>>Besides the "incompetence" charge, dontcha get the feeling that Karpinski will wind up with charges longer than a Chinese Restaurant menu?<<
I would hope so, but you know the media will protect her. . .after all, she is in a “man’s world” and the man is trying to take her down.
>>We can thank Patsy Schroeder and Hitlery for their part in helping dismantle corp morale with their insistence that our combat Armed Forces be under the command of girls -- disrespect was bound to happen.<<
Indeed. It is wrong to place women in combatant roles, or roles that are too close to performing combatant duties. Why? Simple, because when they are placed in such situations they lose whatever feminine presence they have to become one of the boys.
They affect masculine traits of aggression. That is why you hardly ever see a feminine woman in the military. Hold on, I’m talking about combatant roles or roles like MPs. These women become “men.” They have to because those roles require aggression, not feminine traits. Combat and dealing with the enemy is not a situation where Oprah or Dr Phil are needed. Those are situations where Sgt Rock is needed. Even popular media recognizes they truth in what I am saying. . .though they would never admit it.
Consider a couple of typical examples; “Alien” movies and Captain Janeway from Star Trek. Alien movies have women performing as warriors and they act, speak and think as men. Capt Janeway has a rough, commanding male presence. In neither case are women feminine.
England wasn’t some impressionable young woman forced/tricked or somehow made to act the way she did. No. She wasn’t merely acting as one of the boys. . .she WAS one of the boys.
Sad.
It'll be very interesting to observe the dynamics of both the media's treatment of Karpinski, tone of questioning at any subsequent hearings, and remarks by liberal/female members of the Senate and Congress.
" It is wrong to place women in combatant roles, or roles that are too close to performing combatant duties. Why? Simple, because when they are placed in such situations they lose whatever feminine presence they have to become one of the boys.
They affect masculine traits of aggression. That is why you hardly ever see a feminine woman in the military. Hold on, I’m talking about combatant roles or roles like MPs...Those are situations where Sgt Rock is needed. Even popular media recognizes they truth in what I am saying. . .though they would never admit it. "
Without a doubt...
In the name of political expediency and the movement to eradication ALL tradition, common sense and nature have been tossed down the basement and arms twisted.
"England wasn’t some impressionable young woman forced/tricked or somehow made to act the way she did. No. She wasn’t merely acting as one of the boys. . .she WAS one of the boys.
It remains to be seen how she is "portrayed."
I'm betting she is made to be a victim in order to preserve and maintain the status quo of the Armed Service's ongoing "feminization" process, and liberal agenda.