Comments

Posted:  17 Dec 02:

I am a male who happened upon this site and I can say that I feel for the women sick of military thinking and red tape. I joined the Army in 1994 and subsequently blew my knee out in basic training. I was discharged two months later with a medical discharge...I did not collect any compensation due to the fact that I that I had injured the same knee in high school and the military classified it as an EPTS (existing prior to service) injury.  Five years later I attempted to join the PA National Guard and was subsequently turned down my the MEPS CMO. I, then, attempted to enlist in the U.S. Army Reserves where I was again turned down without ever being examine or my current medical records being considered.  It makes no sense to me how the military will turn down someone so willing to enlist such as myself and make life miserable for those looking to leave.  It seems to me that morale in the military and the military overall would be greater served accepting people willing to make the sacrifices associated with service while letting those unwilling or unable leave.  It sounds and seems simple which is why I assume the military wouldn't do it that.  By no means am I looking down upon or chastising the individuals who aren't 'into' the military life.  It's not for everyone.  djv1944@yahoo.com

Posted:  17 Dec 02:

This is just a comment to all the women who withstand all the pressures, biases and negativity thrown at them everyday in the line of duty.  Thank  you, for giving other female soldiers, mentors and a way of life to be proud of.  I'm proud to be an American, I'm proud to be a Unites States Army Soldier........

Posted:  29 Jun 01:

Posted:  12 Jun 01:  "Best Wishes"

Posted:  15 Sep 00:  "A Couple of Observations"

Posted:  13 Jun 00:

Posted:  18 Feb 00:

Posted:  3 Dec 99: "HONORING ALL FEMALE VETERANS"

Posted:  22 Sep 99: "Former Army"

Posted:  3 Sep 99: "Women in the Military"

• Posted: 31 May 99: "Why Women in Militaries?"

My first wife (in the seventies) joined the Army to escape a hard-luck-story life caused largely by her first marriage, which interrupted her schooling and ruined her financially. Her luck changed much for the better when she took control of her life by joining the Army. After a few years in the states at Ft.Monroe and Ft.Meyers, we were sent to Germany. She (and I) had always wanted to walk on a castle wall, visit Paris, and generally tour Europe. The Army provided that opportunity for us. Although we split up in 1980, I have some very fond memories of that beautiful, uniformed woman. I hope she's doing very well, wherever she may be these days.

• Posted: 11 May 99

This is a great place for all military and only military people have to express opinions and gratitude. But one thing that I have noticed is the lack of respect there is between people here. We are all here for the same reason, to serve our country and protect its rights. From reading some of the comments made you would think that our own military was against each other. Some people may be against women in the military, some may be against pregnancy in the military, some are against gays, some are against women in combat. We are all here to do the same job, and if a person is qualified, meets or exceeds the standards set before them, then great, but for those who can't we must all do our part to make sure they do. We are only as strong as our weakest link.

Posted: 3 May 99:

First of all we were blessed as females and in turn we have to deal with certain problems. You don't whine about it when a guy hits on you. Certainly some of these that I have read are actually a problem but some are just some whiny girls that can't take it. If you cant take a little flirting then get out. You just think if you were allowed to go into combat. Wow you might actually have to act like one of the guys or get killed. Wow you're right, it is worth our time to sit here and talk about having to flirt with some guys to recruit them. Here's an idea shut up and and get out so there is more room for real women....!!!!!!!

• Posted: 23 Apr 99: "Integration of the Gender Type"

I am the first female assigned to the 3D BN 4TH Air Defense Artillery Regiment (ABN). This is a sort range ADA unit, and therefore combat restricted, except at BN level. While this may seem to be a step forward in integration, I am actually further in the rear than most of the support units. The unit was inundated with several months of equal opportunity training prior to my arrival. This actually served to make people terrified of me and scared that all their careers were at the mercy of weather they offended me or not. The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction and the concept of treating everyone like soldiers is still eluding many. With the draw down and the simple fact that the modern battle field does not have a 'front line' per se, the Army needs soldiers to fill slots be they male or female. Commanders need to focus on integrating the new soldier to the team not the soldiers gender. Others will follow suit. I am lucky in that this is an excellent unit, and maybe even the best of its kind, and has been an excellent experience for myself and for those who have worked with me. I say this as many of them had never worked with females before at all. I am happy to say that many of them now will judge females on the same level as males....by their performance. I don't mean to be on a soap box, but this is the second time I have been "the female" in the unit. Each time people were so much more nervous about the situation than common sense would dictate that things were rocky. It is a self fulfilling prophecy.

• Posted: 16 Apr 99: A Marine writes...

I feel the need to tell all of you something! Everybody is complaining about how rough it was for you in the military, tough. You should be glad that they let you join in the first place. Do you think that it wasn't hard for us males either? It seems that that is the problem in America today------there are too many that complain about a problem and not enough that do something about it, like quit. As far as woman getting pregnant while they are on ships in the navy, what the hell are you doing there in the first place? You should have researched your occupation to see where it might take you. Once you sign the dotted line you are committed to all of the above requirements.

• Posted:  7 Mar 99: "Leadership Positions"

I am a SSG in the United States Army in Aviation Branch, more specifically MOS 67T.  While I have been in the active Army for going on 9 years in addition to some Reserve time, I have only heard of one Flight Platoon Sergeant who was female (myself), and one who has been a Maintenance Platoon Sergeant.  There are many possible reasons for this, both malignant and benign. It is however, not acceptable because of the things I have seen done to female soldiers who hold General Mechanic MOS'.  This is a very exacting MOS and it is imperative that we-as NCO's and NCO's in training-ensure that ALL soldiers receive the proper training on the aircraft regardless of pressure from peers and those above to ease them over to other job positions or additional duties.  We are either leaders or training to be leaders and we owe it to the Army (the Army we signed up for and that we can create) to train soldiers.

Find your contacts at work and outside of work!  People who will back what is right and keep you on the right path! We NEED support networks. That's why this page exists and why we have the buddy system in the Army.  It doesn't stop there, we need to continue to expand our support groups.  Even the Lone Ranger had a support group.

My MOS, like the majority of them, is male-dominated.  In other words, "I've been there, and done that." in some really complicated, sickening situations.  Keep the faith with yourself first and always do your best.  Most importantly, (speaking as someone who has made mistakes along these lines) if you don't trust someone, don't take actions which put you in their control.  For example-go to a party with them after they continually ask you out. They probably haven't changed their attitude, just their words.  If they are your supervisor, keep the relationship COMPLETELY professional.  It will serve you in good stead in the future.

• Posted: 5 Dec 98: "discharge for refusal to take anthrax vaccine"

I was recently discharged from the United States Air Force for refusing to take the anthrax vaccine. I researched the vaccine and the company that produces it, and I strongly feel that the vaccine is unsafe. I received a General Discharge- Under Honorable Conditions. The reason they stated on my discharge paper work was misconduct. I was discharged on 13 Nov 98. I am seeking work, but I can not receive unemployment benefits while doing so. I am a single mother. The Air Force has created a hardship for my family and myself. I am not able to provide for my daughter and myself during this time of unemployment. I served over four years as an Intelligence Analyst. Prior to this, I had no disciplinary problems. Now, because I chose not to poison my body with a vaccine that I feel is unsafe, I lost my job for reasons of misconduct. I received Airman of the Quarter just prior to being discharged. If I had a history of misconduct, I would not have received this award. The military used to be known for taking care of their people like a big family. Things have changed. People are seeing this change, among others, and deciding not to re-enlist. I did not want to get out. I wanted to stay in and finish my enlistment and possibly re-enlist. With the way retainability is in the military right now, I could not believe that they would choose to discharge someone who did their job well, and wanted to stay in. I joined to serve my country, knowing that I might have to give my life, but I did not join to be a guinea pig for the government. The military feels threatened when people start to think for themselves. Instead of urging people to do it, they punish those who do. I guess they would rather have a bunch of brainwashed, scared people to push around than intelligent people who think for themselves. One day, someone will wake up and figure out that treating people this way is not the answer to keeping people interested in joining and staying in. People who are thinking about enlisting need to consider all of the things they will be giving up. Especially the freedom to choose what is injected into their bodies. I have a feeling it is going to get worse, before it gets better.

• Posted: 28 Oct 98: "Fleet Reserve and Retired Benefits"

I am a 24-1/2 year active duty U.S. Navy military retired veteran that receives no military retired pay for honorable service rendered. In 1992 the Navy drifted me afloat with no life raft or even a life jacket. Because I am 100% service connected disabled and unable to work, I receive no military retired pay because of an unfair and unjust law called "concurrent receipt". This law allows the military to keep military retired pay in lieu of VA disability compensation. In 1992 the Navy determined that I was fit for full duty and retired me. I was in fact determined to be 100% service connected disabled by the Veterans Administration due to service connected disabilities. After my discharge from the U.S. Navy in 1992, it took nearly two years after numerous medical evaluations and appeals to be rated at 100%. This action would eventually cause my entire military retired pay entitlement to be forfeited back to the government, which also created an over payment status requiring repayment. When you hear the words the Navy takes care of it's own, don't you believe it. There are many half truths and innuendoes concerning promises for medical retirement benefits for life as well as early retirement, in order to get people to enlist and re-enlist in the Military. The military recruiters and active duty career counselors will never tell you about TRICARE medical benefit fee payment schedules so low that Providers will not accept payments by not participating. This leaves the active duty military, retirees and their dependents paying for over 50% of their so called medical benefits. And the TRICARE processors will pay a very reduced amount only after a long and procrastinated claim filing and appeals process. Active duty and dependents must also now deal with this health care initiative designed to steal billions from the pockets of the military active duty, retired and their dependents. They won't tell you about your medical benefits terminating at Social Security Medicare eligibility age which results in the military retiree having to pay for all of their prescribed drugs which can be very expensive and life support critical when elderly. They will never tell you that you will be required to finance your own disability in the event that you become 100% service connected disabled after reaching the retirement eligible 20 year point, because of a corrupt medical Physical Evaluation Board system presently in place and an unjust law called "concurrent receipt." They will never tell you how Congress has stolen thousands of dollars from every military retired pay account by delaying and reducing cost of living adjustments, while giving themselves huge pay raises. They will never tell you that if you as a military retiree have a no fault divorce decree... even if your spouse was guilty of adultery and worse, you will lose most if not all of your retired pay through garnishment if need be to pay for the USFSPA law enacted in 1982 along with alimony and child support. Statistics bear out that 50% of all military marriages end up in divorce! This means that every married career military person has a 50/50 chance of losing a large portion of his or her military retired pay to a former spouse regardless of the circumstance that led to divorce! The Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA) Public Law 97-252 was signed into law on September 8,1982. This law could effect all Career military members who for whatever reason become divorced. This law allowed individual State Courts to place career military members in perpetual servitude to a former spouse until they die. Over 100,000 career military members of all branches of service are now under court ordered garnishment action, because state courts have classified military retired / retainer pay to be a property asset, thus allowing military finance centers to garnish up to 50% of the military members retired / retainer pay for life, regardless of fault, merit, or need. In fact this life time garnishment action does not even stop upon the remarriage of the former spouse. It only ends upon the death of the career military member and/or the former spouse. There are many homeless disabled military retirees living out of cardboard boxes and sleeping on park benches because of the USFSPA. And finally... they will never tell you that so far there have been over 240,000 veterans who have become ill and another 20,000 Gulf War veterans who have died from unexplained causes. There are many sick and dying veterans who are being denied medical care by the VA and DOD while at the same time they and their widows are being denied benefits from the VA from what has been labeled as Gulf War Syndrome!!! There has been a breach of contract, trust, faith and promise that is not told to the career military force. Once you have obligated the best years of your life, the career sailor becomes expendable. The military justifies disposal of career service personnel using legal means such as high year tenure, raising and manipulating the Physical Readiness Testing standards, evaluations, fitreps, medical boards, etc. I have seen it happen too many times to count.

RETIRED PAY DEFINITION FROM THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

This was a reply received from the office of Senator Robert Byrd with a letter from the Assistant Secretary of Defense written by Captain Elliott L. Bloxom, Director of Compensation. Requested was a definitive definition of Military Retired Pay. The ages old question, is it pay, property, deferred compensation, or reduced pay for reduced services?

The following was the response: "Retired pay cannot be placed in one simple classification because the laws which pertain to it are numerous and have different purposes. Such legislation tends to create financial complexities that go beyond the standard boundaries of terms in common use. In this vein, military retired pay defies simple explanation, and a legal definition must encompass the entire body of law pertaining to it. For the purposes of former spouses, the law states that military retired pay may be treated as property by the State court in a divorce settlement under specified limitations. By general compensation philosophy, military retired pay is, in part reduced pay for reduced services, as well as deferred income for past service."

It appears to me that retired pay is whatever meets the criteria for a specific situation. Government and DOD will change the rules regarding it, in order to meet the needs of whoever or whatever is trying to take it!!!

This is the kind of use and abuse of one's benefits for a lifetime of hard work, that is now falling into "the ends fits the means" category. So, what I gather from this loose definition is simply: "we will make retirement pay whatever we want to socially engineer it into". We will define it after we decide what we want to do with it. This type of thinking logic needs to be publicized to the masses within the military. Let those who now serve see what is in store for them; if a politician wants to manipulate the service members life after years of faithful service... then they will do it.... this is a travesty that tramples all over the intent of the service contract..... This really makes me sick!!! HOW ABOUT YOU???

Honor, courage and commitment. These are the words you hear in Navy television commercials. These are the same words that are ignored by the U.S. Congress, DOD and the Military Leaders towards the military retiree, after that commitment had been honorably and faithfully made. Everyone knows what a liar and cheat is. Well I am here to tell you that the U.S. Congress represented by you the American people, the Department of Defense and their Military Branches for condoning concurrent receipt are both a "liar and a cheat." I will not be a part of or support the military establishment, nor can I recommend it positively to anyone, until all of the retirement pay and benefits that were promised to Military Retirees are fully restored.

The Washington Post, on Aug. 13, carried a long article entitled "Military readiness, Morale show Strain". The following paragraphs are from that article. "If the Pentagon is to sustain readiness, top military commanders have concluded it will be necessary to undertake two costly 'quality of life' initiatives: one to close a 13 percent gap between military and civilian pay; the other to reverse a decline in retirement benefits that has become a sore point with younger troops." The article goes on to say that DoD is reluctant to push for these reforms and increase in budget because the White House hasn't committed to the need.

COMMENT: It seems to me a sad day when DoD has to cower to an administration and to be afraid to fight for what is needed to sustain national defense efforts. It is just another indication to me that our current military brass is more political than military.

• Posted: 16 Oct 98:

Being women in the military do you ever feel like you just don't quite fit in? Sometimes it seems that the men just don't understand what it is like being a female. I know for me women stand out in a crowd in the Coast Guard because there are so few of us. Sometimes the guys can treat the women like pieces of meat and not like one of the crew. They would rather talk to all there friends about you than talk to you. This seems to make for a very lonely existence at least that is my experience.

• Posted: 16 Oct 98: "A Civilian Writes..."

I believe that women should not be able to be stationed on ships where there are men (Married Men). This seems to cause a lot of problems with so many wives. I don't really think that this is very fair for them ( wives). I think that women have a right to be what ever they want to become, but if they choose the military I think that they should do something besides being on ships. I have met a lot of women that were stationed on ships, and I heard a lot of conversations that commented on being with a married man from their ship, and flirting with them, just to see what kind of response they will get from all men, not just married men. This bothers me and I am positive that this bothers a lot more women. So you women out there that are in military please do everyone a favor and get off the ships.

• Posted: 24 Sep 98

I was brought to this page by an error in doing a web search. But it is so very refreshing to see a woman actually state she has not had any problems in the military. She should be commended for coming forward and showing her "metal." It seems today all we ever hear about is the negative news, not the uplifting and the positive.

Big military cutbacks are dangerous to all of us. Not just for jobs, but more importantly for the security of America. The dictators of the world are much more dangerous than the old USSR. That country knew what would happen in a global war- today's fanatics could care less. We have been left exposed to these forces in the world. It takes more than hi-tech to fight these types of dictators; it takes good, dedicated people.

My hat's off to all of you who serve in the military. It shows real dedication because your certainly not in it for the money. You are the ONLY people that prevent us from having to learn a new language, and learning to bow to one another when you say hello....

Ted T., President of a Defense and Industrial Contractor

• Posted: 18 Sep 98: "In Response to the 30 Jun 98 Post, 'Women Don't Belong on Our Boats'"

I am shocked at the comments made by "Woman don't belong on my boat". This individual is a glorified idiot and let the world know. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and should express themselves but he went OVERBOARD (pun intended). I won't stoop but woman are entitled to go to ships just like men. We cannot change our fat% makeup so don't be insane to think we can run as fast pound for pound. One immature person does not dictate the entire female species as one stupid male does not dictate the male species.

• Posted: 5 Aug 98: "Weight Standards"

In reading the comments from members/former members of the services, I realize that I'm not the only female who has trouble with the rigid weight standards. Being in the Marine Corps (with the toughest weight standards of all the services) I find it extremely hard to maintain a "Barbie Doll" figure at age 43. I have been in for 15 years now and am trying to make it to 20. The older I get the harder it is to maintain the PFT standard (also the strictest in the services) and maintain my weight at what the Marine Corps perceives a good weight to be. If I lose weight to standard, it seems I don't have the energy to run like a deer. This has severely hampered me from being promoted due to the mentality that if you can't run like a 20 year old and look like a "Barbie Doll" you are not worth anything.

If you speak up within your unit or even up the chain, you get chastised for insubordination and told you will never be able to reenlist.

I'm not one to complain about things and not have a possible solution to the problem but, for this one, I'm lost.

From the comments I've seen, this seems like a problem that needs to be solved. AND NO, the answer isn't -- just get out. I know this is the solution for all those who have a perfect body size and can run like the wind. I've never been a quitter and have strived to increase my speed only to have policy changed to make things even harder. I've always had excellent fitness reports and have never been in any kind of trouble, so I'm not a slacker either. I've gotten where I am today because of hard work and persistence.

If someone out there knows a way to help, please reply. There are those of us who joined the military because we believe in our country and wanted to help defend her who still feel that way. We are not looking for an easy life. If we were, we certainly would not be here. We just want some reality and fairness.

• Posted: 5 Aug 98:

Just a thought for everyone else to ponder. Being military means that we are given certain tax exemptions, not that we are tax exempted. SHORT AND SWEET MILITARY PERSONNEL ARE TAXPAYERS, TOO.

• Posted: 3 Aug 98: "In response to a 7 Aug 97 post"

<snip from 7 Aug 97 post submitted by a navy officer: "I'm tired of having to defend myself against all these news stories of women who want something for nothing. I'm tired of watching as women who are unqualified are pushed through certain programs simply because of their gender. Its dangerous and unfair. <snip>

I realize this is a late posting, but I just found this web site. It has been interesting reading. However, as I read the writer's posting from Aug 7, 1997, I wondered if she was referring to military women when she wrote about those who have been placed in positions where they were not qualified to serve.

I hear this sort of thing from fellow female servicemembers all too often. We eat our own, it seems. I think the writer might have been referring to Kara Hultgren, a Navy lieutenant, who died in 1994 in the crash of her F-14 fighter while attempting to land on an aircraft carrier.

The initial investigation clearly pointed to pilot error, so many critics of female fighter pilots used the opportunity to claim that LT Hultgren was an incompetent pilot who should have never graduated from flight school. However, the final investigation revealed that LT Hultgren made key mistakes, but that there were other mitigating factors involved in the accident. Furthermore, the report took great pains to show her track record from flight school to the moment of the accident. She had not been an accident waiting to happen.

Yesterday (7-30-98), two F-14s collided over the Mediterranean Sea. One pilot died. I bet his reputation was not smeared by faxes and phone calls to major media outlets, which is exactly what happened to LT Hultgren. I don't think her body had been retrieved from the water nor her parents informed of her tragic death, when the newspapers and TV reporters started questioning her fitness for duty. I can only imagine how her parents have lived with this painful legacy, knowing that many of her fellow pilots found it more important to trash their daughter's reputation than mourn her death.

I think we, that is, women in the military, should celebrate our accomplishments and avoid criticizing each other--no matter how subtle or well-intended we think our comments might be. We might not have all the facts. And we wind out sounding like we are jealous of each other's success or accomplishments instead of being excited for what it is yet to come.

submitted by a Major, U.S. Army Reserves

• Posted: 23 Jul 98: "In Response to the 30 Jun 98 Post"

What is this guy talking about women are lazy they don't belong on ships we cheat! PRT qualifications yeah I agree they should be the same but this guy has gone too far if he thinks that women can't handle it tell him to call me up and we will see. Guys like that are sick and need to get their heads out of the 18th century

• Posted: 30 Jun 98: "women don't belong on our boats"

Well first of all I'd like to say women don't belong on our boats anyway, why? Because they are turning our war ships into love boats. Women always talk about equal opportunity, women get away with everything, always accusing men of sexual harassment when it's not true (sometimes it's true, but the ones I've seen are NOT true). Let me get to big P.R.T REQUIREMENTS, what the hell is going on? EQUAL OPPORTUNITY HUH!?! One good thing I must say that they are sending women on boats so they don't take up all the SHORE DUTY. Women should be in seaman rates not aviation. ESPECIALLY A.O.( YES I AM AN A.O.) women are so lazy, always trying to get away with something, or get out of something, or WORK. Someone always has to pick up the women's slack. Women don't think straight either. There's this stupid girl on my boat, she said that she didn't want to go on west pack, so what is the one thing that would not make her go. PREGNANCY. Guess what? She's pregnant and not going on west pack.WHAT A WAY TO BRING A CHILD INTO THE WORLD! "HEY MOMMY WHY WAS I BORN", "OH..BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO GO ON WEST PACK". What an answer huh? Even wog day isn't the same now that women are on the ships."YOU CANT DO THAT!"all I got to say is put the p.r.t standards up to the mens and see how many women stay in the military. They can cheat on the sit-ups and push-ups but they can't cheat on the run.

• Posted: 28 May 98: "Recruiters can be scum!"

Just had the worst experience in my life. I was in the Army and taken advantage of in my non knowing of what I could get guaranteed when I signed my Military contract. Winding up doing a commo job for 3 years and hated it. Initially wanted nursing but was told no opening for many months. They have you when they know you want to leave and get out of town....they know in a way you are desperate and they will fill you in any slot open to make their quota...They do not care about you personally. (I should say most do not care about you personally). Recruiter didn't lie...just did not elaborate, and certainly didn't divulge the whole truth. Daughter went to take ASVAB test and physical and was told she didn't have to sign any contract with the Marines. Marine recruiter was going to pressure her into signing, telling her if she didn't sign all military would dx her as immature the following day. Well she told recruiter along with me that she would not be signing anything and he berated her, saying she should cut the strings...and that they he would be in trouble with his commanding officer and that they had spent $200.00 on this....BULL!!!!!!!! Don't ever let the recruiters force you into doing anything you don't want to. If they are telling you no other military, or last chance...that is all BULL!!!!! Always another chance! You can get out even up until you take that oath and sometimes after.......Remember they do not have control over you unless you allow them. Take someone with you who has been in the service and have them help you with questions and guarantees...a non knowing fresh out of high school person will almost certainly be taken advantage of.

• Posted: 24 Apr 98: "12 Sept 97: IRS Fight"

I too got out of the USAF on disability severance pay which of course was taxed and now is being recouped. I also filed an amended return in 92 as soon as I heard about St. Clair. My claim was denied by the IRS which I appealed and of course lost due to the statue of limitations--3 yrs. from date of the original filing. This is a legislative problem. All the law suits in the world will not help because of the statue of limitations. We need Congress to change this law for a special class of people--US! After all, if they can forgive Joe Lewis his back taxes by Act of Congress, they should be able to do this for us. He was a boxer and a vet but I think his fame helped forgive his back taxes. Please include my address. Maxxena. E-mail: Maxxena@aol.com

• Posted: 26 Feb 98: "In Response To 23 Feb 98 Posting"

There are a lot more than two types of women in the military. In fact, if you counted up all our numbers, you'd have that many "types" of women, just as you'd have the comparable number of types of men. One of the biggest problems we are having is that some people insist on classifying us by "types." This misguided attempt at so-called leadership is a not-so-subtle form of discrimination, and your comment smacked of it. Sorry, but a whole bunch of red flags ran up when you made a remark about a woman who had "...three kids, different fathers...." Pardon me, but what's that to you? Are you paying child support for any of those children? Are you feeding or clothing them? Evidently the woman is, or at least she is trying. Is it possible she's being held back by a dinosaur of a supervisor who insists on making judgement calls about her personal life?

I have found (in my measly 20 years of experience) that slackers are just that, slackers, not specifically men, women, single parents, blacks, whites, or whomever happens to be the minority-du-jour. I have also found that outstanding workers are just that, outstanding, not specifically men, women, single parents..........get my drift? Today's military is made up of a cross-section of society, but we have many more appropriate channels to praise, re-direct, or discipline than society in general. It's a shame the two women you describe seem to be substandard. Or could it be that the women are performing adequately but are being over-supervised or micromanaged by a bitter, vindictive person who would love to see them fail? You know, if you give people a chance, most of them will come through for you, if you've shown that you'll support them in times of need. That's what most of us learned in leadership school. Haven't been there yet? Go. Been there, done that? I think you may need to request a repeat.

If in fact your situations are described accurately (pardon my cynicism), I wonder why your senior leadership hasn't taken steps to remove the problem children from your command. Perhaps the high muckety-mucks just don't see it the same way you do.

Before you write off an entire gender, or at least those who choose to bear children (regardless of the chosen fathers), take a good look around at the things the rest of us have contributed. And really look- with your eyes-and mind- open.

• Posted: 23 Feb 98: "Pregnancy & Duty"

So, it seems that there are two types of women who get pregnant in the service. Those who abuse the system and those who despite being pregnant keep working hard. Well, here's some information regarding the wrong type. I just got back from drill last weekend and one of our female enlisted soldiers will not be attending AT this summer. Why? Well, it seems that she is pregnant. This is someone who came back from BCT/AIT less than 6 months ago, failed the PT test and now will not be training with us this summer. Forcing the remaining soldiers in her section to cover. This is outrageous. All that time, effort and money on the part of the Army, the unit, and her fellow soldiers ... wasted. This is not the first time this sort of thing has happened in my unit. We had another female soldier who missed many AT's because of pregnancy. Three kids, not married and different fathers. Really outrageous.

My solution. No pregnancy until you have at least completed one complete tour (YOUR FIRST), either active or reserve. If you do get pregnant before you have completed your duty, then you're out with NO benefits. There are some career women who balance pregnancy, motherhood and being a soldier. However, it seems that many of the recent young enlistees do not. Maybe this would differentiate between those milking/abusing the system and the conscientious soldiers. I admit that I think the sight of maternity BDU's just seems plain wrong, but I would prefer not to penalize good career women soldiers. Heck, maybe one day I'll be wearing those awful maternity BDU's. However, the way things stand right now just seems to create more tension between male and female soldiers.

This is not about motherhood and fatherhood. It's about pregnancy.

• Posted: 9 Jan 98: "Advice/Questions About Employment After Retirement"

I retired from the Navy in June 1997 after 20 years. For the most part, things went well for me, but I can't in good conscience recommend a military career to any of my junior shipmates with less than 10 years in. The times they are a-changin'......

I have a few issues I'd like some help or comments on. My husband is still on active duty and we are stationed in Japan. I was a hospital corpsman for 20 years, and an advanced laboratory tech for 18 of them. I also have extensive experience in medical administration and all the leadership gew-gaws and rigmarole that comes with a successful 20 year career. My Navy training helped me toward completing my BS in Management before retirement and I am about 4 months from completion of a Master's degree. Sorry, I don't mean to sound like I'm bragging (although I am proud). I give you this background because I have had an incredibly difficult time getting a job here on the base in Japan, despite my serious qualifications. I have qualified for several jobs at the GS-9 level and up, but I can't get any hiring priority. HRO classifies me as a 3B. I have no veteran's preference. As a female HM-8506, I was ineligible for sea duty until after I executed my last set of orders; the only sea billets available were on combatants, and hazardous duty options were limited. When many of the rest of you did your time in ODS, I was stateside helping the reservists fill your jobs. Consequently I have no campaign badges, which are required for vet preference. To make matters worse, I took an MWR job to fill the gap after retiring (as was recommended by the counselors at the local FSC in the Retiring and Separating in Japan briefing). I am now told that taking the MWR job uses my spouse preference, whether I chose to use it or not, and I no longer have any spouse preference. To add insult to injury, MWR employees are not considered "part of the system" until they have worked for MWR at least a year. What it comes down to is: Any person who served honorably and happened to do a major cruise or was in a hardship area, and earned a campaign badge, gets preference, even if they only did one tour (sometimes less than a complete tour). I get no preference for an honorable 20-year career, simply because my gender and NEC denied me being in the right place at the right time. I do not wish to minimize any veteran's efforts in the Gulf or any war zone or hazardous area, but I do not understand the legislation which denies me any sort of veteran's preference. For heaven's sake, a military member's non-citizen spouse will get a job over here before I will! My questions are:

1. Can anyone suggest where I should take my question of why a 20-year veteran can't get vet preference, regardless of campaign badges or not?

2. Why does an MWR job cost me my spouse preference, but at the same time not consider me as part of the "system," which would allow me the same priority as any GS employee looking for a better position?

3. I see these as women's issues; many of the "career-enhancing billets" simply were not open to me because of my gender. Any suggestions on who to ask for help?

Sorry if this sounds like whining, but I should be able to find gainful employment here. I certainly have the skills and experience to do the job. Your comments and advice are greatly appreciated, sisters! E-mail: lombardi@surfline.ne.jp

• Posted: 29 Dec 97

After reading post after post in numerous different areas of this site I have to say how proud I am to be a military woman. To say to others that I am in the same ranks as the women who posted here makes me stand proud. Thank you all -- Cherie, Sgt. USMC (Vet)

• Posted: 29 Dec 97: "Response to 16 Dec 97 Post "Pregnant Soldiers"

I was an active duty Sergeant in the Marine Corps for 6 1/2 years. During that time I was pregnant with my daughter and I must disagree with your comments on pregnant women in the military. Yes, I understand that a woman is limited in duty while pregnant. This is a physical limitation placed upon her for the safety of the child. You say that a woman's time should be "suspended" for the duration of her pregnancy. Are you going to do the same for someone who broke their arm in a football game? Do you "suspend" their contract? What about someone who is chronically ill for a long period of time? While I was in, I knew numerous Marines who had been off and on light/no-duty for years. Be it a bad knee, problems with their back...are you going to "suspend" their contracts also? Women in the Marines, ( I can't speak for the other branches), were originally brought in to "free a man to fight." That is a recruiting poster slogan. Women in the military were originally used as support. Technically, they still are if you still think about it..at least for the most part. So, in other words, being pregnant does not normally keep a woman in the military from doing her "duty." It only limits it for a period of time. I truly think your unit needs to have another discussion about this topic.

• Posted: 16 Dec 97: "Pregnant Soldiers"

In current discussion in my unit (men and women alike), we discussed the time a woman is 'ineligible' during their pregnancy.

We are in the military to defend...to defend our country and it's interests, to be deployable and to go where-ever we are needed.

A pregnant female cannot carry out this mission, as she has agreed to do (signed a contract, in fact). Take a moment and look at the numbers. A pregnant female is IMMEDIATELY taken off a mobility billet, or commitment, because she obviously can't deploy. This is for a normal 9-month gestation period. After which and upon birth, she is granted 4-6 weeks of maternity leave. That's a total of about 10.5 months, or almost a whole year that that individual cannot deploy--her basic responsibility and obligation. Also, she can't train--she can't run, she can't climb, she can't do PT, she can't go through the gas chamber...she can't do ANY combat training.

Almost a year. That means that, out of a 4-year enlistment, the American taxpayer is only getting 3/4 of the what they're paying for. AND...the taxpayer has to pay for the pregnancy--free medical care, and free maternity support (birth, etc).

My recommendation is that, when a female in the military gets pregnant, her military commitment "clock" is suspended. It is only re-started once she can return to 'normal' duty and be placed back into training/mobility. This would, for sure, cause her military commitment to increase from 4 years to almost 5 years. But, that's what the taxpayer is paying for, and the pregnant female soldier/airman, or marine should make good on what they've promised to do.

It would also make a person think twice before getting pregnant to prevent themselves from their responsibilities.

• Posted: 4 Nov 97: "1986--Basic Training"

After years of abuse at home, and no direction in my life, I'd enlisted in the US Air Force to make something of myself. I knew this would either make or break me, and I was up for the challenge. What I didn't realize was that I walked, constantly, staring at the ground. A Training instructor (equivalent of drill sergeant) stopped me one day by stepping directly into my path. I ran right into him, horrified by my lack of vision. He said, "Airman, if you don't look up, you'll never see where you're going." This statement hit me like a ton of bricks, because I suddenly realized how defeated I had been throughout my life. Something happened to me that day. I took a deep breath, and lifted my eyes to the horizon. From that day, I have never again walked with my eyes to the ground, except, of course, when looking for land mines! :)

• Posted: 4 Nov 97: "Pride"

I feel so much pride when I remember my time in the "Womens Army Corps" from July 1959 to October 1962. Thanks to all the women in the service of their country.

• Posted: 22 Jul 97: I'll never use child care again because of the Army!

My name is hurt. We were stationed in xxx. Where my two year old son was abused by my babysitter's husband, who was in the Air Force also at Co. We were stated by the military that we abused him. He was taken from us for 12 hr. while my husband and I took lie detector tests. When the '' babysitter'' was failing his. He was found not guilty by the Air Force. So I have no respect for the Army for not believing us or for the Air Force for allowing the people who abused my child to go free. At least the DA took the licenses away and so they can not hurt another child. I know all Army and all Air Force are not like this, but at xxx they seem to be. If I were you I would not re-up. Now I am a PFC. If you now what I mean. Me and my son moved back to my home town, without my husband. He has 6 more years of this hell. Our divorce will be final in 30 days. God forbid this to happens to any of you. But I never had any help from the military wives. Because my husband was only a private.

• Posted: 25 Jun 97: Good Advise: Take College Courses in Service

I am currently working at a local University and working towards my Bachelor's on a part-time basis. My advise to women in the military -- take college courses if you can. I took only two courses while I was in and I wish that I had gotten my general education credits taken care of. I've been taking classes off and on for ten years at [a local area] Community College. But it's hard returning back to college at an University setting when you are in your 30's and most of the students are 18-21. Even if you do not know what you want to major in; you can get your general education credits out of the way; especially if the military will pay for part of the cost. While I was in Navy Campus paid for 50-75% of tuition costs. Right now if I pay for one class; I'm looking at $400 for three credit hours. At the rate of one course per semester I'll finish in four years. Do it while you're young and have no obligations, except to yourself.

• Posted: 12 Jun 97: "A-10 Pilot"

Responsible for the employment of at least 1 ea aerospace vehicle, specializing in Close Air Support of the Army (Ground Troops). It requires a minimum of 3.5 years of extensive training to be a proficient Hawg Driver.

In keeping with some of the discussion, I'd like to bring to light some other inequities of the Women in The Military concept. We either need to erase everything about gender lines after signing on the dotted line, or restrict females from military service altogether. As a line pilot (02-03, non-flight commander or section chief) in my squadron, I am additionally tasked as a Battalion Air Liaison Officer, as about 17 of the remaining 20 line pilots assigned to the squadron. I am by-name assigned to a particular Army battalion. That means whenever they deploy, I leave my squadron and go with them. Waaa Waa, I know. Service before self. OK. However, the "crime" of this system is the fact that should we go to war (& we've been know to do just that a time or two) the 18 BALOs leave the squadron, crippling its ability to generate combat sorties due to lack of pilots. On a personal level, no one (well there are an exceptional few) WANTS to be a BALO. Our job is to put iron on target.

Enter the female A-10 pilots. Being restricted from BALO duty, the females' occupancy of line pilot slots in the squadron forces the associated number of male pilots to either remain BALOs longer or even have to become a BALO in the first place. The "Jumping bean" variety BALO has the additional duty of wearing a beeper with his Bn. This frequently takes a pilot out of training deployments, reducing his combat effectiveness as a fighter pilot.

So, that's a quick look at what A-10 drivers do and, moreover, what is expected.

• Professional female response to comment posted 3 Jun 97.

I agree with everything you've said. Selective service should encompass females or be abolished. The PT standards should be made equal. I believe that this should be accomplished slowly over a period of say, 3-5 years. It's simply not fair to change the standards so drastically overnight. I'm sure you'll agree that it is a drastic difference. Grooming standards are also much too disproportionate. I don't, however, think that males should be allowed to grow waist-length hair or that females should be allowed to wear a high and tight. I think that military women should have to have their hair short enough that, according to current regulations, they would be required to wear it down and not up in a braid or otherwise. This would bring the standards closer together without being a huge public relations nuisance, it would standardize women's hair to a manageable point, and finally it would eliminate the use of, often outlandish, hair accessories (i.e.: scrunchies, barrettes, rubberbands, bobby pins, etc). You commented that requiring females to wear their hair as short as men or men as long as women would be fair. Fair maybe but you went on to say that equal standards of grooming would aid in reducing or eliminating sexual harassment. I'd like to understand how you figure that women with high and tight haircuts won't be more often accused of being lesbians than they are now simply being females in the military or how men with long hair won't be considered homosexual more often by both the public and their "old-school" military counterparts? Maybe in time this would be able to become equal without those stereotypes but change needs to be gradual, especially in an institution as conservative as the military.

I also have two other comments not directly related to the topic you laid out, but still relevant One, I find it interesting how frequently many men comment on the inequality in standards between male and female standards. It always seems to be commented on bitterly and with a disgruntled air directed toward females. Why is this the case when women had little or no voice in the making of these rules and regs? Also, in your comments listed on the Military Woman Homepage you have a sentence that does not make any sense, "Yet when those same creative souls volunteer to be institutionalized into the military men are faced with the grim prospect of a mutilated clean-shaven skull while the girls get off with a bad-hair period rather than a bad-hair day." This is completely unclear. You are missing tons of punctuation - mostly commas. Beyond that, you left me with the impression that you believe women only have to adhere to the current standards for the time while they are in basic training or that maybe you are under the impression that women have to cut their hair for basic. Neither concept is true. We have to adhere to the same standards from day one that we have to adhere to for our entire careers and we do not have to cut our hair for basic.

Well, I've enjoyed sharing my thoughts and would like to hear (read) any response you might have regarding my opinions.

• Posted: 3 Jun 97: "Equal Standards"

Unlike many of my male counterparts I have no qualms with opening up any and all positions within the military to anyone of any gender qualified to do the job...don't smile in appreciation too soon. Read it carefully: I said -qualified- to do the job. And I certainly do not feel that the current system permits this. With women representing 12% of military personnel it is astounding to me that Selective Service requirements have not yet been extended to applicable females. Talk about male-bashing. The current differentiation in PT-test scores is a mockery of soldiering. If a 230 lb fat boy can't do his PT run in the stipulated time there's no reason why a 4'9" female with equal troubles should be given a more generous window for completing the task -just because she's female. The job's the job, and the nature of the job won't change simply because you scored an 85% on a slanted test. And finally, the most trivial, and yet contentious of my complaints, grooming standards. I spent a nice afternoon ogling the most incredible body-piercing, weird hairdo-es and tattooed body parts, girls with clean shaven heads or purple dies. These are contemporary fashions for youth. Yet when those same creative souls volunteer to be institutionalized into the military men are faced with the grim prospect of a mutilated clean-shaven skull while the girls get off with a bad-hair period rather than a bad-hair day. I recall the rantings of my DI quite well when he ventured to 'lecture' on the subject. His point was simple: 'you're soldiers first, everything else follows. There are no Joes and Mollies. You're soldiers.' Oh really? There's only one way to reconcile that, and I don't care either way: either males get to wear their hair down to their shoulders and tied in cute little buns on duty...or women shave it all off and keep it regulation short, as male SOLDIERS are required to do, many begrudgingly. I'm not advocating chauvinism or feminism..I'm advocating EQUAL application of standards. You want to reduce sexual harassment in the ranks? Try applying equal standards...or does that run against the feminist agenda?

• Posted: 2 Jun 97: An Opinion from a High School Student:

Our class at East High School looked at the issue of women in the military from a number of perspectives (Supreme Court, history, statistics, personal testimony and sex differences). We used the WWW extensively in our research, including the personal testimony on this Site. Groups then presented their findings to the class and argued their position. I would like to share my ideas:

The viewpoint I studied reflected my own personal opinion. The Supreme Court considered it unconstitutional to discriminate against women on any basis, regardless of tradition and reputation. The admission of women could in no way destroy the institution, but rather enhance its capacity "to serve the more perfect union," according to Justice Ginsburg. I'm not saying that the standards and the entry level of cadets in the various academies should be altered, that would defy reason. The military's sole purpose is to protect the civilians of our nation, so why should their standards be lowered. On the other hand, women should be granted equal opportunity for admission to military academies. If the women are qualified they have earned the right to coexist with the males. The military, like any other institution or business, cannot justly discriminate against sex, race or origin, but only on the basis of qualification. That way the military can perform to its best ability. It's also quite likely that those few qualified women could bring something extra to the institution, whether it be a strategical skill or a different outlook that may be lacking in a dominant male environment. I don't think that anyone, when it comes right down to it, would care whether their doctor was a man or a woman, but that he/she was the best there was to maintain proper health. The same is true for the military

• Posted: 2 June 97: Women in the Military

I think some of the debate regarding women serving in our armed forces is based on male chauvinism brought on by a male dominated society world wide. Men from all cultures need to update their views, attitudes and perceptions of women and their accomplishments and contributions to world development. Women are truly just as intelligent and capable to serve in both combat as well as in support roles. Some of histories greatest combat heroes/heroines have been left out, I believe intentionally to keep women at a psychological disadvantage.

Men are typically more brutal and certainly less compassionate by nature. Maybe when women are allowed equal access to opportunities in the military not only at the combat level but at the policy making levels, the world would be a better place and certainly a lot more inclined to resolve conflicts without a full scale war.

My humble opinion.

• Posted: 16 May 97: "Something's Wrong Here Too!"
  
  I like so many of you (us) am a disabled woman veteran too. (30%) I have become involved in the local DAV Chapter, District 2 Chapter 42 Grand Prairie, Texas and currently hold the position of Adjutant/Treasurer, and my husband is the Junior Vice Commander. We both feel that we still have responsibilities in life however this time it's not to the government as before but to our fellow veterans.
  
  We see the age differences of people involved in various veteran's/retirees organizations. We are in our mid 40's and most of the members in these organizations are old enough to be our Grandparents! Come on folks lets get our comrades involved and make our voices be heard on Capitol Hill! When all of these older folks play their last taps it's going to be left up to us to carry on with the missions they started for us. Alot of the Vietnam veterans (at least in this area) are still "loners" in society (I probably would be too if I got treated the way they by the government and society when they came home and for years afterwards). We need the support of all the new retirees and veterans who are just now coming out of their careers and God knows we have meet and know numerous ones from our service days. Talk to those people, look them up on the net, get them involved too! I too have suffered some of the same things ya'll have mentioned and it's not "just in your head" it's real! It doesn't discriminate either, it has effected all of us who have walked down the same road. I will try to respond and trade "war stories" and info about organizations of interest to us alike if you want. Good luck in life, and never regret the fact that you have changed someone's life somewhere just by being in the military.

• Posted: 15 Apr 97: "Women as Leaders"
  
  I am a sixteen-year-old girl who is considering joining the military. I am grateful for some of the comments by the guys who supported women in the military, I hope that more men can get over their pitiful insecurities and see the big picture. I am as strong as several boys in my school, I can do an average of 505 lb. on the hip sled and can bench almost twice as much as many girls. But my strength would only be part of my fighting ability, it also takes quickness and an alert mind, and many men neglect to remember that.
  
  Remember, Joan of Arc was an illiterate, poor, farm girl, however, she led her armies to victory for several years because she had the desire to fight for her country and people. She only ceased to gain victory when she was betrayed by one of her comrades and let down by her "supporter", the king of France. They were afraid, a women who was more powerful than them, if she had survived several more years, she might have became a monarch.
  
  However, the point I am trying to make is that men are afraid because women, after ascending through the ranks of the military, they would become more assertive in other
  areas and not let men try to run their lives.
  
  However, a real man would not fear these things. He would know that all people are equal. He would also do well to support a woman in whatever she does, whether it is becoming a homemaker, a businesswoman, or joining the military to serve in combat.
  

  ---

Copyright by Webmaster of this homepage ©1998-2002