Big Red Car here. Well, the day has dawned and it is bright, sunny, and cold. Still flirting with 52F as a high. This is winter!
On Earth as it is in Texas. Winter good in the ATX.
So, the Navy Secretary, one Ray Mabus, has sent a scolding memorandum to the United States Marine Corps,the Marines, telling them to get with integrating women into the Marine combat arms including specifically the infantry.
The policy decision was made on 3 December 2015 but already the Sec Navy is in the “scolding” mode. Huh?
Mabus is a former Democratic Governor of Mississippi and has been a loyal Obama acolyte since his 2009 appointment as Navy Secretary. The Marines, of course, fall under the Navy in the Pentagon.
He also served as Bill Clinton’s Ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
Who is this Ray Mabus guy, Big Red Car?
This is not the first controversial action by Secretary Mabus. He also tried to name some warships after Cesar Chavez, disgraced former Democratic Congressman John Murtha, and gun crime victim former Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Curious choices when the Navy usually favors former Presidents and Medal of Honor winners for that honor.
In addition to being a Harvard Law grad, he was the youngest Governor in Mississippi history at 39 years old having ascended to the throne by declaring famously “Mississippi Will Never Be Last Again”.
I don’t know about you but the Big Red Car finds that incredibly inspiring. Almost Donald Trumpish. Maybe not.
“Make Mississippi not last again!” It just doesn’t have that certain magic for the Big Red Car.
What exactly did he tell the Marines to do, Big Red Car?
Mabus directed the Marines to:
1. Create an integration plan which injects women into combat units as a matter of policy rather than as a matter of quality selection.
2. He further advises: “I expect you will ensure that a worthwhile goal does not unreasonably delay or prevent the execution of a policy imperative.”
Nothing about combat readiness or lethality, a policy directive. Sends shivers up my spine, you?
3. Ban the use of “man” in any job title and to make all job titles “gender-neutral” thereby spelling doom for “infantrymen, mortarmen, artillerymen, reconnaissancemen, corpsmen (medics).”
He also directed the Navy to do away with “seamen.” Seapersons?
4. He considers this as an “…opportunity to update the position titles and descriptions themselves to demonstrate through this language that women are included in these MOSs (military occupational specialties).”
5. Integrate men and women into the same basic training units. Immediately. What could go wrong with that?
6. He wants a written report on progress every three months.
Hey, I am sure that that went over well in the Commandant’s office, no?
The Secretary did not directly address the Marine Corps recruiting motto of “A Few Good Men” but you have to know that’s going to get the heave ho, no?
Note there are some women in this picture of Marine basic training. Can you pick them out? [Trick question, be careful.]
How did this happen, Big Red Car?
The Secretary of the Navy has complied with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter’s 3 December 2015 directive to open USMC combat jobs in the infantry, armor, artillery, and special operations to qualified women. Yes, the Sec Def did say “qualified women” and that distinction was lost somewhere along the way in the translation. That will happen sometimes when you rule via memorandum.
The Marines had conducted an extensive three year study which concluded that including women in combat roles would result in extensive damage to unit cohesion, more injuries, and the risk of higher casualties in combat. The Marines stand by those conclusions.
The Sec Navy blew the study off and disregarded it completely thereby cementing a great relationship with the Commandant of the Marine Corps. A sort of critical relationship for a Sec Navy, no? Considering the Commandant has been in the Marines for more than 30 years? And has seen plenty of combat? Made it to the top of the heap in the freakin’ Marine Corps? Yeah, this is a guy I would ignore and then send a memo to. You?
The exact change went something like this.
Then Commandant Marine Corps, General Dunford: “Sir, did you see that report? The three year study report?”
Sec Mabus: “Yes, I saw the fucking report, General Dunford.”
Gen Dunford: “And, sir?”
Mabus: “Fuck the report. Me, President Obama, the Sec Defense know waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than you fucking Leathernecks know about your Marine Corps. Trust us, we’re smarter than you Jarheads. End of discussion.”
Gen Dunford: “Sir, we’re the world’s elite fighting force. We are the United States Marine Corps. Why jeopardize our combat effectiveness, particularly at a time like now?
Mabus: “Cause some shit is more important than being a badass Marine, General. Shit like winning the women’s vote in the next election.”
Gen Dunford: “Sir, with all due respect, there is NOTHING more important than being a badass Marine. Sir.”
The last “sir” was a little late to the party.
Marine General Joseph Dunford was the Marine Commandant who made that utterance about the report and he has, of course, now become the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Mabus has picked a fight with a very powerful Marine.
The Marine Corps itself, 188,000 MEN and 13,000 woMEN, is not very enthusiastic about this change. The big chubby husky Marines are a little worried whether the gals will be able to drag them from the battlefield if they get wounded. Back in the day, the dragging of a 250 lbs wounded man was a critical skill. Even a little Marine is a lot of trouble to move.
I suspect the Marines really loved the approach — ignoring the three year study and sending down a memo. The Marines are not that big into memorandi. It is something about that warrior ethos. But, not to worry, they will come around. Right?
But, hey, what the Hell do I really know anyway? I’m just a Big Red Car. Semper Fi, y’all. And, have a nice damn day!
Mabus and the guy on the other end of his leash didn’t particularly mind the Marines being badass; I mean, _somebody_ has to hold the C-in-C’s umbrella, and it ought to be the best, right? No, what Mabus and the former president disliked was twofold – masculinity, and American exceptionalism. The O administration was an eight-year effort to prove that Americans could be scolded and memoed and sued and regulated into being tractable, ladylike little wusses just like the French and Germans.
So, Sec Nav wants to eliminate seamen. Sure he didn’t misspell that and mean eliminate semen?
Candidate Responses:
(1) As at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_metres
Records in the 100 m sprint:
Men’s records
World Jamaica Usain Bolt 9.58 (2009)
Olympic Jamaica Usain Bolt 9.63 (2012)
Women’s records
World United States Florence Griffith 10.49 (1988)
Olympic United States Florence Griffith 10.62 (1988)
Sorry, girls. But do not worry, girls; in no way does this difference mean that we like you less! Not at all! Girls, we like you a lot — understatement of the past 4 billion years!
(2) As at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_weightlifting
Olympic weightlifting records
Men’s records
62 Kg
Snatch 153 Kg
Clean and Jerk 177 Kg
Total 327 Kg
Women’s records
63 Kg
Snatch 115 Kg
Clean and Jerk 135 Kg
Total 245 Kg
Sorry, girls. But do not worry, girls; in no way does this difference mean that we like you less! Not at all! Girls, we like you a lot — understatement of the past 4 billion years!
(3) As at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_jump
Men’s records
World Mike Powell 8.95 m (29 ft 41/4 in) (1991)
Olympic Bob Beamon 8.90 m (29 ft 21/4 in) (1968)
Women’s records
World Galina Chistyakova 7.52 m (24 ft 8 in) (1988)
Olympic Jackie Joyner 7.40 m (24 ft 31/4 in) (1988)
Sorry, girls. But do not worry, girls; in no way does this difference mean that we like you less! Not at all! Girls, we like you a lot — understatement of the past 4 billion years!
(4) As at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_jump
Men’s records
World Javier Sotomayor 2.45 m (8 ft 01/4 in) (1993)
Olympic Charles Austin 2.39 m (7 ft 10 in) (1996)
Women’s records
World Stefka Kostadinova 2.09 m (6 ft 101/4 in) (1987)
Olympic Yelena Slesarenko 2.06 m (6 ft 9 in) (2004)
Sorry, girls. But do not worry, girls; in no way does this difference mean that we like you less! Not at all! Girls, we like you a lot — understatement of the past 4 billion years!
(5) As at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_records_in_swimming
Men’s records (minutes:seconds):
50 m freestyle 21.30
100 m freestyle 47.05
200 m freestyle 1:42.96
400 m freestyle 3:40.14
100 m backstroke 52.16
200 m backstroke 1:53.41
100 m breaststroke 58.46
200 m breaststroke 2:07.28
100 m butterfly 50.58
200 m butterfly 1:52.03
Women’s records:
50 m freestyle 24.05
100 m freestyle 53.00
200 m freestyle 1:53.61
400 m freestyle 4:01.45
100 m backstroke 58.23
200 m backstroke 2:04.06
100 m breaststroke 1:05.17
200 m breaststroke 2:19.59
100 m butterfly 55.98
200 m butterfly 2:04.06
Men faster (seconds):
2.750
5.950
10.650
21.310
6.070
10.650
6.710
12.310
5.400
12.030
Sorry, girls. But do not worry, girls; in no way does this difference mean that we like you less! Not at all! Girls, we like you a lot — understatement of the past 4 billion years!
We like your spotlessly clean ponytail, white socks and shoes, drop dead gorgeous, pretty party dresses, absurdly full skirts, of shear, pastel, floral print tied up with satin ribbons and bows, with you cared about, cared for, taken care of, cherished, treasured, protected, supported, and loved, and no way do we want you in the mud, dirt, sand, ice, snow, dirty water, snakes, lizards, and insects taking incoming. No way.
And we don’t want you on the football field either — on the first play you will likely land in the nickel seats seriously injured — we don’t want that.
(6) Let’s have some playoffs:
NBA All Stars versus WNBA All Stars
Men’s Wimbledon Singles Champion versus Women’s Wimbledon Singles Champion
(7) Likely best response: F’get about it. Obama has his headline, and IMHO that’s all he wanted. History shows that soon, likely already, Obama will f’get about it, and likely so will Sec Def and Sec Navy, and so should the Chair of the JCS and the Marine Corps.
It’s called “politics”.
For why? The woman’s vote? I can’t believe that. E.g., the women are not rushing to try out for the NFL or NBA or compete against men in the Olympics or college sports. Sure, maybe some girl in grade school or middle school has a chance to compete with the boys, but not for long after the boys start to shave.
Obama has other reasons as in there are some things that don’t make sense that we don’t understand. There stand to be some tell-all books in 2017.
For now, the damage is mostly limited just to headlines.
All those Obama headlines are really just public self abuse.
Sure, it’s not just politics but based in part on political correctness (PC).
So, that PC foundation in our culture is partly what Obama is exploiting.
The relevant part of PC is that men and women are equal. No one with any sense at all really believes this equality stuff in any literal sense, e.g., the sense that Obama is trying to exploit, but a lot of women are slow to see why they should not be regarded as equal. And while such women are trying to get the details of where men and women are and are not equal, Obama, and Hillary, can exploit those women.
And too many women are hurting because of where they traditionally have had different career paths and made less money; the money is important; a lot of women are very short on money.
There are suggestions, e.g., from E. Fromm, The Art of Loving, that this stuff about equal came into Western Civilization, say, as PC, from the French Revolution where any difference was regarded as a threat of tyranny.
So, we got PC, and Obama exploits it.
So, again, and quite generally, PC is a way to slow people from looking at reality and, net, one heck of a good way to sabotage the strength of the US as if some really clever Soviet Communist planted the PC notion to weaken the US.
A challenge is that it is really difficult to stand before 1000 woman and try to be clear on any way at all that men and women are different at all. Any such hint will result in high pitched screams of outrage.
So, as a country, and in picking good leadership, what do we do about that that PC stuff? We be well informed, wise, prudent, thoughtful, and careful.
In particular, we let Obama have his silly headlines where he publicly abuses himself.
Actually in this case, Obama won’t be making any progress in the politics. Why? Because 99 44/100% of women know very, very well — as they have known since middle school when they wanted to be football cheerleaders and definitely not football players, when some of the toughest guys in school the girls were terrified of joined the Marines — that for some jobs, especially the Marines, men are much better suited than women.
So, net, such women — 99 44/100% of women, no matter what their interests in equality in various respects — will regard Obama as a wimp, wuss, irresponsible, unmanly, incompetent idiot who is far too just plain stupid to understand even Women 101 and is on the way to leaving the US, and women, much less secure. Uh, one of the things women want most from men is security.
So, what is Obama doing? Not politics; not even Obama is that dumb. Instead, in his last year, Obama is trying to do all he can to “fundamentally transform” the US. And for what goals? Not equality for women. And not even for more votes for the Democrats. But for a good answer, there are some things we don’t understand. I suspect we will understand quite clearly from some bluntly written tell-all books in about 2017.
.
The Sec Navy had directed the Commandant of the US Marines to “get with the program” of integrating women into combat arms even though the Marines conducted a three year study and experiment that concluded it was inadvisable and would negatively impact unit cohesion, their combat mission, and encourage heavier casualties.
https://themusingsofthebigredcar.com/do-not-screw-with-the-us-marine-corps-marines-good-advice-for-enemies-and-friendlies-no/
No sale with Pres Obama, Sec Def, Sec Navy!
Sec Navy sens a memo and says, “…report back to me every three months on this important policy initiative.”
Not smart.
BRC
https://www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com