Maj. Sarah Armstrong in men’s dress blues (The Army Times)

N.W. writes:

I’ve thought of writing a couple times recently, but every time I thought to write about some new assault on our freedom or some new disgrace it just felt like one more inevitable beat upon the tiresome drum of progress.

I thought to mention the article about sexual mores at Penn State where having anything more than a one-night stand is passé. I also thought about sending a post from Ms. about how the new tween girl cartoon “Monster High” rehashes all the same outdated ideas about femininity. I figured you’d already seen how mass murdering Islamic jihadists are the new cool, per Rolling Stone, and heard about the Tsaernevs’ teen and tweenie fan club.

As I said, I just didn’t see much point in writing to you concerning all of that tiresome agitprop.

However, I came across one piece today that was so predictable, and yet so amusingly original that I figured I’d pass it on: the United States Marines are looking for a few good “gender neutral” uniforms. Yes, you heard right. Apparently the Marine Corps, acting in accordance with highest traditions of the Naval Service, has decided to preempt the problem of transgender troops by issuing all Marines the same dress blues. Isn’t it so simple and yet so brilliant? I at first imagined it was so we could embrace the arrival of our transgendered brother and sisters (or sisters and brothers) with open, accepting arms. Upon second thought, I’m beginning to think it might be a strategy to lower the incidents of sexual harassment and assault. A lot of times the uniform is the only way you can tell “it” is a woman. Without that, all of us male Marines won’t know who the hell to assault. Brilliant. I’ve got to hand to General Amos. He knows how to locate, close with, and destroy every last trace of honor, pride and tradition in a once great American institution.

 Laura writes:

According to The Army Times article, many female Marines are concerned about whether the uniforms are flattering. But you would think they would want unflattering uniforms. Shouldn’t they strive to suppress any interest in themselves as women? Anyway, it seems that military uniforms are the only modest clothing for women out there.

We’re going to see fewer and fewer men who want to wear that uniform.

—- Comments —

Eric writes:

The Army was having trouble recruiting women way back in the 70s. When they conducted focus groups to find out why, they discovered that women found the Army uniforms to be unstylish and unattractive. After a redesign, recruitment rates improved.

Buck writes:

This perversion of the natural order; the radical social experiment bought into completely and now lead by our repugnant male military commanders, has to be being driven by a small number of radial feminist and lesbians. It has to be. Doesn’t it? But how? How do a small number of radical women and, uniformed homosexual males, get so completely into the heads of career military commanders? Where does their insidious power come from? What is it? What are these career military “men” now dedicated to?

U.S. Military commanders still sit atop the warrior food chain. How did they get there? What propelled them? Is every thing that they now do a conscious and deliberate career and political tactic; a part of their own, and somehow the collective, exit strategy? Each one of them has to know what it is that they trade-off. Is there one single patriot left in uniform?

I read the comments following the Marine Corps Times blog entry. It’s sickening. These are Marines? They sound like school kids arguing over changes to the marching band uniform. The range of thinking is, to say the least, not uniform. What does that tell us? The Marines represented by these comments reveal a muddle of confusion and diversity and ongoing conflict that is now encouraged. None of that is mission necessary, and it did not exist in the former Marine Corps. The Marines no longer have a mission. They will end. This silliness is more than embarrassing. “Semper Fi” is for me a lament.

N. W. writes:

Despite appearances, it is not a small cadre of homosexuals and hard core feminist which is destroying our military. They are, of course, useful implements to be used in the deconstruction of our military, but they are being wielded by revolutionaries who only wish to see the destruction of the West.

Gramsci proposed a march through all of a cultures institutions before the complete subversion of the government and that is exactly what has happened in America. The revolutionaries recognized that the historically conservative military would be a threat to their cause so they began to subvert our armed forces using the false equality of feminism as a tool to undermine the militaries cohesion, discipline and morale. In recent years, they have expanded this to include the homosexuals as well.

Our Armed forces Commander and Chief is a civilian, and at the end of the day it is civilians who inform the military of how things should be. Top brass and senior staff NCOs don’t get where they are by being tactless mavericks and most of them are pretty well aware of what civilian policies will have to be supported if they want to retire with a few stars on the collar. They know as well as any other hard-nosed cynic that things are going to end badly. However, they also know that the situation, for now at least, is manageable. Further on down the road, another ten or twenty years, maybe not so much, but by then, hell, not their problem, they will be out and enjoying their very generous retirement benefits. Essentially, their silence and acquiescence has been bought through the generous retirements Congress has voted for them.

As far as the men of our armed forces go, I’m very wary of all of those in non-combat arms positions simply because of the amount of dishonesty required to make it look like men and women serving creates no tensions or issues.

However, most infantrymen I know are still pretty well locked-on, good-to-go men and I credit this to the esprit de corps of a brotherhood of warriors. There are no lies occurring at the small unit level, no b.s. favoritism towards the cute new lance corporal in supply, no going on a ruck march with forty pound packs cause everyone knows the chicks are going to fall out other wise.

Unfortunately this masculine esprit de corps has been noticed by the powers-that-be and is already being set upon as a negative force within our enemy. General Dempsey recently identified all-male military units as one of the major contributing factor towards a culture of misogynism in our military which encourages and condones sexual harassment and assaults. In order to eradicate this threat to the good order and discipline of the military, Gen. Dempsey has recommended opening combat arms positions to women and effectively doing away with all male units — unisex geldings all around. Rot this deep in an edifice cannot be repaired, the only thing for it is to raze the structure and start over.

Please follow and like us: