Friday, January 30, 2015

Hey Superbowl!

"He did well, but he would have done much better if he had somebody with him who knew the score instead of all those crew-cut college boys in their silk suits."
Robert F. Kennedy, The Enemy Within

I don’t know who is playing. I don’t plan to pick up a 55 gallon drum of bean dip at Costco for my superbowl party.

I don’t care who wins. I don’t care what the score is. 

I don’t even care about the commercials because, well, commercials.

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Women Not in Combat

“‘Good-morning; good-morning!’ the General said
When we met him last week on our way to the line.
Now the soldiers he smiled at are most of ’em dead,
And we’re cursing his staff for incompetent swine.
‘He’s a cheery old card,’ grunted Harry to Jack
As they slogged up to Arras with rifle and pack.

. . .
But he did for them both by his plan of attack."
 - Siegfried Sassoon, The General

O good grief. If I weren’t past the age where estrogen makes me all “erratic” and shit, I’d be weeping at Fred’s post about Women in the Military.

Partly, because Fred is 100% right that women are often in pain. To this day, I am acquainted with increasing pain, and I hit menopause in the previous century. Apparently, men can function and perform whatever isn’t “light duty” better than women, because their external genitalia make them stronger. Never mind that real life – like real war – is somewhat more complicated.

Mostly though, I’d be weeping because Fred is clearly not alone in his – dare I call it misogynistic? – opinions and racist rants. I understand. Many people preoccupied with their masculinity and power can become a bit irrational when their spot atop the steep precipice of the social hierarchy is undermined from below.

My personal pre-menopause experience involved being a professional in a large bureaucracy. I was an attorney at a large research institution. Apart from the fact that all the attempts to do mortal harm to others in my workplace were metaphoric, we also didn’t have to carry wounded people around. While I lifted my share of heavy loose-leaf binders filled with bureaucratic rules over the years, I never had to apply a tourniquet. But my story bears an uncanny resemblance to that of The Menstruator. I’ll call myself The Post-Menstruator.

I spent my 30-year career being managed by both men and women, and managing both men and women. Unlike the guy with The Dismal Facts in Fred’s post (who retired in 1967) I’d say my anecdotal experience, having retired in 2003, was that the ratio of competence to incompetence was much more inversely proportional to pay grade than to gender. My work environment was relatively tolerant of gay people. Racism was so pervasive that you’d literally have to be blind not to notice it. But believe it or not: there was rampant sexism even before political correctness (almost certainly spread by menstruating women) put a curb on the worst abuses - before PC itself became a travesty of a mockery of a sham. I could, at least, use the ladies room without a buddy.

In my white collar world, where bravery, strength, aerobic capacity and upper body strength, were not factors, women were still not promoted based on intelligence, skill or leadership qualities; women were expected to work harder for less pay, and to make the coffee at meetings they attended.

Fred says women are more susceptible to fatigue? Are you fucking kidding me? Visit any group senior home – or survey your cohort – women live longer than men. Men succumb to the ills that flesh is heir to at greater rates and at younger ages than women. But why limit ourselves to facts?

If I may be permitted a few of my own unsupported claims like those in Fred's article above the section on The Dismal Facts: men complain louder, whine longer, become more needy as they age and expect their wives to do the heavy lifting of housekeeping long after all they do is manage to figure out how to pay their bills on line. In general, women are more stoic, more resilient, more capable than men as we age. I’ll even go so far as to suggest we possess these same advantages in our youth, but that might go against Fred’s inherently internal narrative.

Assuming Fred’s unsupported statement (quoted in previous post below) that sex erodes command authority is a fact, and his snarky rhetorical question about whether women would use sex to get what they want, is Fred implying that men don’t do precisely that? Seriously? And exactly whose fault is it that sex erodes authority? I’m guessing that’s not exclusively down to the girls either. Certainly in my non-military career I saw both sexes behaving badly. What eroded authority more than sex was incompetence in authority and the lack of respect that incompetence engendered among the rank and file.

With all due respect, I suggest we all drop the pretense that this whole women in combat argument is based on differences in physical strength or mood swings. It’s about men in power not wanting to let the girls into the game.

Which is exactly like it was in my professional workplace a generation ago, and like it is today in corporate offices, retail malls, and many marriages. This argument may take a while to become obsolete. After all, I’m not pretending we live in a “post-racial society”. Still, it’s hard for me to share Fred’s worry that the last bastions of military and corporate rule by white men are being overrun with people who aren’t their equals. But as the tide turns, posts like Fred’s seem to become more shrill and desperate. It’s almost unmanly.

Monday, January 26, 2015

Women in the Military: Then and Now

“And there are problems that one mustn't talk about. Menstruation, for example. Women often are in pain, they want light duty, and become erratic. Having men of low social class in authority over young women inevitably results in rape or behavior close to it, usually by black men. Women don't like to squat and pee around men, which can lead to absurd behavior--see below. Thirteen men in a squad will work together as a team; add a woman and they will all compete to get into her pants. Sex erodes command authority: Once Admiral Jones gets involved with Seaman Sally, it stops being, ‘Yessir, Admiral,’ and becomes ‘But Bob....’ Would women use sex to get what they want? No, never. Perish the thought.”

 If you have read the above quote and can’t quite get a grasp of where this guy is coming from, read his entire post. Apparently, women can’t be in combat because they menstruate. Or to use Fred’s words: A few* with truculence sometimes amplified by misspelling, have demanded supporting data.” The facts support the fact that men are generally physically stronger than women. Who knew?

* Presumably women who disagree with Fred’s unsupported statements.

The response below is from a female Army vet who washed out of OCS (with stress fractures) at the age of 35, and then spent three tours in Afghanistan as a civilian advisor stationed with a British unit in Helmand Afghanistan in 2011-12, followed by a year as a civilian conducting studies under DOD contract in Kabul. Let's call her The Menstruator

Holy fuck balls! With all due respect to those in the military in 1967, do let them know it is now 2015. I'm not trying to be cheeky - his understanding of integration and women problems is seriously out of date.

Twenty-nine out of 29 failed. I am sorry to read that. I can go find you 100 men who would also wash out. 100% of women have failed, but we all [should] know that's a small sample size. He won't get an NSF grant with those sorts of stats. It's just not compelling yet. It's also flat wrong to argue that women aren't capable of the 'guy stuff' that men are. Not only am I a female who menstruates, grew up playing with dolls, and sometimes cries at bad rom-coms, I am also twice the age of the male soldiers with whom I deployed, carried half my body weight, and kept up. I also was one of two females who carried a wounded soldier to a PEDRO. I didn't even cry. I can't remember if I was menstruating at the time...

I am a crappy runner. Nevertheless, I passed all Army PT tests even to the standards for males. Of course these tests were also easier the older the soldier is. Under his logic, anyone - male or female - should be discharged (honorably?) after age 30, because apparently all that matters is the ability to run and lift things and talk about boobies and shun menstruation. One of the many reasons I thought OCS as horrifying was that I watched people earn their butter bar because they could 1) run five miles in 45 minutes, and 2) yell.

That's all one has to do to be an officer in the USA these days. I'm not kidding. I watched smart people who can actually lead and think under pressure get out, or go enlisted because they couldn't stomach the nonsense. I understand why the Army has a tradition or rewarding people who can shout (and lift heavy things) rather than real leadership much better after reading this. There is more to the combat than cardiovascular capacity! I think we'd all agree that anyone on a patrol needs to be able to carry a mate to safety if necessary, and I assure you women can do that.

I say this having been in combat. I went on over 100 combat patrols in the most dangerous Districts and Province in Afghanistan, and have been in dozens of TICs, and have been IEDed 3 times, and not only was I not a drag to the non-menstruators around me, I was a force multiplier because I can carry rounds, and send them down range just as well as the boys. In fact, the Army's insistence that long distance running was key to combat effectiveness continuously proved wrong to me. What we needed out there was the ability to carry lots and lots of stuff on our backs at a 15 min/mile pace forever, all day, for weeks on end. Women can do that just fine! Occasionally shooting prompted us to sprint with that weight for cover, and we did that fine too. I've NEVER gone on a combat patrol and jogged! More importantly for combat effectiveness is what the Army calls "resilience," meaning the ability to see bad shit and continue the mission ("Charlie, Mike"). Women and men are susceptible to combat stress, PTSD, and all that other stuff. In fact, if we're looking at numbers here (selectively), I'd point out that far more men have PTSD than women, so perhaps men aren't up for combat?

I absolutely take issue with his characterization of women "looking cute" while men lifted things. I remember in BCT once a male soldier tried to help a female soldier with something, and the DS yelled at him, and reminded us that that dog don't hunt, because downrange we're all going to need to be up for that. The DS was right, and today I'm proud to say that my Army promoted women getting their shit together and learning to pull their own weight. While the Army still links physical fitness too much with leadership, in my opinion, they are right to emphasize that part of leadership is the ability to lead from the front (hence OCS' "Follow Me" slogan), and dudes in uniform are going to be less serious if their female OIC is leading from behind. Got it. It's still all possible.

It's strange to have done three deployments with an integrated Army, and read that apparently I was using sex and threats of false rape reports to further my career. The British Army has mixed accommodations; even the "ablution blocks" were mixed sex. Guess what: we all survived, and we weren't all shagging each other as much as Fred would have us think. His opinions don't change the fact that I was integrated, and carried my own weight (literally and metaphorically). Not only have I peed in front of guys, but because Helmand is so dangerous, I had to go announce to them I wanted to pee, ask the point man to barma the area (check for IEDs), and then have them stand guard around me so I could have 30 seconds to drop trou, have a wee, and not worry about getting shot. We showered in front of each other, we did laundry together, we ate together, and we shared accommodations, and it was professional. 

There is an intimacy to living together like that, but it's often not sexual. The thing they never told me in training is that the real intimacy comes with being with someone who is about to die, or has been terribly injured. One soldier I was on patrol with stepped on an IED and suffered a traumatic amputation of both legs. I went with him to the field hospital (SOP is that the first one with the soldier accompanies the injured bloke/bird to the hospital); months later his wife emailed me to ask if I'd had an affair with her husband. My point is that of all the intimacies troops experience, the most important one is not at all sexual. Troops also had lots of sex downrange, but they kept it discreet and out of the "office". In any event, the issues we face in combat have actually little to do with our potty parts, and much to do with our maturity, and I'd prefer to see my Army focus on the important parts of resilience and leadership. Yes, sex can erode command authority, but so does sexism. Of course I would say that, I'm a girl who sucks at running.

I don't see the military as he does. It is simply a fact now that because war is so weird and unconventional that women are in combat. Often I suppose these are logistics folks taking the mail out to FOBs or something like that. In any event, let's please stop pretending there is a FLET and everything is neat, and women can be sheltered in a green zone. That world has never existed in AFG, and I suspect it hasn't in Iraq as well. Moreover, I have not seen the presence of women, people of color, or gay people erode anything we did in Helmand. I believe that to a great extent, something can only "erode command" if leadership is weak. In other words, if troops are irritated to have women (or place any group here), then command needs to step up and create an ethos and environment in which it becomes workable (CW can speak to this much more than I). Easier said than done, I know, but it would be aided by having officers who have some charisma in addition to their ability to run 5 miles in 45 minutes.

It is interesting that he said "the brass are terrified of women." I believe that to be 100% true. I felt in the USA there was a big difference in experience, backgrounds, and just plain street smarts between CPTs and below and Majors on up (and similar split among enlisted ranks based on time in). The Army has its most highly educated junior ranks it has ever had in all its time. Additionally, Field Graded cut their teeth in Desert Storm 1. With all due respect to their 72 hour war, our war kicks their war's ass. What I'm getting at is that those with more time in are more socialized to buy into the argument that change is bad, and that women/gays/blacks/etc. are going to disrupt something sacred to the esprit de corps. In contrast, those in for 10 years or less (who had done most of the fighting) are less amenable to those arguments because we grew up with women/gays/blacks/etc.

I'm not intimidated by integration. Integration of women does not threaten the military. From my perspective, what threatens the military is that we are hemorrhaging smart and battle-tested CPTs who are keen to get out and going to a world that isn't so superstitious and resistant to change. What threatens our military is that we are given power in war, and treated like children in garrison. (It's true that in CONUS I needed a "battle buddy" to go pee. I agree it's nonsense.) What threatens our military is that it punishes those who seek better ways to fight a war that is unconventional - but please don't tell the field grades and generals that we're not fighting an enemy in uniform. Better they work on devising new PT tests that even girls can pass.


Thanks for the interesting read!

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

The Former Drunkard

I will walk the streets up
And I’ll walk the streets down.
I will see the fine ladies
Dressed in their silk gowns.
With my elbows all out
And my breeches without knees
You are the biggest vagabond that e’er I did see.
-      -  Steeleye Span, The Drunkard.

I used to sing this song to my child as a lullaby to put her to sleep when she was small. No wonder she has “issues”. What was I thinking? I had a completely unhelpful heart operation to straighten out my irregular hear rhythm. I can’t drink or have more than 3 potato chips without breaking out in flop sweat as my pulse races up to the low 140s, sometimes for days. Which sucks, but which I suppose is only fair given how I messed up the kid by singing such sick lullabies.

My Wikipedia page would read like Alice in Wonderland, except I don’t have a Wikipedia page. And this place is to Wonderland as a circus clown car is to a suitcase that fell out of a plane. By which I mean, non sequitur, yo.

Instead of taking a Viking Rhine River cruise like most retired boomers at this point in their smug lives, I’m thinking of taking a road trip this year, only I’ll call it a lecture tour. The 2015 Motel Six Philosophy of Disappointment Tour.  

My mission statement for 2015 is not going to be “suck it, bitches” because that didn’t work out so well for me in ’14. Perhaps “Less carbs, more gummy bears”?  Or: My life blows so much that I put the air in despair. Need to work on that: a little more redemption and a little less gloom.

For the new year, I usually try to re-do my “about” page to make my life more interesting. Each year, this becomes more of an exercise in distinguishing my real life from that imaginary life down the rabbit hole, past the orange marmalade jar, and into the land where I hop rides on passing trains and travel with benevolent hobos to quaint and colorful places where I can depend entirely on the kindness of strangers.

Each year it becomes more of an exercise in ignoring the Elephant of Cognitive Dissonance in the room that looms between my drab actual life and the imaginary and vibrant life I had always intended to lead. I think this year I’ll survive the coming apocalypse by finding a nice quiet bunker filled with gummy bears and books I’ve been meaning to read. I joined a gym and I already feel better, so that’s good, right?

My backstory needs some more color too. As a recently widowed crone, whose dearly beloved passed out of my life and into assisted living in 2013, but who didn’t die until last month, I’m having trouble saying things like how I miss his support when something goes wrong with the infrastructure of this old house/yard. I mean, I can say such things, because shit is always going wrong here at the Fortress of Attitude. But it’s hard to say it with a straight face.

I at least have the deadly serious lesson learned from his death: you have to re-arrange your memories in non-chronological order in order to grieve properly. The man I married was a wonderful person, and it makes me very sad he’s gone. But he’s been long gone. The sick old man who died was a shell of that wonderful man. Too bad – so sad, as my sister once said.


So that happened. At least we got to say goodbye.

Saturday, November 01, 2014

Scarcely Incredible

When you have heard all my adventures, you will understand what trials and vicissitudes I have had to undergo to reach the felicity of this palace; you will realize that I have had to purchase the wealth which sustains my age with strange and terrible labors, with calamities, misfortunes and hardships that are scarcely credible
 - The Tale of Sinbad the Sailor, from 10,000 Nights and 1 Night.

Brisket and onions are making love in the slow cooker; infusing the house with the smell of comfort food. I just finished my coffee. It rained last night. It rained so loud I woke me up. So loud.

But it was just a shower. I remember days when it rained all day. There have been a few tiny passing showers since then. The rain gauge was just emptied and washed yesterday, so half an inch of rain in 24 hours. That practically constitutes the deluge.The sun is out. 

Like the landscape, I am not sustained by great wealth. But our wealth is modest and adequate. Like our health. I got a bargain in terms of the price I paid in calamities, misfortunes and hardships to get here today. Unless you happen to appreciate the fact that I’ve been without an icemaker in my fridge for several weeks. Incredible, right?

Today is bourbon and popcorn Saturday. The hard cherry cider is in the fridge. The popped art (get it?) that I make using my air-popper and season with white truffle oil and black truffle salt awaits. Somehow, I’ll survive the vicissitudes of not having my iceless cocktail. 

My palace houses a few good books, basic cable TV, and a cat for my lap. Life is good.

Monday, October 27, 2014

We Understand Your Need to Question Everything

"All the world is made of faith, and trust, and pixie dust."
- J. M. Barrie, Peter Pan

The Frequently Asked Questions on the Peter Pan Peanut Butter website begins with the title of this post, but in a cool whimsical font that seems to imply a wink that you're a hip badass rebel who questions corporate authority, and they like that about you.


Trans fatty acids are formed when vegetable oils are made either into a room-temperature solid or into a more stable liquid during a process called hydrogenation. Peanut butter stabilizers contain hydrogenated oils, but are used in such small quantities that they have little nutritional impact. According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's regulations for nutrition labeling, Peter Pan Peanut Butter contains zero grams of trans fat per serving."

Turns out for all us badass hip rebels, the actual FDA provisions for claims regarding trans fatty acids leave some greasy wiggle room.

FDA's regulation for nutrition labeling of Trans fats states, if the total fat in a food is less than 0.5grams (or ½ gram) per serving, and no claims are made about fat, fatty acids, or cholesterol content, Trans fat does not have to be listed on the label..."

So, the correct answer to FAQ #6 would be "Yes. Yes it does."

So, while Peter Pan Peanut Butter totally gets your need to question everything, They understand they don't have a need to answer everything.

Dear Letter of The Law,
Piss off.
Fondly, A Consumer

Dear FDA,
Thanks for having my back wrt/ nutritional labeling about trans fats. Also, pixie dust.
Fondly, A Disillusioned Cynic

Thanks for having my back wrt/ nutritional labeling about trans fats. Also, pixie dust.

(Picture credit: The Duet, Dorothy Wheeler)

Wednesday, October 22, 2014

Ten Kinds of Facebook Posts That Suck

  1. Posts (like this one) that list X number of things that promise to explain Something Important because life’s wisdom doesn’t come in the form of numbered lists.
  2. Posts that demand, “share this if you agree” because mostly I don’t agree. 
  3. Similarly, but slightly different, posts that demand I comment if I agree because shut up. 
  4. Posts that are pictures with pithy clichés added as captions to pictures that are clichés - except those that involve giving zero fucks. 
  5. Suggested Posts that are commercials, because I have more of them than I have posts from friends. I already know I need better friends and don’t need to be reminded. 
  6. Shared posts with embedded videos and headlines that end with “… you’ll never believe what happens next” because I have an actual life that is filled with such surprises thanks to my diminishing short term memory skills. 
  7. Posts that are tests to determine what type of fossil I am, or what pre-packaged frozen food item I am, or how much I would care if my neighbor’s children were attacked by a pack of wolves. 
  8. Quotes by celebrities about important things they have no expertise in - even Leonardo DiCaprio - because just because you’re famous or gorgeous doesn’t mean I should care what you think about a subject on which you have no legitimate expertise. 
  9. Passive aggressive posts intended to put somebody in their place without naming names because, seriously? 
  10. Posts arguing either side of matters involving global warming and vaccinations because, science, people. Those trains have sailed. And in a similar vein, posts that state political opinions of people I thought I liked but now find to be simpletons. 
  11. And finally, I don't like numbered lists that have titles telling you how many items are on the list.