here's where I really take issue with this dumb b*tch. The US Navy proved that this was a leadership or lack thereof of leadership that was the issue, not the women. If the Old Man, the Skipper, the CO, the Commanding Officer put up with it, then the command was doomed. It was rampant and caused all kinds of issues. The Navy used to have a saying, probably still does, "What goes on deployment, stays on deployment." Originally meant as the secrets, the missions, stayed quiet, but extended to those indiscretions that some sailors had. The saying "a different girl in every port" came from sailors after all. As women were integrated, well, the skippers, the Commanding Officers, that didn't make it very clear what was and wasn't acceptable had Love Boats. In addition Commanding Officers that didn't make sure that they held their senior enlisted accountable had even more problems. Anyone that has been military knows, the senior enlisted hold the keys to how the rest of the troops will behave. If they look the other way, even if the Old Man says "no", then the junior enlisted can get out of hand pretty quick. She cites our ships, our units and toots it all off as fact--never being a sailor herself, never being there because it was way before her time, and passing off scuttlebutt (rumors, gossip, bullsh*t) as fact. Pure and simple. I was there at the time this all happened. I am a sailor. I'll tell you straight up, the buck stops at the Old Man and his senior staff. Period. He tolerated it, his ship, his squadron, run amok. He had a zero tolerance, his ship, his squadron, had unit cohesion and worked as well as any single sex unit. Period. Do I feel bad for her? A little. The Marine Corps only recently started calling female Marines, Marines. The title until the last decade, 10 or more years later than the other branches, still gave their females a separate, degrading, throwback to wars gone by, name--WM. Perhaps, the Marine Corps is having a hard time with the old sea dog Marines who long for the day that women just didn't serve in the Corps. The Navy had those--20 years ago. The submariners freaked out a little too when it was first announced. But let's be honest, the submariners have done extremely well. Probably because you have to be way smarter than the average bear and in comparison some Marines are still neanderthals. It doesn't change the fact that the Navy has proven that women can be a very successful part of the team. They can pull chocks around an aircraft carrier, launch after launch, that weigh more than a pack. They can fight fires and save their fellow crewmen. This woman simply doesn't know what she's talking about and I wouldn't want her in the Navy, let alone the Marine Corps. She's a WM--whiner marine, and the military simply doesn't have enough space for them anymore.
We have an Army medic that was awarded the Silver Star. A female Army medic. Put herself in the line of fire. Ran to a truck in her convoy from the one she was in after the truck was blown up. Threw her own body over 3 wounded during transport to shield them from bullets. An act of valor that she referred to as "just doing what she was trained to do". When 60 Minutes did an expose on her, two of the 3 men came on. One refused. He wrote a scathing letter saying that women didn't belong in combat. It was very, very likely that she saved his life. Perhaps he was embittered from his injuries. It's not uncommon for men to be upset when someone saved them and their lives are not going to be what they had pictured. "Lt. Dan" from the movie, Forrest Gump, is a great example. I've met both men and women that have served that wish they had died over there, not because they were even wounded, but because they lost comrades, friends and those wounds are just as great and frustrating. This woman would have you believe that the Army medic shouldn't have been there. I'm sure, regardless of the letter, that there are members of 3 families that would disagree. It's a fact that sometimes, regardless of training, male or female, we freeze up in combat--especially at the first exposure. Another Army medic, male or female, may have froze, may have not run into the line of fire, and it's a fact that we don't talk about. Valor knows no sex. This woman has no idea what valor is or she believes that it is one of those things that is only for men. It is not. Valor is often shown by women in droves over men. The Nazis commented that when shooting women and children, the women would often jump in front of the children in spite. It was demoralizing to the Nazi men and the SS had to stop the practice. The Army medic I speak of here, she may have been just doing what she was trained to do and a man could've just as well done it as she did, but in truth, we never know the valor inside of us until tested. This woman has not had hers tested, and I daresay that I would not want to be beside her, or even in the same unit, if her metal was going to come under fire. Not because she's a woman, but because she simply doesn't have the ability to believe in herself, let alone others.
The arguments against women in combat aren't unit cohesion, sex, the lack of physical ability or size (ask the last guy who jumped a guy friend of mine), the only argument against women in combat that is viable is the same argument against men in combat. It's mentally harrowing. It's a test of who you are, everything about you, everything that you're made of--good, bad, indifferent. Everything. Is there any reason to believe that a woman is less capable of passing that test? I'd argue that the mass, very large majority, of the 30% of the military comprised by women, are there because they really want to be. They want to take that test, for whatever reason. Not the combat part of it, but the test of who they truly are. They want to prove to themselves, prove that they can. I'd argue that half of the men are there because they liked Call of Duty or some other war game. The realities of war being so much more different than a flat screen television version. The smell of gunfire, the screams, the sounds of various things around you, the cologne someone sprayed on that morning...No, I'd argue that the women joining the military in general--some whiners still join--are uniquely more qualified because they don't join just because, or because it's what the men in the family do, or for money for college, alone. Those might be reasons also, but deep down somewhere they join to prove their worth to themselves. This woman failed to prove her worth to herself and focused on every reason that she failed, that other women failed, and never once understood it's something that she, that they chose to do. Failure was an option for her. She never realized, in spite of what the military--particularly the Marine Corps try to instill, that failure is not an option. She should take a long look in the mirror and realize that some of us not only learned that lesson, but took it to heart. We tested our metal and we shine like bright freshly sharpened and polished sabers. Unlike her, we are all but too well aware that the problem with women in combat are women like her.
You can read the dumb WM (whiny marine)'s post at: