Far East Cynic

Speaking of things that are degrading to women, back in January,  Martin Van Creveld published a fine article in Small Wars Journal. In it he makes the point that got RDML Gaouette fired, namely that there is a double standard existing in today's military-and its one where one gender is in fact devalued-but its men that are being devalued, NOT women.

Last not least, as figures from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan show, relative to their number military women are 90 percent less likely to be killed than military men. In other militaries around the world, incidentally, women’s share among the casualties is much lower still. Uniformed women, in other words, are not pulling their weight. Whether this is because public opinion will not stand for large numbers of dead servicewomen or because the women themselves have found a thousand ways to avoid going where the bullets are is immaterial. Probably both factors play a role. Instead of fighting, women get all the cushy jobs. For anyone who serves in the military, or whose livelihood depends on public approval, the prevailing climate of political correctness makes it impossible to mention the problem even in a whisper. Obviously, though, it is bound to have some effects on the morale of male personnel.

Van Creveld makes a key point about the thought processes behind the feminization of today's readiness. If you view the military as just another large corporation (in fact the largest American corporation) than increasing numbers of women in the force is just a reflection of the trend in society. So too are the large numbers of men unemployed and losing opportunity due to the reduced total numbers and increased numbers in the work force. Which is fine if you support the "corporate" point of view. On the other hand, " If the reason for having armed forces is to guarantee national security, then [having large numbers of women] the answer is clearly no."

As I have pointed out repeatedly in this space, discussions about women in uniform rarely deal with the true issues at hand and instead tend to focus on ideas of "fairness" and "opportunity"-when in fact the execution of wars in defense of the country is not a fair premise, and in a proper world would not exist at all.

So, it might do you well to understand the Professor's key point about what the "transformation" of our military force has wrought. You asked for it, you got it. Welcome to the world mediocrity built.

Looking back, clearly what we see is two long-term processes running in parallel. The first is the decline of U.S. armed forces (as well as all other Western ones, but that is not our topic here). The second is their growing feminization. Critics will object that, even as they were being downsized, the forces went through one qualitative improvement after another. In particular, the so-called “Revolution in Military Affairs” is supposed to have increased their fighting power many times over. That, however, is an illusion. To realize this, all one has to do is look at Afghanistan. Over there, “illiterate” tribesmen—not, take note, tribeswomen—are right now about to force the U.S. to withdraw its troops after a decade of effort in which they achieved hardly anything.

Are the two processes linked? You bet they are. Consider a work by two female professors, Barbara F. Reskin and Patricia A. Roos, with the title Job Queues, Gender Queues. First published in 1990, it has since been quoted no fewer than 1,274 times. As they and countless other researchers, both male and female, have shown, over time the more women that join any organization, and the more important the role they play in that organization, the more its prestige declines in the eyes of both men and women. (emphasis mine) Loss of prestige leads to diminishing economic rewards; diminishing economic rewards lead to loss of prestige. As any number of historical examples has shown, the outcome is a vicious cycle. Can anybody put forward a reason why the U.S. military should be an exception to the rule?

Welcome to the brave new world. To hell with it!

Warning notice: I am leaving comments on. However if someone spirals down the same rat hole we went through last year-and refuses to discuss issues but instead engages in personal attacks, your comment will be deleted immediately.

Can we finally do away with DACOWITS now?

Since everyone can do everything-why are they needed? Except of course, its not about equality at all.

Its about reshaping the service into an image it never should have.

But such is the way society is changing.

I consider myself pretty open minded-but on the issue of women serving in combat, in squadrons, on ships, in submarines,  in the military in general, I shall never change my mind.  These changes come at a cost to American society-and they in the end,  demean women. It is not about doing what's right-its about careerism, and wanting to slant the table so that the tables of 10,000 years get turned 180 degrees around.

Secretary Panetta, Professor Van Creveld would like to have a word with you:

This, so you can understand the implications of what you did today.

And for the hypocrites in the Navy who whine and cry about all the guys getting fired for "morals" violations-just wait. The world you supposedly wished for has come true.

And no Mr. Ruiz, I do not apologize for writing this post about this time last year. I was right then-and I am right now. I will go on believing what I believe as long as I live. 

This-This is the world you have created. Enjoy it. 

There is no free ride and no matter what the benefit-we pay a cost as a society as the role of women as the civilizers of American society is destroyed.

All I can say is that I am glad I got to serve with men, when it was a man's thing to do.

I have been keeping in touch with friends in Japan, listening to them tell all about the complete stupidity of VADM Swift:

While the specific recommendations that were developed as part of the summit are reviewed, additional, temporary measures will remain in place in addition to the U.S. Forces Japan curfew, an 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. liberty curfew for all U.S. service members in Japan. These Navy specific additional measures include: the consumption of alcohol is prohibited from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. for all 7th Fleet assigned personnel in order to ensure all Sailors will be better able to meet the curfew requirements in Japan and all Sailors with any alcohol-related incidents within the last 3 years be placed on Class “C” liberty risk status which administratively curtails their ability to take liberty off of a U.S. installation..

 

 

Suffice it to say there are a lot of upset people. And their should be. These rules are , for one thing,  completely unenforceable-which, as I was taught early on generally makes a rule a bad one. Swift is fooling himself if he thinks that it is going to reduce liberty incidents-and it certainly is not going to prevent the consumption of alcohol after 10 PM.

Lets look at the smart persons strategy to beat this little measure, shall we?

1) Move off base. Preferably far off base and away from other Americans. Just about all of the southern Kanto plain is within a 30 minute train ride of Yokosuka, or Atsugi. Better to have a long commute in order to have some privacy over one's private life.

2) Stock up early. On cash and on beer. Lay in a good supply from the exchange and use some of the cheap supermarkets and 7-11's to keep it topped off.

3) Get an answering machine with phone forwarding. Never, Never, Never answer your phone-let it go straight to voice mail and call back as needed.

4). Learn Japanese and start going farther afield. Plenty of great bars away from Roppongi. Most with "Stay or Rest" hotels nearby. Bring cash-and don't go back to the ship till after 6AM. Talk to your buddies in Korea who have been avoiding "courtesy patrols" for years. Japan offers ten times the options that Korea does.

5) Write your Congressman and tell him-in strongest possible terms that the 7th Fleet commander has lost his mind. Then next week write him again.

6)For those of you with a Japanese girlfriend-submit a request chit making your girlfriend's apartment an approved overnight location. If they turn you down-submit another one. This has the added bonus of pissing off the American female Sailors who hate the fact that so many of their male counterparts ignore them and go after nice looking Japanese tuna.

7)Remind any khaki in sight-that his children enjoy more privileges and a later curfew than he does.

8) Non Seventh Fleet Commands should refuse to be dictated to by Seventh Fleet. This has the two fold affect of showing the powers that be that the restrictions are unnecessary-and it creates friction with the prisoners assigned to Seventh Fleet units. That kind of pushback led to easing of these stupid restrictions before and will again.

9) Take lots of 5 day leaves to Thailand. If they insist you take a buddy, get a friend to go-and then stay at hotels on the opposite ends of Sukhumvit.

Seriously, it strikes me as just an arrogant course of action. This is not acceptable in a home port. No commander could legally get away with it in Guam, San Diego, Puerto Rico or even Norfolk. Yokosuka may be on Japanese soil-but it is first and foremost a homeport. Treating it as a liberty port is not only a basic violation of the Sailors rights and American law-its unsound policy.

Oh and as an extra added benefit-better train some more rape facilitators. Because you will have more sexual incidents in the barracks and the ship. When you want it bad, you get it bad.

Clearly VADM Swift is being poorly served by his advisors-more importantly is being clearly misled about what the Japanese really want and expect. What most folks fail to realize is that most of the "outrage" by the Japanese is feigned-to produce a reaction among fellow Japanese and not with Americans. Like noise complaints-the real agenda is about squeezing the Japanese government-especially when it comes to Okinawa. I am surprised that Swift and company cannot understand that.

What the Japanese do want of Americans-is to have serious criminal offenders, like the guys accused of the Okinawa rape ( who incidentally were NOT Seventh Fleet Sailors), turned over to the Japanese criminal justice system. And for the good of the people who don't get in trouble ; the 98% of Americans assigned there-they probably should be.

Willard got this wrong in 2003, They got it wrong in 2005 and again in 2008. They are still getting it wrong. If you want your Sailors to behave like adults treat them like adults-and stop meddling in their personal lives.

Look! I'm smarter than a three star……..

The word for the day is: "pussification". It would seem Navy Times enjoys it. Other, more rational members among us-not so much.

When I saw this cover, I wanted to just reach through the screen and strangle somebody.  Of course, as it turned out-the cover picture was nothing. What really should make anyone's head explode are the new "solutions" to the Command Screening process.

And for the record-I qualify on on two of the three-no one will ever accuse me of being a bully-so I think I know a thing or two about drinking and chasing tail- and the exercise of command there with. Plus to be honest, if Navy Times thinks today's crop qualifies as true drunkards, they clearly have set the bar so low, they would not know a real drunk if it rammed them in their back bumper.

Which, come to think of it, might be a good thing to have happen to more than a couple of Navy Times editors-and more than a couple of the witless flags who continue to propose these stupid ideas. Furthermore, glaring headlines like this one-exaggerate what is really a minor problem.

Yes there are drunks and playboys who get through "the process"-I'm proud to call some of them friends of mine. What you probably don't remember very well-is that they also flew airplanes, drove ships, and guided submarines through destroyer screens from time to time. Many of them did it quite well,  as a matter of fact. More than a few of them were somehow still able to inspire loyalty among their squadron mates. Or has that basic fundamental part of the Navy service escaped Greenert, now that he has a lineal number of 001?

Furthermore-for the most part, and the record pretty well shows this,  generally most of them cared for their units and cared for them very deeply. What they didn't care for-in the slightest-was your twisted and sick view that they had to toe in the way of an idea of what is "moral" and what is not.

Or does the prospect of the blatant hypocrisy of your position-is  itsomething you can clearly ignore. Especially for every firing that you do have-you have probably about three more acts-that are not-and will never be detected. When you have a Navy where a guy can fuck another guy in the ass, married or single,  with our blessing-but a guy can't fuck a woman with a condom without getting axed-you lost the moral high ground a long time ago.

Want to stop firing so many CO's? Instead of mucking up a screening process that is not generally broken, why not stop being so obsessed with who and what they do off duty? There are civilian laws to deal with what happens outside the gate, the Navy doesn't need to add to them.

And whatever you do-for God's sake-stop trying to pretend that the Navy is somehow "a moral profession". By definition, it is not. An organization whose root purpose is to execute-in the aggregate-the mass murder of literally thousands of one's fellow human beings is not, by any rational definition of the term "moral". No matter how much it accomplishes as a "global force good.

Now that preceding sentence is not-in any way shape or form-saying that there should not be rules and regulations. There have to be rules and regulations. I've been clear that there are redlines that cannot be crossed. But lets define those lines in a more clear and practical way, shall we?  Especially when you have the "diverse" institution you have now. How about , in a Navy where "morality"-at least as defined by the UCMJ-is now a relative term anyway. ( or am I just imagining that a homosexual Sailor, by definition of the word "homosexual" is violating the Sodomy statute ( as well as great number of male v female Sailors.   )-why not go back to the old tried and true method to gage Naval regulations. Namely, "what type of behavior really gets in the way".

A man a lot smarter than me wrote:

Then, after 1989 and the Soviet Union’s collapse, the Navy fell into an unchallenged peace so profound that we could reflect deeply on topics considered to have been trivial in the past. Our best minds were turned loose to busily pursue previously “other” issues, while the government tried to find a new global strategy to inform our military’s mission. Then, this rising tide was immeasurably spurred by the 1991 “Tailhook” debacle, which set the stage for dramatic social change. We had no enemies except, it seems, ourselves. Overnight, everything was on the table.

So has the metric for success as a commanding officer changed since the 1980s? Certainly. Mission accomplishment took a distant back seat to myriad other considerations because we could suddenly afford it. Has the “standard,” which the CNO assured us in August will continue to be enforced, changed? No. But when you change the variables, new results are assured.

The so-called zero-defects mentality that emerged in the mid-1990s greatly expanded what might be measured against the unchanging standard of perfection. Beginning in the 1990s, a DUI became a death penalty for officers seeking command. You could be a superb warrior, but if your Sailor was arrested in Japan, you were humiliated. COs were scourged if they didn’t meet unrealistic retention goals. An overweight captain was doomed, regardless of any other consideration. What changed was what, on any given day, would be measured against the standard of perfection.

While no electronic records related to CO firings exist before 2000, the San Diego Union Tribune has quoted sources in the Naval Personnel Command saying “nearly every commander fired 50 years ago got into trouble for running the ship aground or hitting a pier.”

Mission accomplishment got the standard of perfection applied to it in the past. Not so much today. According to the same source, “changing social standards mean more wires to trip over.” Indeed, there are captains in command now who have professionally survived collisions at sea and failures to pass major inspections. Those are metrics against which we are currently not willing to fully apply the standard, for whatever reason.

But we are absolutely willing to apply the standard of perfection when it comes to a captain’s handling of his mixed-gender crew. ( Skippy comment-somehow the word "hers" never quite gets the same attention, celebrated female firings notwithstanding)

Now that same author goes on to note that there are people who get through the screening process that have no business doing so.Here is a news flash-they will continue to do so.  Oral Boards and written tests won't solve that.-you will just get people who test well.  The selection board is a human process-a compromise-that like it or not sometimes makes mistakes. In fact I submit to you that this "new"  process will actually get you more bullies, especially if they are female. That is why you have other tools-including firing people.

How about trying a solution that they tried 30+ years ago? Keep people doing their primary warfare specialty ( flying, sailing, submarining) for the entirety of their sea tours till they reach the time to screen for command.  Have community leaders who brief the records and let community reputation have more meaning in the selection process than JPME, Diversity awareness or DC tours. There is no substitute for experience-the career path laid before our folks today does not put a premium on that. You have folks showing up to Department head tours with barely 1400 hours-when I went to my department head tour I had almost 2700 ( And yes its true I was a whore for flight time-if you were not flying, what was the point of being in the Navy after all?). Thanks to IA's, disassociated tours and other workarounds for nonexistent problems, quite simply you are not "saving" enough in the experience bank so that when people do assume command the don't have that experience to draw on. Three tours of three years flying, floating or submerging should be the minimum-not the exception. 

On other thing I think needs to be looked at seriously, is having the Navy admit it was wrong to want younger commanding officers. Move promotion control points from O1-O6 back by at least a year. The goal is to have more folks showing up to their first operational units at the rank they should be, Ensigns; and in the process buy some more time to get those three sea tours of three years done-and get the post graduate degree they will need.

And while you are pointing fingers-why not point more than a couple of fingers at those who created this situation in the first place?

Casual observers—those who have never served in a fully integrated ship’s company—seem convinced that men and women can serve together in ships with utter disregard for one another’s sex. That sounds ridiculous, because it is. It only sounds sensible to people so determined to make something work that they are able to discount fundamental human nature. Simply put, you cannot put men and women in a small box, send them away for extended periods of isolated time, and expect them not to interact with one another. They’re like magnets being put into a box and shaken—they stick. It is what has kept our species going for 250,000 years.

There are two possible outcomes here. First, we can continue to enforce the standard, ratcheting up the pressure on captains and ships to asymptomatic levels. At least a standard is set and enforced, and the CNO himself has said that “you’re not going to change the standard, just because the number may be getting high.” A scorched-earth policy is supportable as long as it is consistently applied without passion or favoritism. There will be losses, but those losses will grow to be accepted, just as collision and grounding are now.

The second, more likely scenario is that the Navy will grow weary of these embarrassments and find another path. While that may seem inconsistent (and it is), it is also more realistic. Time has a way of altering perception, and this hemorrhaging of COs makes us look embarrassingly unprofessional.

Cause and Effect

Given the trend in 2010 and liberally counting commissioned cruisers, destroyers, frigates, and amphibs at 150 units, that means that 4 percent of ship captains will have been fired. That is not 1 percent. More telling, if one only includes mixed-gender crews in the calculus, it is certain that the numbers are even more glaring.

The end of the Cold War set the stage for a wide-open-to-change era in the Navy. Certainly, the first key change, post-Tailhook, took place when CNO Admiral Frank Kelso mandated that women go to sea in our combatants. Then, in 2000, CNO Admiral Vern Clark (a SWO) decided that a major effort needed to be undertaken to create the resources necessary to remediate 50 years’ worth of underfunding in the Navy’s real-property accounts. The strategy chosen to effect this effort was to increasingly model Navy practices on more “efficient” industrial models and practices—change upon change, leading to unanticipated effects. One of those is that our surface fleet is in trouble. Another—and one that was certainly unanticipated—is that our captains are failing to handle the challenge presented by mixed-gender crews.

In the end, it all comes down, as Vice Admiral Balisle suggested, to causes and their unanticipated effects. It may seem like an excellent, timely, or even an unavoidable idea to integrate a ship. It may be the right time to integrate a submarine. It might even be the time, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mike Mullen (another SWO) suggests, to do away with the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. But to do so without the full and conscious awareness that there will be a cost, potentially high, at a variety of levels, is to abdicate responsibility.

Only one day left in the month to get in a post on March Madness. Not basketball, but the Madness known as Women's History month. Yes, Yes, that oh so special time of the year when we get to celebrate the history that women want us to know about, while white washing the details they would rather just not see printed in the paper. Which is designed to be translated into its real meaning:

“Setting the bar for historical achievement so low-than any average everyday achievement for either a man or a woman becomes ‘historic’ if it is done by a woman”

You can quote me on that if you wish.

Oh and I guess after recent experience-we should get the usual disclaimers out the way first. I don't give a rat's ass if your daughter is a Naval Aviator, an engineer, CEO of a  multi-billion dollar firm, or for that matter the first woman to eventually walk on the moon. Nor do I care if your husband is supportive of what you want to do. These are my feelings and thoughts, these are issues that need to be discussed-not swept under the rug, and I'll write about them. If you think that gives you a carte blanche to go after me-I've got a message for you.

So, as is my custom in March- I intend to use this little missive to write about something that got me really peeved the moment I read it and heard it.The source of my anger? This little headline in Navy Times:

Getting Personal: Naval Air Forces plans character-building workshops.

(It appears the article is behind Navy Times firewall so I can't send you a link-but the article is on Page 18 of the April 02, 2012 issue.)

Starting this spring the Navy's  air wings, squadrons, and aircraft carriers will take a moment to stop and delve into some real life, but awkward scenarios in a move the top commander hopes will tamp down personal misconduct and misbehavior.

Naval Air Forces will roll out its new "Character and Integrity" program, developed by a contracted consultant and organized in the "train the trainer" format. Each training workshop will provide group discussions and include a video message from VADM Allen Myers.

" The real intent is to improve decision making skills  and give our people interventional strategies so that we do not adversely impact our readiness as war fighters because of character- related and integrity -related incidents, " said Cmdr Pauline Storum, a Naval Air Forces spokeswoman.. Top leaders "heard….we don't have a tool to help our people make better decisions."

I'll pause while you throw up now.

If that last paragraph, does not make naval veterans angry-very angry, then I think you have not been paying attention recently. Or have just given up, and acknowledged the fact that every thing the nay sayers said back in the bad old days about the great experiment has come true with a vengeance. 

So by implication, the generations of officers that fought the war in Vietnam, lived through 70's, gave rise to the 600 ship Navy and fought Desert Storm and Desert Shield were unprincipled, bastards with "no character?"-No character indeed because after a long at sea period they went ashore and got a little unwrapped, and part of that getting unwrapped might have included a tryst or two with the local female population? Bullshit!

But so many people are getting fired!

Yes they are. But as I pointed out before its as much about today's environment and the lack of consistency in application of standards that contributes to those firings-as well as an interconnected world that intrudes on things that quite simply: are none of Al Myers-or the rest of flag counterparts business.

I'll say it again: "The "moral character" of our force (whatever the hell that means) is just fine. 99% of our Sailors do the right thing-every time, all the time when it comes to the particulars of their profession. For the other 1% there are already sufficient remedies in place-there is absolutely no reason to add to them."    

And of course, later in the article-the familiar old canard of Tailhook gets trotted out. THAT Navy was killed a long time ago-by stupid Politically Correct actions like this one. ( And for what its worth-THAT Navy was a hell of lot more fun than this one.)  And just as full of "character"-where character had a clearly defined professional basis and less of a personal one. of course it was Tailhook that led the Navy down the path that made it think that its leadership had as much of right to tell you how to live your personal life as well your professional one. ( P.S." the true story behind the sensational Tailhook Scandal and how Paula Coughlin was anything but innocent"-but 8 million dollars works wonders.)

What should be an insult to anyone's "integrity" however-is that the Navy has to outsource this training to an outside firm, with several folks who just happen to be "friends of a friend of friend".  That should strike more than just me as odd and particularly insulting-the institution and to our Sailors.

But today's Sailors don't have the time.

Really? They don't have the time to do their central job as officers and chief petty officers? Lead their Sailors?   Yea-I think that would get in the way of all the diversity training that needs to be accomplished.  And it certainly would get in the way of IG's throwing people under the bus. Give me a fucking break. Hey Al-how much did this little ( probably non competitively bid) contract cost the US Navy? How much-probably a fair amount I think.

So what does all this have to do with Women's History month, you ask? Good question-and it really doesn't- save for one major thing. The primary argument against gender integration was the amount of problems it would create by having men and women live together in close quarters in a profession that prizes companionship to a  large degree. Add to that- long series of events that closed the doors on other more discrete and non threatening means of releasing that tension concurrently ensued-and you should not be surprised at the result.  The Star Trek Navy doesn't exist. And it never will. 

There is no moral crisis in the Navy. The average naval officer or Sailor is getting up each morning and going to work on time, pays his bills, takes care of his family, serve his country-and maybe just maybe-desires to have a good time once in a while, while doing so. Its not an unreasonable expectation on his or her part.

I wonder if there will be a module in the course about how its bad to stab your contemporaries in the back. That always denoted a certain lack of integrity-right Al?

That less than polite statement was one I heard during the middle of the 90’s from a fellow Navy person. His rather blunt point was that AFN- or any other military mouthpiece had to show a woman doing just about any military job; regardless of the actual demographics of that particular MOS or Designator. It was one of the dirty little secrets of the Navy’s PAO world-that they had accepted the subliminal mission of serving as an active advocate for the feminist mission. When the speaker said this particular phrase-the PAO effort to preach the feminist gospel had probably been underway for over 15 years, if not longer.

If you don’t believe me-go back and look around the Navy.mil website. For every picture of an individual-there will be at least 50% (or more of them) female. And the papers and TV have gone out of their way to trumpet any number of female “firsts”.

Even when they didn’t merit notice whatsoever.

Gotta show a gash. Anywhere and anyway you can. This is rule number one at AFN and in the PAO community in general.

Crude way to say it? For sure. But 100% accurate.

Long time readers of this blog will know that I am not exactly a fan of the repeal of the combat exclusion laws, nor the aggressive thrust undertaken by the services-having broken down that obstacle-to recruiting to a designated quota or percentage (30% by the previous CNO’s sellout embrace of the diversity mantra) of women in the service. I am, however, a realist and I do accept the reality that it is the world we live in today. Women will continue to serve and be advanced within our military, our nation as a whole—unwittingly IMHO-has agreed to accept the costs that come with that course of action.

So it was with a certain degree of resignation- that I was greeted to this picture on my Facebook page. Courtesy of the Tigertail Ombudsman, there was a whole series of photos outline the courageous act of scheduling an all female crew for a mission over Afghanistan.

From left to right, Air Control Officer Lt. Nydia Williams, Radar Operator Lt. j.g. Ashley Ellison, Plane Commander Lt. Cmdr. Tara Refo, Pilot Lt. Ashley Ruic, 

and Mission Commander Lt. Cmdr. Brandy Jackson, all assigned to Carrier Airborne Early Warning Squadron (VAW) 125 pose for a photo before flying

the first all-female-crewed combat mission in an E-2C Hawkeye aboard Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70).

Voluminous coverage in Navy Times and Navy.Mil guaranteed to follow. Hallelujah-the greatest thing since sliced bread! Hallelujah brother-we have seen the light!

Except of course its not the first all female mission. Perhaps for the E-2 community, although I remain convinced that we had our female pilots fly together back in 1996 and several other squadrons had done similar things in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s.

The PAO beast would have surely demanded it. After all-its been years since they already broke the barrier of a non qualified female aviator being nominated to command a carrier battle group. This is old news-if anything it shows the E-2 community has been behind the times.

All kidding (sic) aside-this really should have been a non-event. Not worthy of so much of a mention in the SDO’s log book-much less blazing headlines. If the Navy was really true to its rhetoric-this would have been just another day at sea among many days at sea-enduring mind numbing drudgery punctuated by a isolated moments of excitement.

After all, isn’t what the women said they wanted? “We just want to be treated just like the men!”

Except of course we know that is not true. What they really wanted was to ensure the men and the institution they served in, were changed to be treated like the women-and to ensure that whatever advancement of women occurred, took place at breakneck speed. I mean literally hundreds of thousands of combat hours have been flown by five guys without so much as a whisper in the news media-save for when there is a mishap or someone gets fired for giving into the instincts God gave him.

But this. This-is something different. 5.2 hours of flight time to be emblazoned in the history books. A banner day among banner days for the E-2 community!

Excuse me while I sneeze-Horseshit!

I’ll say it again. Gender should not be a scheduling criteria-and if it happens that the dice roll to have five women flying together, that should be a non-event. Just another day at the office. It’s what we signed up for-and oh by the way women have been flying at sea from carriers for almost 20 years.

Old news-except for how it supports the Navy’s ever growing business of institutionalized racism and sexism, known as Diversity.

A burning devil to take them!

Three years ago. ( three years! That alone is appalling)-when I was contemplating my expulsion from paradise and the reality of having to take up residence in Gehenna on the Tennessee, a commenter here posted this tidbit of advice:

“If you come home and find her watching Oprah and eating twinkies-get her ass on the first plane back to Japan!.”

Wise man-because he recognized the lesson, that so many of the rest of us have discovered that once you take the woman out of Nihon-they start unlearning all the wonderful, Japanese, things that made them attractive to begin with. Protracted periods in the USA have the effect of corrupting their inner being.

So it was with that quote in mind that I cringed when this morning, as I was getting ready for work, that the S.O. asked me to make sure the DVR was set up-so she could make sure she didn’t miss Oprah’s last show.

Now besides the fact that she still cannot figure out how to use the DVR-despite being shown on numerous occasions-the fact that she has turned into a watcher of Oprah is more than a little disturbing. Fortunately, I searched the pantry for twinkies-but found none.

But I am calling the ANA or United ticket office right away.

I came across this article on the USNI website today. It was so good I had to re-post it here for you folks to read. As you do-ask yourself two questions: 1) Is he wrong? and 2) Will a USNI with a new mission statement allow such an article to be printed in the future? Go vote agains the board-and then write to Admiral Harvey and thank him for proving the stereotype of the risk averse Naval Leader to be 100% true.

Now read How the Mighty Are Fallen.

Continue Reading »

This post is not so lovingly dedicated to Phib’s commenter Anathema, who was the central figure in the comment fest over at his place. The veracity with which he defends the flawed decision making of our gutless Naval Leadership-compels me to write this post. Please forward to him if you wish. He needs to read it.

On Friday, I spent some time reading the just released JAGMAN investigation into the so called “Enterprise XO movie night videos”  incident.
Never in 30+ years in and around the Naval Service have I seen so many people get screwed over something so insignificant and so trivial. You really should read the whole thing, all 74 pages. You can cut the hypocrisy with a knife. I commented on this a few weeks ago-but the tenure of the debate since then, and the over reaction by the chain of command demands further comment.

A few words up front.  I know many of the participants in these events-so it colors my view to some extent. Getting moral lectures on what should and should not be present in Naval Aviation grates me-especially when I know that many of those giving such lectures engaged in plenty of similar activities. So appeals to my better nature tend to fall on deaf ears.

In case you don’t have time to read the whole thing, here is the cliff notes version:

The XO made videos to put in front of Saturday night movie night. Contrary to what many are saying now-this always was, and has been a tradition aboard many aircraft carriers. ( They had them on Coral Sea and TR for a couple of examples of ships I served on). What is new-is the idea of someone trying to put spontaneity and some humor into these videos. Most CVN XO’s are clones of each other. They wouldn’t do it-because they lack the humor and/ or the ability to pull it off. Ambition tends to beat that out of them at an early age-and add to it the prerequisites to be even considered for  Nuke XO and its clear that “free spirits” are definitely not a part of that gene pool. (and certainly won’t be in the future).

So when someone tried to put a little life into them-here is what happened:

 Most of the crew probably liked them-a few well-placed female officers probably didn’t, and whined. In the middle of the cruise it was noted-but there were probably more important things to worry about like making the flight schedule and making sortie count. Now 4 years after the fact-with a new “special minority to be appeased” its time to show the greater world we “get it”. So hypocrites who should have more willingness to take care of their own,  are more than willing to throw their shipmates to the wolves. Been there done that in the aftermath of Tailhook, where- there as now-good men got screwed to appease a noisy few.

The investigation backs this premise up. The PDF will not allow you to copy and quote individual sections but I would draw your attention to a couple of items.

1) The investigation was specifically not tasked to investigate who made these videos public, thus denying the opportunity to keep this inside the Navy lifelines. Kind of sad really since I be willing to bet more than a couple of beers it was someone trying to settle a grudge.

2) The investigation casts a huge net as to what is “offensive”. (Paragraph 5). Suffice it to say, what they consider to be offensive-was quite normal during my time. And is still done today-although I’m sure it is being done more quietly now.

3) The phrase “popular with the crew” is used ten times at least. The phrase ” no one complained about the videos” is also used a lot. So are the words, “so and so was not derelict in the performance of his duty”-but they were quickly disregarded in the conclusions. Oh yea-the words, “Enterprise morale was high” show up a lot too.

4). Page 24 is key. A female CDR who had a “close personal and professional relationships with a member of the CSG-12 staff”  whined about the videos. Now mind you the CAPT had already discussed when and where content crossed his personal comfort line and the CSG-12 commander accepted explanations of counseling at face value.

5) And oh yes, the Enterprise was on deployment, with an old ship and still won the Battle E.

There are some very particular issues here as I see it.

Issue #1: The hoary old issue of “command presence” is at the heart of this.  This question has been around since the 1970′s that I can recall if not a lot longer. For the uninitiated-basically command presence is the idea that you have to be a certain type of personality to be effective in command. Those who believe strongly in the idea tend to have little use for mitigating factors such as great piloting, ship-handling, or great skills at tactical execution. ( Also known as the now defunct holy grail of the Navy: being able to “fight the aircraft, ship or submarine”).  These folks were described in an August 1984 issue of US Naval Institute proceedings. Namely,  people with great “command presence”:

“When faced with quick decisions, they will opt for the status quo. He (or she) is inherently short on imagination, preferring careful analysis to brilliant insights. He is overly cautious…but will try to look the part of a traditional Naval Officer….and is usually very demanding “about looking good around the ship“. BTW -most “command presence” kind of folks are “thunderstruck” at liberty in Olangapo or Pattaya-their favorite ports are Monaco or Cannes. “Although he may not do well in combat-he will gladly die trying“.

In a nutshell any arguments about what CAPT Honors did or did not do are centered on this. NOT ONCE, have I heard his ship-handling, piloting skills, or ability to track details discussed as a mitigating factor. Nor it would seem is anyone asking if he could understand the concerns of the deck plate Sailor. They come back to command presence. There is no room in today’s Navy for characters-especially when “shoes” are making the judgment.

Issue #2-Nothing, even it it never violates the UCMJ, is ever in the past. Which is odd-since even the UCMJ itself has a statute of limitations. CAPT Honors-for whatever concerns were voiced about his failure as an VJ-evidently received good enough FITREPS to allow him to go on to his Deep Draft and then to subsequent CVN Command. If you are currently serving on active duty today, you should be very concerned about this, because it now means that anyone, and I do mean anyone, with an axe to grind can go back and resurrect a past decision and get it to be used against you.

Ask yourself this question? Why did this require letters of censure? A quick, ” I think you should retire” and a quiet P-4 ordering that XO movie night videos shall not be produced anymore couldn’t suffice? Of course not-not with DADT repealed and a new need to show people who cannot and will not serve,  that the Navy somehow “gets it”. And why didn’t subsequent performance and accomplishment serve to mitigate any desire to punish these individuals? Because it got out in the press and embarrassed the Navy.

3) Issue #3. It is wrong to punish enlisted people for following lawful orders and telling them what they should or should not be offended at.  Several of the critical paragraphs take Enterprise crew members to task for not voicing offense to things that they did not find offensive to begin with is just plain wrong.  I’ll grant that officers bear responsibility and will take the heat when they decided wrong-this wholesale action to formally single out enlisted personnel, whose only crime was doing their job, is just wrong. Furthermore, by making statements that they have some sort of an obligation to whine-ensures you will have whining of the worst sort. ( Law of unintended consequences).

Issue 4-This kind of overkill, on what is essentially an isolated issue, when real negligence on behalf of our personnel and procurement leadership is overlooked, sends a signal too. Who has been fired over LCS? LPD-17? JSF?Someone did get fired over JSF-but the program is still hosed.  Who is going to go back and formally censure those leaders who created the train wreck that is Naval Aviation procurement?  The XO Movie Night videos got a woman offended-the latter will actually kill people. Page 55 and the “lecture given” rings hollow from guys who acquiesced to similar things in their own time -and participated in really dumb perosnnel and hardware decisions with no one holding them accountable for them.  So spare me the moral outrage.

Now as I said at the begining-I’m not surprised at the way it all turned out-but I am more than a little angry and at the same time sad. 

 As far as I am concerned it is the natural result of the trend that many of us warned would happen when squadrons and ships were made mixed gender-namely, that unlike what the women said they wanted, “to just be treated like the men”, the real agenda was to change and destroy the culture of the Naval Aviation and ruin everything that made it fun. And it would appear they have succeeded.

There are people who say I am defending unprofessional conduct. I firmly reject that contention-now and in the future. But don’t kid yourself this is deeper task, nothing less than legislating conformity to a humorless and quite frankly, “watch your back” type of day to day environment that is not good for anyone.  The a work hard,  play hard environment of Naval Aviation is dead. And it’ s not coming back. Enjoy life as Black Shoes who fly airplanes. I’m glad I won’t have to join you.

Last Friday was the first day that I could truly say I no longer missed the Navy and I am glad I am retired. I am glad I served when I did and not in the one the “Throw ‘em under the bus” crowd wants to create.

Hey! Its March….and we all know what that means…….

Yes, its that oh so special time of the year when we get to celebrate the history that women want us to know about, while white washing the details they would rather just not see printed in the paper.

So, as is my custom in March, I make it my mission to report on women’s history-the stories you won’t hear at a convention like this one.

Now when I read this story and saw this picture I was a just a tad bit miffed. Imagine, in a gender neutral Navy, that women would actually be paid to go to a convention where the aim was, to get women aviators together for purpose of “build{ing} the right networks, help develop our people professionally, and establish effective mentoring opportunities between our Senior Leaders and our young folks. ”

Captioned as follows: Rear Adm. Wendi Carpenter, Commander, Navy Warfare Development Command, is surrounded by Naval aviators and air crewman attending the 22nd Women in Aviation Conference in Reno, Nev. The conference hosts over 3,000 people involved in the aviation industry and provides a great opportunity for networking, mentoring and recruiting.

Now if, as a man, you are not more than a little offended by that-go back and ask this question, ” When is the Men in Aviation convention in Reno, for the purpose of building the right networks”?

Oops-I forgot. When you go to those,  you don’t follow up by sorting your business cards-but by saying hello to your [not so] friendly NCIS agent.

And exactly how many men are in that picture anyway? I’ll bet there are few that would like to network with some of the “talent”  in that crowd. What’s up with that?

Now before everyone heads on out to send this link to the Navy IG. ( Please feel free to do so-I will be happy to write about them too), I’ve got a serious point to make.  There is a Woman Officers Professional Organization (WOPA), where is the MOPA? There are associations for Hispanic Officers, African American Officers-even groups that align Asian American officers. Where is the WASP Officers Professional association?

There is isn’t one-and even suggesting that there should be is considered a non career enhancing move. Some readers might remember when I quoted a guy named Chistopher Caldwell back in 2007:

Racism and certain other forms of exclusion corrode a society morally. But diversity, as an ideology, is not a matter of avoiding those occasions of sin. It is an active, ruthless and crusading belief system. Its effects resemble those of “meritocracy” on the community life of London’s Bethnal Green, as described in Dench, Gavron and Young’sThe New East End. It involves identifying, discrediting and breaking up close-knit communities in the interest of mixing them more easily into some new ideal of the nation.

If the Navy were true to its rhetoric-it would not give aid and comfort to associations like this. It would encourage all of its female aviators to join ANA, Tailhook and the NHA and show up there. As I have pointed out in many different ways under this yearly ritual of posts, by being so hell bent for “diversity”, companies and the US military are turning their back on the thing that makes mission driven organizations succeed-namely a unity of identity.

And people wonder why we have JO’s who don’t understand how the food chain works when we read about these exchanges between an O-8 and an O-2:

One milestone with which I was involved, and which gives me great sense of satisfaction, is the newly formed WAI Chapter in Iraq. This has materialized over the past year since the last WAI Conference where I met a young Air Force C-130 pilot, 1st Lt. Chrystina Short. Chrystina has just returned from a deployment to Iraq a month ago. While she was overseas, we were “Facebooking” one another (which is an easy and effective way for me to mentor). The thought occurred to me after having just spoken at the WAI Conference in Johannesburg, Africa and posting the pictures on Facebook… “Why not start an Iraq-chapter of WAI?” So when Chrystina commented on the posts for South Africa, I responded that she should start such a chapter. AND so she did! The rest is now being written in the pages of history, and joining us at the WAI Conference this year are two young women from Iraq – Shahad & Zahrau. They have just this week graduated Air Traffic Control School in Miami. These young ladies are exceptional women, motivated and passionate about aviation. They both hold other degrees to include Laser Physics and Computer Science.

Funny, and here I thought she was just over there to make the flight schedule.

There is so much that is so wrong about this. Lets start with WAI-its a 501(C)(3) organization . These groups are not supposed to engage in any political activities, though some voter registration activities are permitted. Women’s advocacy groups don’t exactly meet that definition. For the Navy to actively support it-borders on dangerous ground that brushes up against the Hatch Act. The group admits men to be sure-but go back and look at the picture, not a lot of swinging body parts on that stairway.

And when did it become Wendi Carpenter’s job to mentor officers outside her chain of command? Somewhere I don’t think that is the billet description of the Commander Naval Warfare Development command.

You cannot have it both ways- claim to be gender neutral and then have actions that turn women into preferred customers within the system. Now that DADT has been repealed, what’s next? A GAI convention?

And unlike Nir Rosen-I am not going to apologize for what follows.

Lara Logan got beaten and sexually assaulted by a mob of Arabs. And now the world is “shocked” that such a thing would happen to a hot blonde in the middle of crowd of Arabs.

While I feel as much sympathy towards Ms Logan as anyone else-and I wish it had not happened to her-I’m not in the least bit surprised, and neither should anyone else be who has spent any amount of time in the Arab world.

These are Arabs after all. They are anything, but inconsistent.

The whining can start now- and the vicious attacks too. “How can you say that?” ” “No woman deserves to be raped”. ” You are a mysoginist pig”.

I didn’t say anything like that.

But, hey,  knock yourself out- it changes not the reality or lack of risk management practiced by CBS news. On this particular issue-I have to side with the neandrathals-there are certain places it is just not smart to send a woman, especially a  blonde woman reporter, to.

Are you listening DACOWITS?

People don’t like to hear that ugly truth. But it remains the truth just the same. There are times when prudent discretion needs to trump the urge to “break new ground”.  This appears to have  been one of those times.

Ask yourself these questions: 1) Why was it so important to have a woman there? and 2) How many Al Jazerra reporters who speak fluent Arabic got assaulted? Of either sex. I’ll bet the answer is “Zero”.

Look at it another way. I have the freedom to go anywhere I choose. However, whether I like it or not-there are some places, I should simply choose not go to-out of simple common sense prudence and a desire for my own safety.

Which gets back to CBS and its lack of judgement. You cannot tell me that there are not some dark haired, hijab wearing, Arabic speaking reporters that CBS could have paid-who probably also understand Arab culture-to do the same job that Ms Logan got sent to do. Why did it not occur to CBS to take that approach?

Oh yea- I forgot, we don’t have local bureaus anymore,with people who actually have lived in a country for an appreciable amount of time.

Before one goes to ballistic about pointing out what is a simple fact of life-I have a homework assignment for you. Google this phrase and see how many hits you get back: “Filipina women raped by Arabs”.

I’ll save you the time-its over 300,000. Where is the US  media outrage about that?  Most of those women didn’t even try to go down and insert themselves into a mob-they just picked the wrong employer to work for. At a rate of pay far less than Lara Logan’s. Don’t see the western world up in arms about that.

If you parsed the stories in that Google search carefully-you would have found at least TEN (that’s right-TEN) stories of a woman raped in an Arab country since the beginning of this year alone. There is no one who speaks out for them. And its not stopping. It should serve as warning flag though.

Now let’s be clear. I am not condoning what is clearly a horrible crime-no matter who it happens to. My point is, however, that these statistics point out what can only be described as a much higher level of risk for a foreign woman in an Arab country. People in management in CBS news had to know that. Relying on translators and security guards is not enough.

Its what they would call in the aviation world, “supervisory error”-which serves as a contributing factor in the mishap. Arabs are Arabs after all-they are not going to change, no matter who tells them to. Democracy or no-they are still Arabs. This is and will remain an unfortunate fact of life in these countries for a long time to come. At least as long as they practice Islam.

Even after the furor dies down about Lara Logan-those same Filipinas will still be getting on planes out of Manila and some of them will be living in fear just a few months after their arrival. And most of the Arab states will not be lifting a finger to change that. And sadly, no newspaper outside of the Philippines will report on it. Its a lousy story and a big part of what is wrong with the Arab world.

Its an outrage-just like Lara Logan getting raped is an outrage. But all of our moral pretensions is not going to change that anytime soon. That’s the world we live in and will report about. You cannot eliminate these risks-no matter how much you want to.

Because these people are Arabs.

You can manage risk though and try to keep it diminished or avoided. And one way is to actually have reporters who can blend into crowds and speak the language. And if its absolutely vital to go against that advice…..

Well, don’t be surprised when it blows up in your face.

That it was March and so for the entire month I have to hear about Women’s History month. How could I forget? Every day when I come to work and go to get on the elevator I have to look at a sign telling me “Its time write women back into history.”

Oh really? So Betsy Ross, Joan of Arc, Anne Boleyn, and Mata Hari ( to name a few) were not a part of history? Could have fooled me. And here I thought women always were a part of history as Uncle William Shakespere  reminded me. “From women’s eyes this doctrine I derive:They sparkle still the right Promethean fire;They are the books, the arts, the academes,That show, contain, and nourish all the world.”

Seems to me women have been in the history books since day 1, right when Eve turned Adam into the first man to be lied to by a woman. ( Regrettably he was not the last…as the tradition continues right up to today.)

No-when one says, “writing women back into history”-it really needs to be translated into its real meaning:

“Setting the bar for historical achievement so low-than any average everyday achievement for either a man or a woman becomes ‘historic’ if it is done by a woman”

 You can quote me on that  if you wish.

How do I know this? I read it the other day in the paper. There right on page one, I read all about the “historic” achievements of Trish Beckman. Who is she you ask?  Well lookie here:

“Among her other aviation accomplishments, Beckman – who retired from 28 years in the Navy as a commander in 1999 – was in a group of women who testified to Congress about the importance of them being able to train for and fly combat missions.”

When you dig into it you find this-she basically did the same thing many men did-only they never got a subpoena to testify in front of Congress.  She flew EC-130′s.  She got to go Test Pilot School. She got back seat qualified in a few fighters. (So did I-the fighter part- not the TPS part.). That and $ 3.20 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

 Hate to break this too you-but lots of people get to do that.  Hell, I’d have gone to Washington on my own dime to tell Congress what a bone headed idea it was to have mixed gender squadrons.

Summing it up another way-she is historic for showing up for work on time for 28 years. How many men did that and all they got was a kick in the ass out the door? No entries in the history book for them.

You can read about more great non-achievements here, here, and here.

I need to answer the door now-the thought police are here to take me away…………

Naval leadership casts the last vestige of its manhood down the toilet. Unsurprising, but disgusting  nonetheless:

The Pentagon on Monday notified Congress that women will be able to join submarine crews within 30 legislative working days, making good on the wishes of top Navy commanders announced last fall.

As required by law, Defense Secretary Robert Gates sent a letter to legislative leaders announcing the Navy’s plan to lift its ban on female submariners, giving the House and Senate time to absorb the decision and, if members want, to take action. Congress can pass a law forbidding integration, requiring the Navy to wait or perform a study. If it does nothing, as expected, the ban will expire around the end of April.

Reason number 327 why I am glad I came of age when I did. Serving in all male units was an honor and a privilege-and a lot more fun. Sorry if that bothers some women readers-sue me. There is an order to the universe and women on subs is not in it.

Nonetheless, it will be interesting to watch this all play out. We have seen this script before:

1) First women in submarine training will not be allowed to flunk out.

2) Surface warfare LCDR’s will be persuaded, cajoled, and offered bonuses to change designators. They will be rushed through submarine training and then assigned as department heads on SSBN’s.  No such late transition opportunities will exist for male officers.

3) Three years later, to the day, these same women LCDR’s will make Commander and a couple of them will be screened for command. Great hoopla and fanfare will accompany this announcement. Hordes of VIP’s will show up for the change of command and it will cited as the greatest thing since sliced bread. The Navy diversity industry will kick into high gear-and have ads showing ( a nice looking) woman at the periscope and on the bridge of a submarine.

4) Well before then-several cases of fraternization and rampant sexual activity on and off the boat will make the pages of Navy Times.  The question in the editorial pages, “So its ok for a man to suck a man’s dick, but not to have sex with a woman?” will be buried by the editors.

5) Seven years after first women make Submarine CO, first female ( and hopefully African American and lesbian) woman submariner will be selected for flag. Several well deserving men who worked 24-27 years for the same chance will retire due to non-selection.

6) USS (Fill in the blank name of Virginia class submarine) runs aground entering Hampton Roads harbor. Woman CO is relieved for cause, then re-assigned to command (fill in the blank for out of the way Naval Station).  Male counterpart fired for failing an Operational Reactor Safeguards exam is forcibly retired 3 months after being fired.  “A great victory for equality”

Repeat.

Welcome to the brave new world. You can have it!

For a good copy of this video:

According to TMZ, Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million dollars during her settlement negotiations with Miss California USA Pageant until the Pageant lawyer presented her with a XXX sex tape of which she is the star..

The video has never been released and is apparently so graphic, not even TMZ would play it.

Apparently it took her about 15 seconds to withdraw her demands and accept a $100,000 payout, all of which covers the cost of her lawyers, leaving her with nothing

You can’t make this stuff up.

My Canadian counterpart may be right-”The GOP can learn a lot from her, particularly that Sarah Palin.”