Archive for the 'Navy' Category

Apr 23 2016

Here we go again.

Published by under Navy

A CO has been fired through what appears to be, assassination by IG.

YOKOSUKA NAVAL BASE, Japan — Yokosuka base commanding officer Capt. David Glenister has been relieved of duty, Navy officials in Japan said Thursday.

Rear. Adm. Matthew Carter, head of Navy Region Japan, relieved Glenister Wednesday afternoon after losing confidence in his ability to command.

“The action resulted from the findings gathered during investigations which determined that Glenister had not performed to the high standards demanded of an installation commanding officer,” a Navy statement said.

Glenister’s initial misstep involved an investigation into Morale, Welfare and Recreation programs in the summer of 2015, Navy Region Japan officials said.

The investigation completed by the base command was deemed by higher headquarters as “wholly insufficient,” Navy Region Japan spokesman Cmdr. Ron Flanders said Thursday.

The regional command later conducted its own investigation, which found and later corrected deficiencies found in the MWR programs, Flanders said.

This year, Glenister inadequately handled a “very serious” personnel grievance filed by a Yokosuka civilian base employee, Navy Region Japan officials said. The grievance was not filed against Glenister personally. Officials declined to provide more detail on the grievance because it could be the subject of a lawsuit.

The two incidents, combined with poor initial findings of a command climate survey, led the Navy to determine that Glenister could no longer “handle that complex range of issues that can occur at a major base,” Flanders said.

 

My sense here is that we do not know the entire story and there is more to this than just what was written above. Certainly it says a lot about autonomy, or lack of it, in the current Navy Chain of Command. Was he counseled by his leadership following the first incident?

The poor command climate is a wrinkle-but then again, I would like to know the back story here. And it would be worth seeing the demographics involved. It is an open secret that Navy Region Japan has been enforcing the utterly stupid "5 year rule" on its civilian employees. That has to have an affect, and its not one the CO can control. A military vs civilian breakdown might reveal something.

And lets not forget, all the bullshit liberty restrictions in place that turn a really good deal, namely living in Japan, into a nuisance.

There is more here than is being admitted to.

One response so far

Mar 20 2016

Ignoring the real crime

Published by under Navy,Time wasters

I, like many people, subscribe to Navy Times. And, if you have been a follower of this blog for some time, you that I very upset with some of the news about the Navy, my Navy, that it reports.

And in the latest edition to arrive in my mailbox, the news paper did not disappoint.

635933909924974767-Navy032116-social

There are two things on this cover I would draw your attention to. First,  is the sacking of RDML Williams for viewing porn on his computer and the  over  reaction to it.

Now of course, I am quite certain the admiral knew that you should not view porn on Navy computers. However if you dig through the story, you will find out that the story is not as clear cut as the headline makes out-and it begs an equally important question of why, on the network that blocks many sites that are not controversial at all, the IP's he went to were not already blocked. And so, during a time when an Admiral should be sitting on his hands-so as to allow  time for his staff to get work done-he surfed to someplace the Navy did not want him to go.

Two points before moving on, Nora Tyson. 1) All men look at porn. 

"Guys, including your boyfriend, like porn. So do a lot of women. Men just get off to visuals more easily, which is why it always seems to be guys watching all the porn. It doesn't mean men are constantly looking at porn and self-pleasuring like fiendish deviants. Your boyfriend (probably) doesn't have some insane stash of weird fetish porn and Fleshlights hidden somewhere in his walls. But most guys look at porn on a fairly regular basis. " 

Which is always why you use anonymous proxies and VPN's.

And 2), while  Navy Times was dragging up all the sordid details of this little incident, it and Nora Tyson along with much of the rest of Navy leadership was ignoring a much, much bigger crime.

Go back to the Navy Times cover again. Look at the main picture and lead. There in bold print you have the Navy bragging, through a PR outlet that it put a ship on cruise for 9 months when it did not have to.

One of the saddest consequences of the Navy's part of our blind stumble into a pointless war on Iraq was the way the Navy jumped with both feet into a course of action that made the Navy's OPTEMPO and deployment schedule a train wreck. By making a rather fool hardy decision to send 5 carrier battle battle groups to the Gulf. And then to aggravate the issue, technology increased the number of ships required for various  other types of commitments. Add to that the insatiable appetite of the combatant commands for more ships and "voila", here we are.

The greatest failure of Navy leadership in the 13 years since the foolhardy invasion of Iraq ( which, by the way,  ranks as the single biggest foreign policy disaster of the last 40 years), is the failure of the Navy and the country in general, is to get the Navy's OPTEMPO back to six months portal to portal.  Having people going through sea tours and getting three cruises in three years, all of them 7 months plus ( or more) is really criminal.

But hey, knock yourself out being upset about a rather experienced man getting a few looks at big tits.

 

 

No responses yet

Jan 13 2016

Now it’s just getting ridiculous.

Published by under Feminist Buffoonery,Navy

It is January and I am traveling again. Not without some trepidation, since my last voyage to points beyond put me in the hospital. But this trip is back to the whining States of America, so I am hoping O.D.'ing on Krystal burgers will be safe. ( I love Krystal burgers-they just don't love me.surprise).

But I had to take a moment while I sit here drinking in the lounge to comment on this:

The Marine Corps has been ordered to come up with a plan to make its enlisted entry-level training coed, and to make its job titles more gender-neutral following the recent move to open all military combat roles to women.

In a Jan. 1 memo to Marine Commandant Gen. Robert Neller, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus requested a "detailed plan" on how the service will fully integrate its boot camp and Officer Candidate School. The plan is due Jan. 15 and will be implemented by April 1, the memo states.

"The Department of the Navy's implementation plan must include gender integration of Marine Corps enlisted recruit training and officer candidate school," Mabus wrote. "In this submission, identify where, if anywhere, this training is already integrated, where it is separate, and specific steps that you will take to fully integrate these trainings."

In a second memo from Mabus to Neller on the same day, the SecNav directed the Marine Corps to conduct a full review of its military occupational specialty titles in an effort to ensure that they are gender neutral.

 

 

WTF? Can we have a nice round of head shakes and swear words please?

Since January is usually the month I piss off feminists, I guess I should put the usual disclaimers here. I really don't give a fuck about your ideas on diversity or how your need to live your dreams. I really don't. I do acknowledge that the world is changing, but good God-it doesn't need to change that much. Thanks for proving me right though, it was never about just "being like the men". 

I mean really. How the hell does it limit your so called opportunities if your title is that of Airman, Seaman, or Fireman? For 200 years, better men ( and women) than you Mr. Mabus,  have worn the title with pride-and provided service to their nation without this level of whining.

And if you just think this is a politician being mis-informed, well, clearly you have not been paying attention. The agenda goes deeper than just words.

Go here and look at the slide presentation at the bottom. Then go here and look at this.

The Navy proposes to "enrich culture". How do they do that?

Evidently it has something to do with child care.

Oh, and "increasing female accessions to 25%"

Remember those words-they get repeated a lot.

It's not about "best qualified regardless of race, creed or gender", evidently.

Oh and this too:"implement a plan to increase USNA and NROTC female accessions".

And since experience has shown that these types of things increase the level of  fraternization inter service marriages, more guaranteed incentivizing of such relationships through co-location policies is in order. And child care, lots of child care.

Never, ever, in all of this discussion of opening up combat opportunities for women, are the words "improving combat readiness" ever used. In external reporting such as a recent report on APM's Marketplace, the central focus was on "improved career opportunity". I generally like Marketplace-but that story sucked.

The Navy is betraying itself by these ideas. I don't care if you think I am a dinosaur and whatever version of the "m" word you choose to use. The Navy is not, has never been, and can never be-a family friendly employer.

I am old enough and experienced enough to point this out. These ideas are going to blow up in the unit commander's face. He ( or she) is being set up to fail, and he or she is powerless to do anything about it.

The whole thing has gotten insanely stupid. Thanks feminists, thanks a lot.

Thank God for Scotch and beer. Can anyone give me directions to the Las Vegas Hilton?

13409907-glass-of-whiskey-and-ice-isolated-on-white-background-486x520

Gotta run to the plane. This is not the last you have heard me rant on this subject………….   Women at the Nana Plaza have more "honor, courage, and commitment" than the CNO's women's policy office. Yes, I said that.

 

No responses yet

Jul 14 2014

Submitted without comment-but worth your time

Published by under Feminist Buffoonery,Navy

This appeared at  Phib's place a week ago. It is so good and so much a commentary on what is wrong with my once beloved Navy, I had to post it here in it's entirety. Its worth a read-especially where it calls out the survivors of the Uncle Vern's purges during the last decade for their failures. Naval Aviation culture is dying-and when it is gone, people will never know how much fun it once was.

Here now is the post:

"When the Tailhook investigation began, and certain political elements used the incident to bring discredit on Naval Aviation as a whole, and then on the Navy writ large, one is entitled to ask, on behalf of those magnificent performers who have never failed their leaders, where were their leaders?" As Naval Aviation leadership begins to face one of the worst retention crises in its history, readdressing this question, originally posed by former Secretary of the Navy James Webb at the Naval Institute's 122nd Annual Meeting and sixth Annapolis Seminar in 1996, may help explain why some of aviation's best and brightest have decided to leave. 

Naval Aviation leadership is currently struggling with the real threat of not having enough pilots to fly the aircraft on its flight lines, and it's not solely due to cyclic and predictable factors (economy, OPTEMPO). The more insidious problem, going largely unaddressed, is one of trust and confidence; more accurately, the fleet's loss of trust and confidence in its senior leadership. This breakdown in trust has spread well beyond junior officers reaching their first "stay or go" milestones. Large numbers of post-command Commanders are electing to retire, instead of pursuing further promotion and increased retirement benefits. In both cases, officers are saying "no thanks" to generous amounts of money (for some, as much as $125,000), choosing instead to part ways with an organization they competed fiercely to join; one that, at some point, provided tremendous satisfaction.

  The Naval Personnel, Research, Studies and Technology (NPRS&T) group recently conducted a survey of Naval Aviators from the ranks of Lieutenant to Commander. All groups suggested availability of resources and workplace climate should be top priorities for senior leadership. These two factors go a long way towards explaining the larger problem of lost trust. 

The NPRS&T survey solicited open-ended responses and provided selected examples in their summary. With respect to availability of resources, the underlying theme was, "stop asking us to doing more with less." Whether the "less" applies to flight hours, qualified Sailors, or materiel support, squadrons are routinely asked to meet increasingly demanding operational requirements with less of each. Worse, they're being told to do so by flag officers who wear flight jackets adorned with multiple 1000-hour tabs and Centurion patches, symbolizing aviation milestones which have become almost entirely unattainable to today's aviators. Squadrons are regularly sent on 10-month deployments with just-in-time parts delivery, artificial readiness, and aircraft that saw their best days when our flag officers were using them for a BAGEX.

NPRS&T also accepted open-ended responses pertaining to workplace climate.

Many of the ill effects described above spill into this arena, but there are additional issues that must be addressed. Not surprisingly, some of the key words provided in the responses include race, gender, SAPR, micro-management, and GMT. It is also no surprise that the manner in which our leadership has chosen to address these issues also serves to erode trust. 

Many of the cultural and climate issues that are alleged to plague our current force were accepted – nay, fostered – by today's admirals when they were swashbuckling junior officers. We're being asked to undo and "fix" the problems they watched develop.  

We're told to de-glamorize alcohol even as we hear legendary stories about the Miramar O'Club. We're required to complete mind-numbing Trafficking in Persons training, yet hear frequent reminiscences about Subic Bay and Pattaya. We watch good officers publicly shamed and relieved for offenses that the relieving flag officers themselves were guilty of, but in an era absent Facebook and Twitter. We see the fervor surrounding the military's alleged sexual assault crisis, while time and again, our flag officers fail to recognize the 99% of us who find such crimes equally reprehensible. Instead, we're subjected to yet another NKO training to make sure we remember that rape is wrong. And we're conducting this training at the expense of executing our primary mission – flying our aircraft and preparing for war. With this description of our "workplace climate," is it any wonder that Lieutenants and Commanders alike sense an ever-decreasing amount of trust from our leaders? Is it any surprise that talented and highly competitive officers are turning down bonuses and voting with their feet?

 So what's an admiral to do? First, our leadership must stop talking to us like we're suits at an annual shareholder's meeting. Speak to us honestly, frankly, and with words that don't betray your brown shoes. Don't speak to us about best-practices, enterprises, or stake-holders. Remember that we're a sharp and incredibly discerning audience who knows a bad deal when we see it. Stand up and own the problems that you've charged us with fixing. Accountability still matters in this profession. Second, stand up and serve as advocates for the over-whelming majority of us who are doing it right. There is very little faith among us that our leadership will stand up in the face of outside scrutiny to defend any officer who is unfortunate enough to end up on the wrong end of an investigation – for anything. We don't believe you have the ability, or the willingness, to pump the brakes before pulling the trigger.

For many, the professional satisfaction that may come with command at sea just doesn't seem worth the risk of having our careers, reputations, and families drug through the bilges on the basis of allegations. Our leaders are seeing the effects of their "do as I say, not as I did" message manifested in decreased retention, lost trust, and waning esprit de corps. James Webb asked, "Where were their leaders?" Today they are scrambling to piece together financial solutions to problems that can't be monetized – at least not until they can figure out how much our trust is worth."

The survey is here.

 

No responses yet

Apr 24 2014

Uh excuse me, this is what you said you wanted.

Published by under Military,Navy

Remember in the run up after the Gulf War, when the first big push for dropping the combat exclusion laws started and women said they "just wanted to be treated like the men".

It seems someone did not get the memo:

Allegations that “sexually explicit humor” and the display of “pornographic images” were allowed — and sometimes encouraged — by the former head of the Blue Angels were just some of the complaints that led to his firing from the No. 2 job at Naval Station Coronado, Calif., the Navy said in a Wednesday news release. Capt. Gregory McWherter led the Navy’s flight demonstration squadron from November 2008 to November 2010 and again from May 2011 to November 2012. He was relieved of his post at Coronado on April 18 because of the initial findings into complaints made regarding his time with the Blue Angels, but the Navy released no details of the allegations at the time. Wednesday’s release says the complaints involved “lewd speech, inappropriate comments and sexually explicit humor … allowed in the workplace and in some cases encouraged by the commanding officer.” Pornographic material also was displayed and shared electronically at the command, the complaint alleges.

Give me a fucking break!

Here is a guy who had squadron command, then held sequential command in one of the most visible public jobs in the Navy, not once, but twice, and then is working as a leader at a base with probably a higher per capita ratio of females than any in the Navy-and he does not know his environment? It's too ludicrous to believe.

Jesus H. Christ, indeed.

The more that gets released the more this looks to me like someone whose nether regions are out of joint-and decided to take out a grudge.

This is how guys interact with each other-and as I discovered to my shock in my final Navy years-women did too.

We won't even get into the fact that NMCI firewalls give you the white screen of death over anything that even smells like the "P" word.

But nonetheless-here we are.

This whole thing stinks. Good thing the complainant did not work at ISIS:

 

 

3 responses so far

Apr 20 2014

Advancment by IG complaint.

Published by under Military,Navy

In Star Trek's alternate universe, people moved up in the Terran Empire by assassination. Over here in this universe, it appears to be happening via the vehicle of the IG complaint:

News about the Navy’s investigation of former Blue Angels lead pilot Capt. Greg McWherter over alleged misconduct when he commanded the flight demonstration team sparked shock among some who know him and expressions of hope for his exoneration on Friday.

The decision was based on initial findings of an ongoing investigation into recent allegations of misconduct and an inappropriate command climate at the U.S. Navy Flight Demonstration Squadron (Blue Angels) based at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Fla,” according to a Navy press release. Vice Adm. William French, commander of Navy Installations Command, made the decision, the Navy said. Thus McWherter has come full circle since a panel of admirals and former Blue Angels officers selected him as they do all aviators named to lead the Blues.

 

If you don't think this whole thing seems more than a little bit fishy, you have not seen the ball since kick-off. McWherter was twice tapped to lead the Blue Angels. And now 18 months later. they firing him? For what exactly? And when did the Navy abandon other less arbitrary means of getting its points across?

This smells oddly like the O.P. Honors case-where,by the way, no one found any real evidence of him doing anything that was really wrong. 

A disgruntled Sailor perhaps? Or someone tied to a certain group that wields disproportional influence in the Navy of today. ( Let the reader form his own conclusions what that means).

Either way-something is not right here.

10 responses so far

Apr 18 2014

Another domino falls……..

Published by under Navy,Uncategorized

They seem to be going after every one. Officers, civilians, CPO's and now Petty Officers:   

SAN DIEGO — A fourth member of the Navy has been charged with conspiracy to commit bribery in a multimillion-dollar scheme involving a Singapore-based defense contractor accused of providing cash, vacations, electronics and prostitutes in exchange for classified information.

“The camera is awesome bro!” Japan-based Petty Officer Dan Layug wrote in an email to the vice president of a military contractor that is included in a complaint unsealed Thursday. “Thanks a lot! Been a while since I had a new gadget!”

In another email, Layug asks, “What are the chances of getting the new iPad 3?” according to the complaint. Layug made his initial court appearance Thursday, a day after he was arrested in San Diego. A judge set bail at $100,000 and ordered GPS monitoring if Layug is released, according to a U.S. attorney’s statement. He hasn’t entered a plea, and messages seeking comment from his attorney were not immediately returned.  

"And every time you send me my shipment its just a few cases short!"

"Carrying charges, my boy, carrying charges."

 

2 responses so far

Mar 25 2014

I got nothing.

Published by under Navy

There is lots going on right now-not so much of it good. I have what could be termed a pretty solid case of writers block coupled with what could only be described as "the blues", being depressed and not seeing a good way forward.

When I get in a better frame of mind, I will start writing again-till then, I just have to cry myself to sleep at night.

There are people doing some quality writing however. If you care about the Navy and the direction it is taking, then you owe it to yourself to go and read this long, but well written piece over at the USNI blog.

Then come back here and comment. I for one am not sure bonuses are at the heart of the retention problem. Lack of ability to travel and have fun is.

Your thoughts?

2 responses so far

Feb 25 2014

And the other shoe drops………

Published by under Military,Navy

Nothing will ruin your day like a collision at sea.

Or a grounding.

This business of firing CO's at a drop of a hat is getting out of control. Not every mistake needs to be published by public execution. It might be-that given the chance-he might learn a good deal and be a better commander and officer in the long run.

But we will never know will we?

The commanding officer of the frigate Taylor was fired Tuesday two weeks after his ship ran aground in the Black Sea, where it was standing by in case it was needed to support security at the Winter Olympics.

Cmdr. Dennis Volpe was removed from command of the Mayport, Fla.-based frigate by Capt. Jim Aiken, the head of Task Force 65, “due to loss of confidence in Volpe’s ability to command,” 6th Fleet said in a Tuesday news release.

Taylor ran aground Feb. 12 while preparing to moor in Samsun, Turkey, with no reported injuries. The Navy publicized the incident a week later, during the investigation.

The investigation hasn’t turned up anything egregious, said Navy spokeswoman Lt. Cmdr. Sarah Flaherty, who characterized the incident as a “standard grounding.”

Good thing Chester Nimitz did not have to serve in today's Navy.  

I shudder to think what hell it must be to be in command in today's Navy. If you are male-you start with one strike against you. If you life to have fun and are a liberty hound in port-the count automatically becomes 3-2. Of course if you are female………..

2 responses so far

Jan 14 2014

Who needs a sabbatical?

Well it’s been two years since I have right royally pissed off the feminist lobby, and it is January and I am cold. So it is probably a good time to jump back into the pool and piss them off again.

Navy Times had a recent article up discussing the idea of sabbaticals, and how they could “help retain women in ranks”. After all, a military career is hard and all, and it is increasingly getting in the way of having it all:

Across the military services, leaders are experimenting with programs that will give valued officers and enlisted troops, men and women, the incentive to stay. Also, as the Pentagon moves to bring women into more jobs closer to the combat zone, military officials believe it is crucial to keep mid-career female officers in the services so they can mentor those on the front lines.

 

“We have innovative things we’re trying to retain women in the service,” said Vice Adm. Mark Ferguson, vice chief of naval operations. “It’s about creating the personnel policies that enable someone to say it’s Navy and family, instead of Navy or family.”

 

In other words, the Navy wants to create a “mommy track”. For what reason, I have no real idea, but it appears they do.

I’ll pause a moment so that you can throw up, and then, scratch your head and utter a cheery, “WTF?!?!”

It seems to me they are not getting the point here.  But I will explain why in a minute. For now, lets remember how hard it is for a service woman to “have it all” shall we?

In October, Katherine left the service and moved from Camp Lejeune to California to be with her fiancé. It was a difficult decision, but in the end, she said, she chose stability.

“For women to have a family and a career, it’s just extremely difficult. And, being in the military, it is extra sacrifice, you have deployments, you have workups, and it just makes it that much more challenging,” she said. “The Marine Corps is a lifestyle, it’s not a job. You dress it, you eat it, you breathe it, you live it. For me, I want to focus on getting married.”

So far, Sarah has chosen to stay in. “I love being a Marine, I love the people I work with,” she said. But not long ago, Rachel said she also is weighing similar issues.

It’s not an uncommon dilemma. More often than men in the military, women choose their family over service.

 

Here is a news flash madam, yes it is about choices, and when you chose to enter the service you made a choice to deal with these complexities. It’s pretty lousy to get in, decide you don’t like the rules of the game and then instead of coping with them, decide it’s better to change the rules and the playing field.

At the risk of being branded with the “M” word-I will remind you that there were reasons that society evolved into the roles for men and women to play in it. Now I will grant you that those roles are changing and society has to change too-but it seems to me that this goes a bit too far.

First of all, its rather discriminatory towards those men (and women) who are not a part of a dual service couple. (Which is a whole another bad trend that is going on-the service has incentives that encourage Sailors to marry Sailors, but we will set that aside for this discussion). A lot of people cannot afford to lose one year’s earnings (or two) especially if there is a stay at home spouse-or young children to raise. They would probably like a year off too-but they can’t afford one.

Second, the logic here is completely faulty.  Especially this idea that you have to have women to mentor women. I thought the services were supposed to be gender neutral. So isn’t that what you have a chain of command for? Isn’t that what you have standards of professional conduct for? Is that not why the Navy is firing so many men?

As it is, there is far too much of this “women networking with other women“ going on with results that are predictably geared to undermine the chain of command. I’ve written about it before-and we have seen far too many Navy Times headlines that have been predicated by mentors “encouraging” actions that have resulted in disaster.

Furthermore the hand of time stops for no one-and the DOPMA wall is still out there, and you can’t tell me that there are not some tradeoffs that get made in the advancement world when you elect this course. For one thing you are changing year groups-and the dynamics of who you are competing with may change dramatically and not for the better.

The Navy is not, and cannot be, a “family friendly” employer. That does not mean, however, that men and women cannot find a balance and raise a family. But it does involve choices and these choices are sometimes hard ones. I hate to remind folks this-but having to make those choices is not the Navy’s fault. When one chooses to enter a Navy career, you are making a statement as either a man or a woman: You want to do something hard and career worthy. That women are the only ones who can have children is a biological fact-not a hindrance the Navy created. If later on downstream a woman decides that she would rather get out and have a family, that’s a choice for her to make. Literally millions of women make it every year. But please, spare me the flack about the idea that the Navy somehow needs to make “accommodations” for the increasing numbers of women in its ranks. It belies the original reason the women said they wanted to serve-to have the same opportunities as men. Well making choices about family and career is an opportunity.

But it’s unfair, men with a stay at home wife don’t have to make that choice!” BS.  I would remind you that there are choices that are being made by the other family-not the least of which is getting by on a lot less money than the dual service couple. “You make choices and you live with them”.

Well, there is nothing wrong with a sabbatical.” No, there probably isn’t-except when you frame it as a way to “retain women”-and allow them to not have to make hard choices, then you are laying bare the hypocrisy behind the idea –and providing an clear inkling of the double standard that will be enforced in its execution. Why not fix the root problem, which is the Navy’s trying to shove 100lbs into a 50lb career bag, and revise DOPMA, to slow down promotion flow points, and allow officers to serve longer . Maybe give every officer a good 2 year break when he or she attends a civilian university to get a Masters Degree. (It could also have the added benefit of exposing these folks to parts of America that don’t normally see military folks). Bring back some of the “good deal" tours as well.

To pay Phibian a compliment for a change, he’s right when he says, “Again, this isn't harmless. In the zero sum game that is selection, support, promotion, and award – special treatment based on [Gender] is discrimination. It also puts in a perverse incentive to lie, cheat, steal, and to tolerate those among you who do.” In essence you are getting to the heart of what all us nay-sayers said many years ago when we began the great experiment, you will fundamentally change the institution in ways that will ultimately destroy the things that made it worth serving in. The PAO hoopla about these sabbaticals and the idea that somehow the Navy has to get to a 50-50 gender split is just crazy. This is not a corporation-it’s a fighting force. You don't always get everything you want-and you cannot have it all. "You make choices and you live with them." We would do well to remember that.

I used to give dual service couples advice, that I thought at the time made sense and I still do. The powers that be did not like it very much and told me not to pass it on. I ignored them. Basically for a dual service couple-you have to decide who will be CNO and who won't be. In other words you have to decide whose career will come first-and then stick to that strategy. If you both want to be successful you will be childless and or lonely. It does not matter if its the man or the woman-but you have to choose. I still think its a useful thing to ponder-and I've met many dual service couples who follow exactly that course. It works-but evidently CDR Steinem doesn't want to hear it.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

2 responses so far

Next »