!CAUTION!  

YOU ARE IN A "VERBAL SHRAPNEL" RICH DOMAIN



4 May 2010


The Butter-Cutter On Women In Submarines



It had been awhile since my last visit to the virtual Mess Hall and The Butter-Cutter, so I decided to drop by and say, “Hello.”


“There y'are!” he shouted, “I been wonderin' what happened ta ya.”


“I have been very busy,” I said in answering.


“How about that shit? The Spear-Chuckers finally got somethin' right by decidin' ta put Hos on subs!”


“Yes, it does continue the Navy's effort to give females equality in our Sea Service,” I said.


“Equality? This ain't about equality. This is about them Bubbleheads livin' off Sea-Pussy since forever 'n' now they gonna get some real pussy!” The Butter-Cutter intoned.


“ 'Sea- . . . ' what? What are you talking about?” I asked in wonder.


“Sea-Pussy, Man, Mother Palm 'n' Her Five Daughters! What the f*** ya think them Dudes been doin' under water fer all them months on patrol . . . TAKIN' COLD SHOWERS?” he barked back.


“You don't understand. These are professional . . .”


“I don't understand? No, MAN! YOU don't understand!” he said in cutting me off. “After a few weeks away from their Ladies, they're all walkin' around with non-professional stiff dicks! Think back a hundred years when you had a dick that was more than just a hose fer pissin' through! Dicks got minds o' their own 'n' them Spear-Chuckers are finally gonna recognize them Bubbleheads' dicks like they did fer their Swabby buddies on the surface.” 


“WHAT? Are you saying that the United States Navy put women on ships to satisfy the sexual desires of their male sailors?” I asked The Butter-Cutter in shock.


“SPOT ON!” he answered. “What do Bitches bring ta a ship's crew that the crew didn't have before?  Pussies, that's what! That means the Swingin' Dicks don't gotta wait 'til the ship docks ta get laid! Like I said, the Spear-Chuckers got it right this time.”


“What a horrible thing to say about women serving in the Navy. Why . . .”


“Whoa, Man,” he interjected again. “Way back when, Senator Webb said, 'Women Can't Fight.' So, if they can't fight, what can they do in the Service? They can SCREW! That's what! Hey! Webb was even the Secretary of Navy Spear-Chuckers. So, he oughtta know!” The Butter-Cutter said with conviction.


“Senator Webb disavowed that Washingtonian article entitled, “Women Can't Fight.”  In any case, he NEVER said that women in the Armed Forces were there to serve as sexual outlets for their male counterparts,” I said in correcting him.


“No screamin' shit! He 'disa . . '--whatever the f*** ya said--the article when he was runnin' fer the Senate in Virginia. That was just political shuckin' 'n' jivin' he learned from his leader Obummer ta get elected. HE WROTE IT! HE PUBLISHED IT! HE SAID IT AT THAT NAVY OFFICER FACTORY! 'N', HE EVEN CALLED THE HOS THERE, 'THUNDER THIGHS'! MAN, THERE AIN”T NO IFs, ANDs, OR F*** YOUs ABOUT IT: HE MEANT IT!” The Butter-Cutter said in an ever-louder voice. 


I tried to change the direction of this converstion by saying, “That is all ancient history. The current Secretary of the Navy has said, 'We literally could not run the Navy without women today,' ” I answered.


“Yeah, sure, 'n' they can't run the freakin' Navy with 'em. In 2008, five-times as many Bitches got kicked-out fer pregnancy than Faggots and Faggettes together.”


“Hold on now! That was in the entire Armed Forces and not just the Navy!” I corrected The Butter-Cutter.


“OK, then. How about them that get pregnant at sea and are sent ta Shore Duty. Some o' the Naval Bases in Norfolk got so many transferred Swelled-Bellies on Limited Duty er No-Duty, they can't accomplish their fightin' missions. Them f***in' Naval Bases oughtta be re-named, 'Naval Incubators.' Now, FORMER Intelligence Officer, what the Secretary o' Navy Spear-Chuckers must o' meant when he said that they can't run the Navy without 'em is that the Navy needs 'em ta accomplish their f***in' mission! So, whose shittin' who?” he shot back.


I had to grit my teeth and compose myself before answering, “OK! Women get pregnant. That still does not mean women are in Armed Forces for the pleasure of the men.”


“My achin' Maggot ass! You don't understand diddly squat! How d'ya think that pregnant shit happens? It happens when MEN ARE GETTIN' PLEASURE! Now, them Bubbleheads are gonna get some o' that Thunder Thigh pleasure!” he said.


“I have about had it with you!” I shot back. “This story is all about the Navy giving equality for women. Your base, if not crude, characterizations are indicative of your manifest failure to understand the profoundly moral and ethical imperatives driving this initiative.”


The Butter-Cutter stared at me for a moment. Then, he shook his head side-to-side and said, “Maaaan, this ain't no equality story. This is a F*** STORY! WAKE UP!”   


I turned and left the virtual Mess Hall without responding. "A 'F*** STORY' indeed," I thought as I walked out.



Semper INDEED A F*** STORY!


Anthony F. Milavic

Major USMC (Ret.)  


HITS:


WADDAYA THINK?

(24)

LC said:   May 10th, 2010 11:05 am

Chuck Myers says below, "Create an all female fighter squadron and an all female ship or submarine." Right on



MOMUSMC1 said:   May 8th, 2010 9:50 pm

SgtMaj Jack Du Bois, USMC (Ret) said: May 8th, 2010 7:11 pm Just want to say "Bless you MOMUSMC 1" Best and most true words I have heard in a long time. Semper delighted THANK YOU VERY MUCH SGT. MAJ. JACK DU BOIS. SHARON, USMC MOM OF 2 SONS

SgtMaj Jack Du Bois, USMC (Ret) said:   May 8th, 2010 7:11 pm

Just want to say "Bless you MOMUSMC 1" Best and most true words I have heard in a long time. Semper delighted 

MAJUSMCRET said:   May 8th, 2010 12:37 pm

The Butter-Cutter's reference to the large number of sailors becoming pregnant on float and then, by regulation, being transferred to Stateside shore duty prompts a recollection. A number of years ago, several Naval Aviators visited a Roundtable I attend at the Ft. Myer Officer's Club in Virginia. They had recently returned from a deployment and came to relate that ALL female members of their squadron, officers and enlisted alike, became pregnant and were returned to the States early. It was their consensus view that most, if not all, these pregnancies occurred deliberately in order to escape the deployment. In any case, naval ships and squadrons do not enjoy a great deal of redundancy in their complement of highly technical personnel and all losses impact the accomplishment of their missions. In spite of submariner's habit of cross-training personnel, such losses would appear also to have a debilitating and even dilatory effect on a sub's mission: How does an SSBN on submerged patrol off-load a pregnant crew member without surfacing and interrupting its patrol? 

Chuck Myers said:   May 8th, 2010 11:58 am

Dutch White is on target but I'd like to expand. Thee decades ago I was asked by an Admiral Fighter Pilot how I felt about the introduction of girls into the realm of carrier based TACAIR. Re capability, I pointed out that our National Acrobatic Champion was Patty Wagstaff, a beautiful young woman, ergo, can they fly? You bet!! I flew with a couple of WASPs during WWII; they were superb. Re being effective members of a combat organization I said: "There are some really good women basketball players. Lets pick a couple of the best looking and put them on the Chcago Bulls. I predict that within three months, the team will come apart. The presence of pretty girls will destroy unit cohesion. Our big blunder is forced "coed" organizations, including grade and highschools. Men just can't handle the situation (me included). The Russians broke the code: in WWII, on the Easternn Front (a REAL WAR), they employed a number of completely female TACAIR regiments which performed equal to or better than the male regiments. Want to run an experiment (JCTD)? Create an all female fighter squadron and an all female ship or submarine. I'm betting on the girls. For a reference read: "A Dance With Death" by Nagle, Univ Texas Press. PS: send your sons to a non-coed school.

momusmc1 said:   May 7th, 2010 6:06 am

I know a lot of woman that can do a lot of jobs and are good at what they can do, but I don't agree about women on subs. Somehow and somewhere men have lost the respect for a women and women have lost the respect of themselves. If men think only of having sex with a woman and not working together, this truly has become a sad world. Also women and men giving in too easily for self pleasure, what have we all become. Very sad. A time and place for everything and truly NOT ON A SUB. WOMAN CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR. 

Powder said:   May 6th, 2010 12:43 pm

The statutory prohibition against women serving on naval ships has already been invalidated under the equal protection component of the fifth amendment, as has an all-male military draft registration plan. In the draft registration case, Rostker v. Goldberg, which the United States Supreme Court has agreed to review, the Government attempted to justify the exclusion of women by arguing that the presence of large numbers of women would hamper military flexibility in time of mobilization. Soundly rejecting this, the district court pointed to testimony by the Director of the Selective Service System and representatives of the Department of Defense that the inclusion of women in the pool of those eligible for induction would increase, not decrease, military flexibility. In view of the current standard for scrutinizing sex-based classifications under existing constitutional law, the steadily expanding utilization of women in the military, the recognition that women in the military enhance our national defense, and the fact that Congress has the power today to draft women, it is likely that the issue of the all-male draft will soon become moot. The U.S. Supreme Court could establish this if it affirms the district court's decision in Rostker v. Goldberg that an all-male registration plan is invalid under the Constitution's equal protection clause. In any event, however, the application of the ERA is clear: women may not be excluded from the pool of individuals eligible for a military draft solely on the basis of gender. TAKE AWAY: America's military needs the human capital & our cold-warriors need to understand this fact. 

John said:   May 6th, 2010 12:26 pm

H.W. (Bill) Buss not withstanding...I have THREE beautiful daughters. If any one of them wanted to join the Navy (and not the Marines), reluctantly, I'd be alright with their decision. But Heaven forbid! That they'd want to become submariners?!!! I'd yank their chains so hard that their ears would ring so loudly that they'd get the message. No subs for you young lady!!! There are many good reasons that historically women were not allowed on ANY sea going naval vessel. The PC crowd has totally screwed up on surface ships...please not sub surface ships too!!! 

Momusmc1 said:   May 5th, 2010 9:59 pm

I have two sons that are retired Marines and I raised two daughters and another son. No matter how you raise your sons or daughters they are human and have feelings and being out to sea wheather six months or a year this is no place for woman, especially if a woman gets preg. This world is going nuts with equal rights. Men are men and woman are woman and I truly believe it should stay that way. If woman want to do mens jobs in the military then get some balls and if men think they want to be women and do their jobs then get some implants. etc . etc. etc. So woman stay out of our mens way and let them do their jobs.

RJI said:   May 5th, 2010 10:44 am

Bravo Zulu to the BC and his courageously politically incorrect humor and commentary. Soon the challenge regarding diversity, multiculturalism and other social engineering will be gone from our forces at,under or over the sea...we will replace all the humanoids or at least most of them with UAVs and Robots...which will all have a PC correct number of multicolor paint jobs and decals representing various forms of human genitalia, skin color, etnicity etc.. We will be victorious and our Orwellian society will be at rest.

H. W. (Bill) Buss said:   May 5th, 2010 9:31 am

There are probably male personnel who think like this and I hope someone slaps them up side their heads. I raised a beautiful and intelligent daughter and if she had wanted to enlist in the Navy and train for nuclear subs, I would resent anyone assuming she did it just so she could screw all the guys on the boat.

T Constantine said:   May 5th, 2010 9:23 am

Submarines have small passage ways. Two parties travelling in opposite directions are required to face one anoyher to allow ech to pass unless their is an open hatch to duck into. No just imagine some very nice JG, Lt or 3rd class traversing these narrow passage ways. Any one guess how many times she will be inadvertently touched by a male sailors ICBM as that pass face to face. The possibilitys of sexual harrassment are limitless. Gates and his crowd of politucal sycophants should be required to get underway in a fast attack submarine for one week. I think they would sing a different tune afterward.

USMCRET said:   May 4th, 2010 7:46 pm

Apparently overlooked in this installment of the Butter Cutter is his comparison of homosexuals to pregnant personnel who were discharged from the Armed Forces in 2008. He echoes the DoD statistic that five times as many pregnant women were discharged for pregnancy than homosexuals in 2008. Curiously, the numbers of homosexuals being lost to DADT is being argued as an unacceptably expense. Yet, DoD now wants to increase females in the Navy--aboard submarines--which will evidently increase the female pregnancy/discharge rate; i.e., the loss of five times plus as many women due to pregnancy over homosexuals is an acceptable loss. Does anyone else detect a DoD hypocrisy here? Or, in the words of the Butter Cutter, "This is a F*** Story!" 

MSgt. Marshall Schiller, USMC (Ret) said:   May 4th, 2010 4:10 pm

The Butter Cutter gets it. Why can't the Spear Chuckers understand?

Dutch White, Mustang Capt. USMC (Ret) said:   May 4th, 2010 12:39 pm

I have always believed that women in combat roles, or even close to combat roles, have normally caused their male counter-parts to become less effective. It is the nature of the beast. It is what male Marines (and Sailors) do. That is just the way it is, as they hang around the females with their tongues hanging out for a good portion of the day at work, competing for the females attention. I have gotten pissed off on a number of occasions during the 1970s and early to mid-1980s because I knew there was very little I could do about the situation, even in my own S-2/3 office aboard Camp Pendleton. I am glad I retired when I did in 1985 after almost 28 years on active duty. I feel sorry for all the now senior Staff NCOs and senior field grade officers who I trained back in those days, that have to now put up with the problems this new "combat roles for women" scenario has unleashed upon our glorious Corps and Navy. Just my two cents .... 

Norm "Frenchy" LaFountaine said:   May 4th, 2010 11:48 am

THAT"S IT !!! I've got it!! A female Sub driver hit the fucking OIL RIG ! PC demands that it be blamed on a foreign entity! DAMN! What took me so long to figure it out ??!! What better place for a female than in a big tube full of seamen? Sorry, Today is just one of those days! I'm a bad boy !! 

dave spetrino, Capt, USN (ret) said:   May 4th, 2010 9:04 am

Tony, Your Butter Cutter was outrageous... (ly) funny. Of course, it is unfair to the dedicated women who have served with distinction, but the Love Boats and loss of productivity certainly provide a hard-to-overcome image of women in the sea service (and other services) 

Gunny G said:   May 4th, 2010 7:31 am

the usurper/aka recently referred beck and rush to a lefty/marxist website; the bc should be put on distribution to all these lib sites just to keep 'em "motivated" Gunny G *****

Tiresias said:   May 4th, 2010 5:09 am

The Butter Cutter is too cautious in his predictions. This is just the beginning. Someone remembered how Rome fell, and then recognised unbridled sexual licentiousness as the most effective weapon for his aims. Just wait until participation in orgy parades becomes compulsory (refusal to join such team games being deemed evidence of unacceptable sexual discrimination).

Al said:   May 4th, 2010 12:29 am

Generally, they are a pain in the ass! Can you imagine a boat having to put into port to disembark a PG woman? Will the pill be mandatory?

capnbill said:   May 3rd, 2010 11:20 pm

My son, the squid, leading torpedoman on two fast attack boats sez, "I don't need no damn woman in here, screwing up my entire operation"!!!!!

Robin Rebhan said:   May 3rd, 2010 10:08 pm

Well! The Butter Cutter warned'em!

D Shea said:   May 3rd, 2010 9:36 pm

Women on Subs, Military Gay Agenda, SEALS on trial for giving a terrorist a bloody nose and politicians trying to crucify Marines for defending themselves in combat to gain political advantage.....Yeah!! I believe the North Koreans could take out an Oil Well off LA too!!!

Bert said:   May 3rd, 2010 9:27 pm

Butter Cutter really gets down to basics.