desertvixen: (SFC)

 They did print my response to Single Female Soldiers Getting Pregnant Destroys Government Property.

 Part of it, anyway.  (I know, I know, they reserve the right to edit, but ... they sort of pulled my letter's teeth.)

 My letter is under the cut, with the parts printed in the Times in bold.


 They cut all the good parts! )
desertvixen: (sexism)
I have read my last letter in the Army Times written by a condescending idiot. I'm firing back this time.

Did you know female soldiers get pregnant out of wedlock so they can get more uniforms and TENNIS SHOES?

I guess I know what I'm writing tonight....

ETA: Here's the letter. The letter is in italics, I'm in plain.
I also changed the icon to reflect the letter.

I find the question regarding the female soldier refusing to deploy because the lack of a family care plan not only discriminating but outright ridiculous. The Army regulation on family care plans is black and white and if the Army even considers any favoritism because the soldier is a female then the whole regulation needs to be rewritten.

In March 2003, my ex-wife left me, leaving me without a family care plan and set to deploy to Iraq. The question to me was "Find your ex, give the kids back and go to war...or get out." There was no question of me being a single father with three children. Why is there consideration for this specialist?


Point 1: This guy was screwed by his command. If he became a single parent, then they should have given him the thirty days to get an FCP together. I don't care how close to the deployment it was - that's the regulation. You know, the black and white one? I have worked with several single father soldiers, so I'm either calling BS on his story or saying this: His command failed him.

Point 2: The specialist HAD an FCP. It failed. The person designated as the long-term provider did a flake on her. Based on what I've read, her command failed her.

Why is the Army allowing female soldiers to remain in the Army by getting pregnant out wedlock?

Because it's not the pre-1970s Army, maybe? My ex's mother was in the Army and was separated when she became pregnant with her first child. We don't do it that way anymore. We don't treat unmarried female soldiers differently than we treat dual-military female soldiers. Why? Well, that would be...discrimination!

We have single female soldiers getting pregnant and I believe because they know they only won't have to deploy, but they get more uniforms. tennis shoes and months of convalescent time.


This is the line that made me lose it. No, they don't pull women out of the recovery room and put them on the plane, but female soldiers who are moms also get deployed. Even single soldier moms. They deployed me.

More uniforms - which previously at least, we had to turn in. (I don't know if we get to keep the maternity ACUs.) Not to mention - NO ONE WANTS THESE UNIFORMS. No one wants to wear a BDU or ACU tent.

And I didn't get my tennis shoes. Who do I file a complaint with? To be fair, I think he means we get to wear tennis shoes, which many of us don't. The tennis shoes are supposed to help with swelling issues. I'll be honest - I had to sit on the floor to lace my boots, but I would have rather done that than worn tennis shoes with my uniform. But that's me.

Months of convalescent leave. I can only assume that he's referring to the APFT exemption, for which we get six months. Otherwise, the Army gives us 6 weeks. People can take more if they have it, and their command approves. As far as the APFT exemption, I'd like to see this guy gain 40 pounds, not run for six months, totally get his abs out of shape, and then have to get back into APFT shape. It's not a damn vacation, I promise you.

Don't get me wrong, to female soldiers who are married and are trying to build a family, God bless and best of luck.

To quote the movie Clue, "Too late." I took you wrong. I'm so glad we have your approval.

But the single females getting pregnant should be separated for destruction of government property, and breach of contract being unable to fulfill their obligation to the Army.

So, what about the cases where a female soldier was impregnated by a male soldier? Does he get charged too? Pregnancy takes two - it's not like we go to the store and pick up a pregnancy. Luckily, the Army disagrees with this person. Also, this comment reeks of "stupid girls should have kept their legs shut". Just what I want to hear out of my fellow NCOs.

I recently reclassed and while in AIT three soldiers got pregnant and laughed stating they won't have to go to war now.

So, let me get this straight. Some women made a flip remark, or maybe a joke, about not deploying. If they weren't joking, they're wrong. Soldier moms go to war too, so the joke will be on them in the end.

As long as the Army condones this, others will have to take up the slack of these so-called soldiers.

It's also another episode of one of my favorites - one woman's screwup is held against the rest of us. It's That Girl! You know her. She's the one who oopsed someone's buddy, or filed a false rape report to get even with a bad date, or got made because a guy held the door. She's the one who causes all the problems for the rest of us. Too bad she's made of straw.

So the question is, what should the Army do now? Stick to the policies and regulations that are in place for every soldier in the Army and make her deploy, or if she is in her first enlistment, give her a general discharge and a handshake and make her take responsibility for her actions.


If she can't get an FCP together, then yes, she should be separated. If she gets it together, then she deploys.

Anything else would be a disgrace.

No, the disgrace would be that these attitudes are still hanging around.

The writer is a SSG at Fort Carson.


So I am going to write the Times, along with this entry.

I'm a single mom, and a senior NCO, and tired of this attitude. I'm NOT a single mom by choice - I'm a single mom because my husband came home from his deployment and decided husband and father were two jobs he couldn't handle. So this guy would probably be "okay" with me. I don't give a damn, and I could care less about his approval.

DV
desertvixen: (penelope wtf?)
 
 The last one was getting a little long, and I wanted to give this person (I think female) special attention. 

 Judgemental Rape Counselor

I was doing counseling with victims of sexual assault at a secular agency. Yes, I understand that what a woman wears has nothing to do with "traitional" rape (which is a matter of control and/or anger, not sex), but after talking to some of these women, I got to wondering what ever happened to common sense. Young women would go out with guys wearing clothing that left little or nothing to the imagination, have quite a few drinks, go back to the guy's place....then call us to complain that they'd been "assaulted!" Hello? You dress like a streetwalker, both of you get drunk....what did you THINK he was asking you to his apartment for - a Bible study?

While I grant that getting drunk with someone you don't know well is not smart, rape is not a punishment for stupidity.  This person has also obviously not experienced the date that goes Really Bad, and ends up with one party trying to force the other to have sex.

I suggested to the head of the organization that we start a City-wide campaign, along the lines of, "If you want to be treated like a lady, try dressing like one." There IS a campaign with billboards and signs on the sides of buses about waiting until marriage before having sex (from a different agency); I wanted to take it a step further. Guess what? Virtually ALL the (female) counselors had a fit when I suggested such a thing; they claimed they had a "right" to wear anything they want! I tried the tact of, "Doesn't it bother you to have your husbands looking at all these half-naked girls?", to which I was told, "If my husband can't control himself, that's HIS problem!"

Yay for those counselors!  Women should have the right to wear what they feel like wearing, regardless of what others think about it (assuming, of course, that no laws or dress codes are being violated).  Besides, who gets to define "ladylike"? 

And God forbid we expect the men to control themselves.  Really, sometimes when I read these arguments, I need to be reminded why feminists are the ones who hate men because we expect them to, well, act like grownups.

I really couldn't continue on there - they were "helping" girls after the fact, but doing nothing to prevent them being assaulted in the first place - it was like pulling out a band-aid after telling someone it was OK to stick her hand in a chainsaw. (And let me reiterate, because I always get a lot of flak on this - what a woman wears has NOTHING to do with traditional rape; I'm talking about date rape, so-called sexual assault, and driving a man - when both parties are often drunk and/or on drugs - into a frenzy, then primly saying, "No means no!")
Because these women have no common sense, men's lives are litterally being destroyed with criminal records that will follow them the rest of their days.

Thanks for adding to the feeling of so many victims of date rape that what happened to them wasn't "really rape" because it was someone they knew, or because they had a moment of poor judgment.

No means No.  I sort of feel bad for the guy if she changes her mind at the last second, but blue balls will not kill you.  And I fail to understand why this person thinks "traditional rape" is different from the others - they're all about power.

Fashion Advice

You see, the problem isn't just with "worldly" women. I attended a special program for adult students at a conservative Christian college. I needed a few more electives, so thought a course in Popular Culture would be fun. My final presentation was on fashion, with an emphasis on overly-provocative clothing (including for small children - there's actually a "look" called "prostitot") and the WOMEN (all claiming to be "Christian", mind you) had a fit! Once again I heard the cry of, "We have the RIGHT to wear anything we want!" I tried to explain the effect on men, who are visual creatures, and told them they were causing these men to sin, but they didn't want to listen; I made several enemies that day! Ironically, after the class almost all of the MEN came up to me and thanked me, saying it was nice to see someone understands!


Kind of beats the same drum.  The poor little men, visual creatures.  We're leading them to sin.  It's all our fault.

Basically my take is: if you want to dress modest (for whatever reason), then please feel free.  I know there is at least one person on the f-list who prefers to dress modestly for religious reasons.  She, however, gets what many of these people do not - it is HER choice to dress modestly, and she isn't trying to force her choice on anyone else.

DV

On rape

May. 13th, 2008 09:37 pm
desertvixen: (sexism)

 This is more serious than the other two.

Yes, They Really Do Exist

Hey, women, wake up! Face the fact that you are the more vulnerable of the two sexes. Face the fact that your dress, your manner and your behavior can be provocative. Realize that men are not real smart and that they are programmed to respond to sexy women. Sometimes, those men haven't the where-with-all to understand the word, 'no.' Just as everyone should avoid 'occasions of sin,' women should avoid occasions of sexual stupidity.

So, once again, we have the "men are animals who can't control themselves" argument.  Yet, they continue to claim that it is FEMINISTS who hate men.

There may be some actual real-live feminists who hate all men - I have not met any of them, but they may exist.

But these people who think men "can't help it"?  Pardon me if I think they dislike men.  And if men can't control themselves, how in the f*ck are they qualified to run everything?

Yes, women may dress provocative.  They may act provocative.  They may do stupid things. 

RAPE IS NOT A PUNISHMENT FOR ANY OF THESE.
RAPE IS NOT A PUNISHMENT FOR ANY OF THESE.
RAPE IS NOT A PUNISHMENT FOR ANY OF THESE.

Men do have the capability to understand no.  Some of them just have situations where they choose NOT to.

DV
desertvixen: (evil kitty)

A rundown from FSTDT:

Aggressive Persuasion Can Be A Beautiful Thing

[...] Is a husband, pinning his wife down to have sex with her rape? What defines rape in a marriage?

When she says, "No."?

See, even then, I have a problem with it. A wife and husband are to give to each other of this. If a man is pinning her down, yet lovingly trying to... ehh it's too "grey". I hate it. It's of Satan,and the liberals are holding hands with Satan on this one.. destroy marriage with "rights" and villifying your spouse. Satanswants to break down the church and marriage. He wants us to think we don't need God, or each other....

The notion of marital rape. It's almost an oxymoron. It actually sounds like a litigous term used by 3rd Reich Femi-Nazi Women's Lib Czar's who hate God, burn flags, don't eat meat, and glorify same sex sexual relationships.

Disgusting.

Yes, it would be insensitive and unloving for a man to force his wife to do something sexual. If he took a gun or another inanimate object out and threatened her life, or her health, yes, that could be seen as rape. Yet, if he was aggressive in order to persuade her, I could see that as a wonderful thing. Wonderful? YES.. because that could be the answer to some dynamic in thier relationship. [...]


OK, so I'm probably not the only person reading this comment and going, What?  I kept getting lost in it.  They start making sense for two seconds, and then it gets weird again.

Bottom line: It's fine, as long you both enjoy the dynamic in your relationship being answered that way... and you have a safeword.  Otherwise, it falls under the heading of "problem".

*** *** ***

Feeling Castrated

A man's point of view...

I can not speak for all, but a lot of men I know feel- pardon this expression- "castrated" in todays world. Even scientific studies show fish and men in the UK feminizing under the pollution of estrogenic compounds in the water supplies from the breakdown of wastes including primarily birth control (excreted in urine), pesticides, and soybean use (both estrogenic). Radical feminism, which is harmful to women, has been very effective at reducing the "manliness" of men as well. How often do we see men being portrayed in positive light anymore? On TV, the dad is always a buffoon kept alive by the wise wife. We have a total and systematic- even deliberate- breakdown of the family structure.

I hate to break it to this guy but... the majority of corporate heads allowing pollution and approving these TV shows where the dad is a buffoon with a hot wife are MEN.  There is not a Super Secret Female Cabal Ruling The World.  If there was, things would be different.

(whining about how he's accomplished, but can't get a good job)
Men have become soft, lazy, ineffective, and absent. The decline in manhood is natural based on the progression of sin permeating every aspect of our lives in a cause and effect sort of way. Look around- the 'metrosexual' or metro male is the image du jour. The manly guy who can use his hands, fix things, build things, etc. is marginalized. Pansy-boys are celebrated.

You know, I fail to understand this one.  Maybe because I'm in the military, so I definitely still see PEOPLE who can do things being celebrated.  There is more than one gender-specific way for people to be. 


DV
desertvixen: (penelope wtf?)

So, Washington University in St. Louis is presenting Phyllis Schlafly with a honorary doctrate.  It wouldn't be my choice, but I'm not the one making it. 

She did an interview with their school paper which makes for some interesting reading.

Phyllis Schlafly Interview

What do you mean when you say, "Feminists want women to think that they can't succeed"?

Everything that they are teaching in Women's Studies and in those courses is that women are victims and that marriage is unfair to women and that it makes them second-class, that men are naturally batterers and that if you get married you'll probably get beaten up. It's a dreary picture that they paint for women of the life of a married women or a mother.

I guess I missed that class. 

So you see the feminist position as saying that there is one acceptable path for women in the world, the path of the career woman?

That's right. Because they think that if you give them the choice, too many will pick getting married.

The two options are not always exclusive.  It is possible to have both career and family.  Men have been doing it for ages... oh wait.

Could you clarify some of the statements that you made in Maine last year about martial rape?

I think that when you get married you have consented to sex. That's what marriage is all about, I don't know if maybe these girls missed sex ed. That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery. If there is any violence or mistreatment that can be dealt with by criminal prosecution, by divorce or in various ways. When it gets down to calling it rape though, it isn't rape, it's a he said-she said where it's just too easy to lie about it.

"I think that when you get married you have consented to sex."  It's not a blanket consent form.  Being married does NOT mean that women have to give it up anytime he wants it.  If she never wants to have sex, then you have bigger issues that probably require counseling.  Or there's always talking about the subject.  There may be a physical or emotional reason that can be dealt with.

"That doesn't mean the husband can beat you up, we have plenty of laws against assault and battery."  OK - so it's okay for him to force you to have sex (whether physically or by nagging you into it), but it's not okay for him to hit you.  I have to tell you, I think the former is far more damaging than the latter one.  And really, if you have to nag your partner into it, what is the point?

 I mean, I have to admit here - there was a fairly long period where I just did not feel like having sex after I had my daughter (well after the six week mark).  I just didn't feel any desire to, at all.  It may have been hormonal.  I missed feeling like I wanted to have sex, and I'm grateful that my husband was understanding and didn't let his frustration become an issue between the two of us. 

 But honestly, if one partner is just submitting out of duty, is it really worth it?

To me, though, this is the saddest bit: "That's what marriage is all about"

Funny.  I thought marriage was about partnership.  And love, which may be expressed through sex.  It may also be expressed by a husband getting up on the 2AM feeding so his wife can sleep, or by a wife doing something similar for a husband. 

Marriage is about more than sex - it's about being partners.

And then she accuses feminists of wanting to keep marital rape in the grab-bag of goodies.

Sometimes, I really just find other people depressing.

DV
desertvixen: (sexism)


 He's a Stud, She's a Slut and 49 Other Double Standards Every Woman Should Know by Jessica Valenti of Feministing.com.

 Go forth and read it.  None of it is really new, which is the point.  Women deal with this stuff every damn day.  Some of the topics are small, and some aren't.  But most of them are going to sound really familiar...

 Men who have lots of sex, who score, are studs.  They're envied.  They have achieved something,
 Women who have lots of sex, are sluts.  They're dirty.  They lose something.  

 Women in charge are bitches.  Women who speak up are loud, we're shrill, we're grating.
 Men who are in charge are leaders.  Men who speak up are respected, are listened to.

 Women who are angry are too angry.

 Women who don't conform to a certain standard of beauty are sloppy - but women who put a lot of time into grooming are vain.
 
 And how often do men get stopped on the street and asked why they're not smiling?

 There's a few annoying typos, including Gem when it clearly should have been Jem (outrageous, I know), and I find the use of pet terms for the vagina a little annoying, but it's definitely worth reading.

 DV

desertvixen: (penelope wtf?)
At least, I know this female soldier is.

1) Women aren't in combat.  Okay, not in direct combat.  Okay, not in direct combat UNITS.  And if they are, and they happen to get a Silver Star, we'll yank them out because God forbid we expose women to that kind of danger.  The fact is, there's not really a defined battlefield anymore, and the old regs are just that.  They're old.  They don't apply so well. 

2) Women can't be in combat arms (CA) units because they're weaker than men.  Or because the men can't be trusted to ignore the instinct that says, "Protect the woman at all costs".  They won't be able to keep up.  They'll destroy unit cohesion.  OMG, they menstruate!

I am NOT saying that I, myself, personally, would want to be in a CA unit.  I wouldn't.  I don't think I could make the physical qualifications.  But there are female soldiers I have worked with who could have done that.  Who wanted to do it.  And I think they should be given the chance to try.

3) The Army says it's okay to deploy a woman's who just given birth 4-6 months ago.  Despite the fact that her body is likely not physically recovered from the pregnancy/childbirth experience.  Despite the fact that this plays merry hell with her bonding with her infant.  Despite the fact that other services allow up to 12 months before a woman is deployable again.

I have a feeling that the root of this is the belief that if there's a really long grace period after childbirth, women will game the system.

Again, one of the reasons I'm getting out is because no, I don't like the prospect of spending a year away from my child.  I'll be doing it, but I'm also voting with my feet the next time I get a chance.  I tried it, I don't like it.

4) Insulting male soldiers by calling them "girls", or "ladies".  Implying that they're weak, like women.

5) Sexual assault prevention training that focuses on all the things the victim should NOT do (most of which is sensible advice), but never includes the slide that says:

 Men: Don't Rape.
           Don't keep buying drinks for someone who's already impaired.
           Don't let your buddies do either of the above.

Sorry, got a little ranty and venty there.  But still.  Truth is truth.

DV

Profile

desertvixen: (Default)
desertvixen

October 2017

S M T W T F S
12345 67
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 22nd, 2017 08:13 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios