KARL D. writes:

A tiny woman who is a Captain and veterinarian in the Army took it upon herself to earn a badge which required that she hike 12 miles in full kit in under three hours. In the video you can see a male soldier walking calmly across the finish line while she collapses twice behind him and has a virtual cheerleading team pushing her to finish as she uses her weapon to push herself up. Ostensibly, after passing the finish line one is supposed to be ready to perform the job, something she was unable to do.

While everyone in the media and comments section is cheering her with the obligatory “You go girl” comments, all I feel is sad for her — and sad for the army. Read More »

JAMES P. writes:

Attached is a copy of the cover of Military Review, “The Professional Journal of the US Army”, which depicts a “female engagement team” in Afghanistan. Its purpose is “community engagement” – yaay! Apparently, “direct communication between male U.S. troops and Afghan women would cause uproar in the Afghan community,” and therefore we need the female engagement teams who are “geared toward family, community and advocacy of women and children.” Nothing says “we are serious about war” like sending your women to hold hands with the native women so you don’t make the residents of a conquered country unhappy… Read More »

North Korea's awesome, incredibly formidable fighting forces (Reuters)

Read More »

Sgt. Jennifer Smith

SEE this astounding headline in The New York Times:

Military Has Not Solved Problem of Sexual Assault, Women Say

Why would anyone expect that a coed military would ever solve the problem of sexual assault? It’s much more likely that the problem has just begun. Also, might we ask, why women who are trained aggressors are not able to deal with aggression from their fellow soldiers? Someone who cannot defend herself against other service members is hardly in the position to defend herself against committed enemies.

Here is my working definition of a woman in traditionally male military positions. A female solider is someone who joins the military not to defend her country but to fight her country. Even if she has patriotic feelings, even if she has done her job well, she is, unless in some crucial role that can only be served by a woman, effectively at war with her own country to the extent that she approves of, seeks and fights for equality in the military. America depends on a male fighting force and on the relative cohesiveness, simplicity and camaraderie of a male force.

Illustrating this point, the women interviewed here are outraged that men made improper comments or physical contact. And it’s true these actions are improper. But the idea that they could ever be eradicated is delusional. There is a quite easy solution: minimize the number of women in the armed forces, making it as close to none as possible. Read More »

LAWRENCE AUSTER writes:

Looking at the picture of Bush dancing with a female veteran who has a prosthetic device in place of a leg, I repeat something I’ve been saying for over twenty years: a country that, not as a matter of necessity, but as a matter of choice and discretion, puts women in combat or near-combat situations where what happened to this woman can happen and does happen, and, furthermore, congratulates itself for doing this, is a country that is so perverted and wicked that it has lost the right to exist. That we still exist is due to mercy or suffrance, not justice.

Read More »

MARY M. writes:

There are traditional ways for patriotic women to support the military without joining. Somehow those traditional forms of support have been forgotten or demeaned in the rush to push women into combat. Read More »

HERE is an undated photo from the Facebook page of the Tea Party showing George W. Bush dancing recently with an injured veteran. The sight of  a woman dressed in military fatigues says a lot about what a society thinks of women. But the sight of a woman who has lost her leg in military action, having been deliberately put in harms’ way, says even more, painting a picture of a world that does not value, well, anything. It fills me with horror and disgust, not for this particular woman, who has been maimed permanently and deserves some compassion, but for the powerful institutions and leaders who have condoned this.

In the recent entry on women in the military, a female reader, an Air Force veteran who stated that she joined the military for solely economic reasons, says that women, purely on the basis of their patriotic sentiments, are an asset to the military as soldiers. Terry Morris, also a veteran, disagrees. He writes:

In short, while I agree with you that women CAN BE, and often are, patriotic Americans, I reject that patriotism, as defined above, is in general the chief motivating factor for female enlistments in the U.S. military today.

His comments are worth repeating in full: Read More »

JILL FARRIS writes in response to the post on the Navy’s “Love Boat culture:”

Of course, the inevitable result of sex between shipmates under stress are unplanned pregnancies resulting in abortions. Women who undergo abortions have an increase in drug use, divorce/relationship problems, depression etc. In other words, these “love boat” conditions lead to an increase in ruined lives.

Whenever I read of women in the military or see any woman in a man’s uniform (ie., border guard, police woman etc.) I wonder where is her father and why didn’t he protect her? There is something so perverse about a woman acting like a man! And, apparently, underneath that uniform the hormones still do what hormones do and women still act like women!

Read More »

SAILORS were once known for spending their leisure hours in brothels in foreign ports. Okay, they were not just known for it. They actually did it. That, for better or worse, was considered compensation for hard work and long hours at sea. Things have changed dramatically. Now men in the Navy have much less incentive to visit these fleshpots. On many naval ships, as much as 40 percent of the crew is women. And, there is plenty of opportunity for sex with shipmates. News flash: The typical naval vessel is becoming more and more like your average college dorm.

In his interesting and candid article “Co-ed Crew: Reality vs. Taboo,” in Proceedings Magazine of the U.S. Naval Institute, Capt. Kevin Eyer writes:

[I]t would not be unusual for you to be glad, believing that your Navy has grown up into a service no longer sullied by raw, alcohol-fueled lust. You may reasonably think that the Navy is a professional and sober organization in which the worst elements of human weakness have been stamped out. Certainly that is the image that leadership jealously promotes and guards.

But you would be naïve to believe this mythology. You see, human nature has not changed, and water inevitably finds its own level. So, even despite the Navy’s ever-increasing efforts to legislate morality (or perhaps because of it) sailors have discovered new ways in which to be, well, sailors. Over time, they have largely replaced those historic foreign dalliances with that which is more expedient and close at hand: sex with their shipmates.

Read More »

IN THE entry on a billboard that depicts a woman in the National Guard hanging in the air on a rescue line with a small child, apparently in her off hours while attending college full time, Terry Morris writes:

She is Woman! Look at ‘er roar … or, soar!

You wrote: “Normal women don’t yearn to rescue, they yearn to be rescued.”

Exactly. And this is what I find to be so ironic about the billboard. The young woman depicted does not look like a strong, self-confident, determined rescuer. Rather she looks small and frail, and the way she’s peering upward gives the impression that she, in spite of the military garb she is wearing, is actually being rescued along with the child, instead of rescuing the child. Somehow I imagine that there is a (heterosexual) man at the other end of that rope.

But, of course, how could she be an effective “rescuer” and a full time college student too?

A reader writes:

This is a billboard sign from McAlester, Oklahoma. As you can see it is a petite young woman on a rescue line. I thought you might find it interesting.

Read More »

JAMES P. writes:

The Daily Mail reports that the Army has developed a new type of body armor for women. I am reminded of the old Secret deodorant ad — “strong enough for a man, made for a woman.”

Of course, that armor won’t help them when their Afghan “colleagues” shoot them after they remove their body armor…

A FEMALE  Air Force sergeant and the mother of two children allegedly had her husband shoot her twice in the legs last week to avoid a military deployment to Asia. According to the Associated Press:

Police say 25-year-old Judy Groomes was treated for wounds on both of her legs from one round from a handgun fired by her husband, 26-year-old Christopher Tyquan Groomes. Both are active military based at nearby Barksdale Air Force Base.

Groomes allegedly claimed an intruder shot her early Friday while her husband and two children slept. But police say she convinced her husband to shoot her to avoid military service.

Groomes, below, is white and her husband is black. Here is a slightly longer version of the story at The Daily Mail. None of the newspaper accounts of this highly implausible story say how the police know that Judy Groomes induced her husband to shoot her.

Read More »

MELANIE writes:

I’ve been reading your website for about a year now. I came across it at a time in my life when I was struggling with a lot of confusion in my family, as well as with my own conscience. You have been an inspiration and comforting reassurance to the “traditionalist” feelings I’ve always had in my heart. My own mother is a wonderful woman and I have most nothing but fond memories of her throughout my childhood. Unfortunately she falls at the end of the Boomer generation and fell prey to far too much feminist ideology. She was a working mother. I am not. Needless to say I don’t think she always respects some of my choices and views. Read More »

N.W. writes:

Your post on women in the military reminded me of an incident that occurred about a year ago when I was enlisting in the Marine Corps. The senior enlisted man at the recruiting substation was a woman. Under her command were a number of men. She addressed the group of Delayed Entry Program recruits. She informed them that things were going to become a bit more disciplined in the program than they had been. The end of her talk went something along these lines,

Now everybody here, you’re all here to become Marines, right? Right? Cause if not, you might as well leave right now. I’m not going to put up pulling around deadweight. Me, I’m here to help you, and your recruiters are here to help you. Now we’re not your buddy or your bro. You ain’t callin me ‘guns’ or whatever, that all is gonna stop. But we are family. And I’m your Mamma and if you have any questions or need something sorted out you come to Mamma and I’ll help you. And all your recruiters, they’re your daddies and they’re here to help you.

Now if your daddy ain’t helping you or not telling you everything, you come to Mamma and I’ll straighten it out. But you gotta tell me, if you don’t tell me I can’t help you. All right? Y’all understand? Good, now form up. 

This is why women should not be in positions of command. This is why women should not be in the military. This is why political correctness will destroy our military, and this is why speaking out against female football coaches is so important. 

Thanks so much for everything you are doing to expose the twisted logic that is strangling our country and our freedom. 

AS HAS been noted here before, the entry of women in significant numbers into previously-all male portions of the military does not render the military less guilty in the eyes of liberals. It actually makes it more guilty. The issue of sex abuse against female soldiers, who are expected to defend themselves against aggressive foreign enemies but are excused from defending themselves from their fellow soldiers, is now a major theme in the press. A federal lawsuit was filed this month by women soldiers charging the Department of Defense with countenancing sexual assault. Read More »

BRUCE writes:

It suddenly dawned on me this morning that with the ongoing feminization of the police and military, a watershed has been crossed, a step that demonstrates the profound unreality of modern life. 

How could women ever have gotten themselves to the point where the idea of having large numbers of women working as police and soldiers and sailors and pilots (i.e. the ‘need’ for enhanced career opportunities for women) would take precedence over their own safety and the safety of their children? That is a really remarkable level of unreality – and one which I fear will elicit a terrible price if or when equal opportunity, mixed-sex police forces and combat units (with female/feminized commanders) come up against all-male gangs and armies. Read More »

The Navy’s announcement last week that women will be assigned to submarines is depressing news. Is this the military or the Goodship Lollipop? Consider young women and men in tight quarters and tense circumstances. Think of something so simple as a wake-up call when sailors change watch. A submarine is not like the spacious and  accomodating  Star Trek Enterprise, in which men and women lived without apparent complication.

MarkyMark writes:

I’d heard about the Obama Administration’s plans to put women on subs, and it’s a BIG mistake! I say that as a Navy veteran. I served during the 1980s; I was too young for Vietnam, while too old for the Gulf War. Back then, women only served on tenders, supply ships, and other non-combatant vessels in the Navy. When we’d tie up next to a destroyer tender, those of us who served on combat ships would hear all the stories about illicit liaisons, pregnancies, the drop in morale, — and this was on a support ship!  Read More »