M.B. Dallocchio's Blog

Lioness hunters conclude unnecessary slaughter with bro-tastic high-fives and glamour shots
Persistent attacks on female combat veterans is nothing new. However, I was greeted this morning with yet another microaggression by a former IAVA darling who uses the pseudonym “Gary Owen” on social media and apparently progressive platforms.

In an exchange of words via Twitter in both tweets and direct messages, Gary Owen recommended reading the following articles to “think critically” about female-based programs used on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan such as Team Lioness, Female Engagement Teams (FET), and Cultural Support Teams (CST):

1. Evaluating Female Engagement Team Effectiveness in Afghanistan - Anna C. Coll (Master's Thesis)
2. Seeking out their Afghan sisters Female Engagement Teams in Afghanistan - Sippi Azarbaijani-Moghaddam (Chr. Michelsen Institute - CMI)
3. Woman to Woman in Afghanistan - Ann Jones (The Nation)


Before diving into the articles, and to have a bit of fun with those who thrive on discrediting women's capabilities, we're going to play a game of Your Logical Fallacy .  Parts of the articles or thesis statements will be used to piece together contradictions or largely unaddressed issues that somehow end up being the fault of military women.  All of the above articles are written by women.  We'll get to internalized oppression at a later time, but now let's take a look at the articles and their logical fallacies.



Article 1
Anna C. Coll dives into her Master's thesis for Wellesley with a spear-gun aimed at Female Engagement Teams in Afghanistan.  Coll attempts to discredit the efficacy of FET through the lack of assessment of what really is highly subjective qualitative data.  Coll's assessment/logic model is, simply:

Engagement Influence among women and through womenDecrease in the strength of the insurgency
First, engagement can be measured in numbers of contact, but the "essential" measure of quality and influence is highly subjective and an obvious flaw in this particular attempt at acquiring and analyzing qualitative data. Such data limitations include:


Research quality is heavily dependent on the individual skills of the researcher and more easily influenced by the researcher's personal biases and idiosyncrasies.Rigor is more difficult to maintain, assess, and demonstrate.The volume of data makes analysis and interpretation time consuming.It is sometimes not as well understood and accepted as quantitative research within the scientific community.The researcher's presence during data gathering, which is often unavoidable in qualitative research, can affect the subjects' responses.Issues of anonymity and confidentiality can present problems when presenting findings.Findings can be more difficult and time consuming to characterize in a visual way.
Determining a relationship between the quality of interactions during FET and any decrease of insurgent activity is not only difficult, but Coll's model discounts out a number of dependent variables that could be included (e.g. male contribution to the decrease in insurgent activity).  Coll's assessment model, in short, is over-simplified.  In spite of receiving data from Marine Corps and Army FET reports, her efforts at minimizing FET success appear to be heavily rooted in her desire for her hypothesis to be true rather than drawing any objective conclusions.

However, it wasn't Coll's flimsy assessment/logic model that caught my attention most, it was her use of Jessica Lynch to downplay women's efficacy in combat:

"“If females are captured it would be a PR disaster,” one noted. Both sources also pointed to the level of resource expenditure that would be needed to respond to such a scenario, alluding to the example of Army Private First Class Jessica Lynch’s rescue by elite Special Operations Forces after her capture by Iraqi forces during the U.S. invasion in 2003."

The Jessica Lynch argument is often used to undermine women in combat, and often those that use this argument conveniently leave out SPC Shoshana Johnson and the other male POWs who were captured around the same time as PFC Lynch.  Johnson, who also wrote a memoir covering her capture, believes "the military's ban on women in combat jobs was absurd, because women are already in combat, fighting alongside men—but without the recognition or the promotions to top jobs."  Now that the ban has been lifted, who are we still listening to, Coll or Johnson?  And don't expect someone like Coll to even bother mentioning Lori Ann Piestewa.   The capture of black female soldiers or killing of Native female soldiers who fired their weapons is apparently not worth the mention, but the dramatic rescue of a white female soldier is.

Your Logical Fallacy, Coll: Fallacy-Fallacy and Burden of Proof
Sure, there's limited empirical data available on how the FET program may or may not be decreasing insurgent activity, but concluding it as not "successful" makes for a poor argument.  The vague and poorly-constructed logic model was no help either.   It simply means that if there is no sufficient research present and if we're discounting anecdotal evidence, nothing can be concluded.  If the proper research assessment practices are lacking, the issue is unsuccessful research practices - not women participating in combat operations.  The burden of proof does not fall on FET but quite possibly with researchers looking to complete their thesis or dissertation.  I'd personally say DOD should be tracking this, but Coll makes an excellent point and should implement her proposed research practices.  However, her bias shines through in cherry-picking her sources and discounting pertinent narratives as well.

Article 2
Sippi Azarbaijani-Moghaddam - or Sepi as spelled in her LinkedIn profile - goes on to make several contradictions in her working paper for CMI.  There is some subtle snark embedded throughout the paper and it's quite clear she is not pro-FET, but also points out key factors working against both FET and Afghan women.  In the end, we want to see both groups become successful, right?  This doesn't appear to be the case.

"Using primary sources this report critically examines the assumptions upon which the concept of FETs was based and the lack of substantive outcomes between 2010 and 2012 as FETs strove to engage women. It also touches on FETs’ struggle to be perceived as useful by male colleagues and their efforts to influence Afghans. It shows how promoters of the programme continued citing FET achievements, without any indicators to evaluate or measure progress or success. Moreover, the report shows that in pursuit of results following the new counter-insurgency orthodoxy, when conceiving and operationalizing the FETs the military largely ignored decades of accumulated knowledge and institutional memory on women and gender programming available in the aid community. Starting from a low baseline, the FETs were easily manipulated by Afghans with experience of three decades of relief and development interventions prior to the arrival of well-intentioned young military personnel in their area."

Aaaaaand here we go.  FETs were undermined by men, manipulated by Afghans, and have no clear measure of success.  What we can conclude from this paragraph alone is that a) patriarchy exists, even in America, b) she thinks FETs were gullible in general and, c) the burden of proof for FET success somehow falls back on the FETs themselves by further degrading the program throughout the NGO paper.

" Similar considerations had led to the use of female personnel by the US Marine Corps USMC) in Iraq under the so-called Lioness Programme."

Anytime I see "so-called Lioness" inserted into a female combat veteran-specific paper or article, I cringe.  I cringe over the fact, especially if this is said by a woman, that such language and comments will only be used as fuel to further torch women veterans.  Often authors of articles or working papers like this sidestep and undermine programs like Lioness simply because they are looking to achieve a common and openly-accepted objective, demeaning female combat veterans.

"[Skepticism] was expressed as to how such groups could be fielded, how efficacious they would
actually be and whether danger would be posed to the women involved. To the few familiar with
women’s issues in Afghanistan, the idea appeared as another publicity stunt with Afghan women. It was feared that it would involve badly trained and misguided but well-intentioned young, foreign
military women who would be sent out to bother Afghan families, while their male superiors in the
military would eventually be disappointed by the lack of substantive results."

A well-articulated bias about how she expected these "foreign women" to fail.  No sugar-coating here.  Points for not bothering to conceal internalized oppression!  However, I found her condescension regarding FETs interesting, especially when she expressed malcontent over how the US military manipulated FETs for achieving its objectives.

"Afghan men and women use the sophistication honed over hundreds of years of living in risky environments to avoid doing much of what the FETs want to do and know. FET engagements were, for the most part, skilfully diverted by Afghans into the quagmire of superficial chitchat on day to day life or small-scale projects and never reached the ambitions of COIN proponents. Afghans manipulated the FETs with gracious ease – the influencing roles were reversed. Sometimes their efforts were too blatant, for example, locals bargaining with the US Marines for money, claiming that the insurgents offered greater benefits. In one case a woman took a FET with her to the District Governor (DG) and asked him to build a well next to her home, to which the DG agreed. The FET recorded this as a success. In fact, the woman used the FETs as a lever to ensure that the DG could not deny her request for fear of loss of face, but this was lost on the young FET soldier."

"Simultaneously culture and the people who bear it became instrumentalized for military purposes as ‘influencers’ and conduits for messages. In tandem with efforts to engage them as people, Afghans, particularly women and children, were depicted as dehumanized ‘texts’, with the ability to ‘read’ them potentially critical to survive in a hostile environment (Commander’s Guide 2011). At times, the manipulative intent behind the FETs was explicit, as in this report: 

The direction to keep FETs out of direct combat has occasionally resulted in overcautious deployment and loss of valuable engagement opportunity…If FET is desired during a cordon and search, this should be supported and deployment should be early enough to capitalise on ‘shock of capture’ very soon after compounds are entered and searching is going on. During such ops, it may be preferable for a FET from another CF [Coalition Force] to be employed in order that follow-op FET ops in the AOR [Area of Responsibility] are not unduly compromised (on the `good cop, bad cop' principle: where the in-place FET is the good cop); however FET linguists may be able to provide reassurance and therefore a positive perception of the FET on these occasions which may allow further future engagement. (TFH Influence Team Report on FETs).

The quote demonstrates that the military were willing to go to great lengths to achieve their goals, even trying to benefit from the trauma of forced entry into private homes to take advantage of women’s unbalanced states to elicit information."

I hate to break the news to you, but from Team Lioness to FET to CST, these programs were all designed to manipulate the civilian population.  Every soft power move or intelligence gathering action is a manipulation of some sort.  Why does the author suddenly become naive about the war for these brief moments?  But when Afghans manipulate, they're lauded as "masters" as indicated by Azarbaijani-Moghaddam.  Biased?  I'd certainly say so.  But she also raises quite a few highlights over gender roles that could support both arguments in favor of Afghan women in-country as well as female US soldiers.

"As a result, FETs should not be presented as ISAF’s answer to ‘doing gender’, for implementing
UNSC Resolution 1325 in Afghanistan, or as a woman-only contingent handling ‘women’s stuff’.
There is a requirement for a realistic understanding of women’s involvement in peace processes,
currently dominated by men pushing their requirements forward. The requisite is for practical options to support women within realistic timeframes, not rapid military ones based on deployment cycles, demonstrating quick fix success to fast-track promotion."

No, FETs are not the sole answer, neither are quick-fix solutions.  But the problems surrounding FETs appear to be a similar issue with Afghan women: they lack support or any clear, empowered role.  Yet this is also defined as being the fault of women in FETs, but not the fault of Afghan women.  Funny how that patriarchy happens, and the cannibalizing ensues.  While Azarbaijani-Moghaddam's bias is quite apparent, I can see why she would be in favor of degrading FETs if she is attempting to protect Afghan women from potentially unqualified personnel mishandling cases, but men are not exactly criticized either for their failures in Afghanistan.  Women as a population are just the smaller, more convenient target for displaced rage.


Your Logical Fallacy, Azarbaijani-Moghaddam: Composition Division and Ad Hominem
While I don't doubt that some FETs were not properly vetted or prepared for work with the Afghan population, it doesn't mean that it applies to all FETs.  Furthermore, the failures of males are completely discarded from the discussion for any comparison in cultural mishaps.  Assuming that all FETs are simply gullible was, no doubt, a simple ad hominem remark.


Article 3
Ann Jones contends that female soldiers in FET were not trained, but trained by men, then messed up Afghanistan some more.  Let's take a look at some of the highlights of her article for The Nation.


"The military officially maintains the fiction that women are excluded from combat, so Army FET organizers have to recruit volunteers among the women in "soft" skill jobs on base—women soldiers the Army hasn’t trained in the "hard" skills of combat soldiering."

You're right on the Army upholding fiction, but the reality is that women are being utilized in combat operations then discarded as though either nothing happened or that they were worthless.  Jones is erring on the side of worthless throughout the article.  This is the trouble with this brand of fiction.  It's sheer convenience and old patriarchal hat, which is a greater slap in the face coming from someone of the same gender.  As for Jones' claim that the Army only taught women "soft" skills and not the "hard" skills of combat?  Wow, I must've been terribly misled in Basic Training -  and every-f*cking-thing else I was trained for in the Army. Basic Training (twice for me thanks to a fractured tibia and starting again at day 0 - WOOT!) in Fort Leonard Wood, 10 months of AIT for both the medic and mental health specialist course (the 91B course used to be a prerequisite for all 91Xs), years of redundant field f*ckery, PLDC, missions to South America with my CSH, and 2 additional months of pre-deployment training to include more fun with weapons, checkpoint ops, urban warfare, etc. were all "soft" skills based on Jones' assumption.  Nothing prepared me for combat soldiering because I wasn't on the OSUT 11B track in Benning?  Because, er, my ovaries.  Got it.  Good to know!

"Most of the FET’s prepackaged PowerPoint lessons clearly had been designed by men. A list of recommended readings included all the old macho accounts of mujahedeen "freedom fighters" but not a single one of many excellent books about Afghan women."

Hrrrmm, so you're saying that the training for women, which was designed by men, was ineffective, but FET failures are exclusively FET failures?  Roger that!

"Typically, commanders sell short both Afghan and American women. They may use FETs when they feel the need—to search women, for example, as women soldiers were recruited to do in Iraq in the so-called Lioness program. But they see no value in women talking to women; they don’t care about the female half of the Afghan populace, COIN tactics notwithstanding, and they want the women under their command to stick to their assigned jobs. As a result, when a FET does jar loose some valuable intelligence, it’s likely to be lost."

So-called Lioness program?  (Again?  Not surprised!)
You mean the pre-cursor to FET and CST programs that military leaders in Afghanistan attempted to duplicate, which was a model for a completely different country? Ah, yes.  You're in luck - I'm familiar!    But here we get a bit more in touch with the central issue I'm concerned about: undermining women.  Jones fails to see that throughout her article, she commits the same faux pas - or perhaps that was the goal?  While Jones highlights patriarchal tendencies in both American and Afghan culture, she also goes on to paint military women in a helpless light who take the word of leaders and civilians at face value.  Maintaining a position that is against women in combat roles has been en vogue and low-hanging fruit for those who want to take a jab at women veterans.  But there is still hope for this article.

"Pottinger, Jilani and Russo don’t blame the women for these failures. They blame the good old boys of the US military. You can hear their exasperation in the words they choose to describe "four factors" that stand in the way of "successful female engagement.""

In between jabs at women veterans caught between half-assed objectives and an unclear mission, Jones makes a lot more sense when Russo et al are brought back into the circle.  From the blunders described in Jones' article, one has to wonder if any of these women were vetted or come with any cultural understanding outside of WASP American culture.  This myopic world view, too, may be - and has been - part of the problem.  The issue of the colonial mentality in American culture was not exactly addressed here. At all.

"To most of the military establishment, the FETs are not "an important part" of US strategy at all. Far from it. But American women meeting Afghan women may be the start of something more important than that."

Damn it, I spoke to soon regarding hope for this article.  One more jab at women veterans - our own military comrades, reportedly have no faith in FET.  Yet somehow, FET soldiers working with Afghan women is the start "of something more important than that"?  FFS.  Make up your mind, Jones.  We're useless, we're valuable.  We're meaningless, but what we do is meaningful.  This sounds as vague as the FET objectives themselves.  


Your Logical Fallacy, Jones: Texas Sharpshooter
Jones found a small pattern of FET mistakes to fit her assumptions, and was even kind at certain points toward FET, much like shooting at a barn and painting targets around them accordingly.  Clusters, as indicated in the link, occur naturally, but don't always indicate a causal relationship.  Cherry-picking, as seen with the Coll thesis, does not make for a sound argument.







Positionality, Positionality, Positionality 

All in all, these articles basically criticize military women who were part of FET in Afghanistan, but also cry that there's no empirical data supporting any military statements of success or dance around making positive comments peppered with the usual patriarchal myths.  They also talk about squandered opportunities on women's empowerment in Afghanistan while acknowledging the vague objectives and restrictive FET roles.  Give a female soldier a job, then tell her not to do it, but do it kinda, show her minimal support and provide sub-par training, then wing it here when you can - oh, f*ck it.  It's all your fault this is not going perfectly, FET!  Contradictions galore.

Somehow, reading a few articles on women in combat in Afghanistan was supposed to weaken my position as an actual female combat veteran who participated in Team Lioness in Iraq 2004-2005, when the program was still in its infancy. Because, you know, these articles are going to just change everything that happened my life and specifically throughout my deployment.  I love time travel!

In reality, the articles don’t state much outside what we already know about the history of imperialism throughout the world: Not having language proficiency, cultural understanding, or defined objectives will hurt you. From what I had personally perceived in Iraq, the issues that arose from operations during Team Lioness were directly tied into this accepted ignorance of history, language, and culture. This lack of awareness of one's own positionality in the articles was more than a bit troublesome, it further marginalizes people like me.

The Taliban isn't the only group to fear empowered women.
Those “Noble Savage” Women

What’s funny and often ignored in this often one-sided debate against women in combat is the fact that many of the women who serve at disproportionately higher rates in the military, Native Americans (AIAN) and Pacific Islanders (NHPI), also have firsthand knowledge of tribal mentality and imperial conquest. Yes, we’re very clear on this.  From noble savage to uncivilized alien , we're familiar with being both historical Western enemies and contemporary warriors in its Armed Forces.

In Gayle Tzemmach Lemmon's book Ashley's War, we get to peek inside OEF through a sanitized Anglo lens of women in combat.  From my perspective, and having served with a diverse group of women on Team Lioness, Lemmon's depiction of CSTs in Afghanistan was not relatable to me as a Lioness who served in Iraq.  Sure, these are different countries, different cultures (Arab vs. Pashtun), and different programs, but everything she described about the female personnel might as well have been an account of women from a foreign military.  Often in the the discussion of women in combat, the voices included in the discussion are - you guessed it - overwhelmingly white, military veteran or not.

It didn't come as a surprise that one of the voices I could relate to most in Ashley's War wasn't a white female American soldier, but an Afghan interpreter from California.  Both Afghan women and Indigenous American women have often been misunderstood or muted in the ongoing discussion of our own lives.  The concept of the noble savage/uncivilized alien - as opposed to a person to be included in the discussion - is present throughout the book as one long-ass microaggression.  No analysis of war, occupation, or the aftermath directly tied to the story and why Ashley was there in the first place.  Just a long cheerful flag-waving frenzy in a post-mortem account of a CST member.  Because that's when a woman veteran's voice can be heard right?  It was a sad, saccharine tale that can now be embraced simply because Ashley is dead -  and more importantly, is not asking the VA for help or questioning DOD policy.

In the start of my time on Team Lioness and working together with a white female from rural Indiana, our outlooks and approaches toward Iraqi civilians were stark in contrast. Luckily, as her NCOIC, I had influence and was able to help her adjust prior to Team Lioness, and during the initial weeks where she needed it the most. Reminders on not only our training as Army mental health and medical personnel were constant, but also helping her understand that she needed to shake her up own prejudices and assumptions was an ongoing process. Even as Americans, we came from different worlds and considerable amount of my time was spent as an indigenous woman educating other military personnel descended from white European settlers in North America on how not to come across as an imperialist shithead.  It's easy.  Don't be an asshole.



Prejudices against people of color within the military was also an issue along with perceptions of women of color, their value, and expendability in combat - military or civilian. Are we starting seeing the disparities here yet? The topic of militarized indigenous populations would be best explained in a post all of its own, but for argument’s sake here, much of missed military and foreign policy opportunities can be directly tied into the lengthy history of colonialism.

In the history of European conquest starting from the late 15th century, the influential positions of indigenous women were stripped, and were thus sidelined and subjected to fundamentalist religious (Christianity) and patriarchal (European) standards. The failure to see history repeating itself is not an issue for indigenous peoples, to include some female combat veterans, but those perpetuating current wars. In this failure to connect the dots, military leaders and policy wonks not only undermine and ignore the importance of women in the countries we invade, but they also perform a similar disservice to the military women they put in harm’s way.

This prejudice against women, even after being utilized in intense counterinsurgency battles, extends all the way to the disparities in VA healthcare and respect within one’s own community. It’s been open season on women veterans, and hardly anyone has had the stones to say so.  Throughout the self-righteousness of all three positions, some of which mentioned Afghan women's sociocultural conditioning, nothing about sociocultural conditioning in American women (or subcultures) was discussed.

Marching On 

In the end, my fellow Lionesses and I learned much about each other and how to be far more effective in a very short period of time and still managed to handle every task thrown our way – inside or outside the wire and sans days off, unlike much of our male counterparts. We had to, and we did. And when you’re an indigenous woman in the thick of combat, you don’t just have the civilian population to worry about, but also supposed comrades who have several biases against you before a word is said or a shot is fired. That is an American reality none of these articles dare to touch.

Diversity, and the opportunities contained within a savvier multicultural element, are lost on the legionnaires of white privilege and their obsequious enablers. As an indigenous female combat veteran, someone like Gary Owen also descends from a completely different world where this brand of complex intersectionality doesn’t exist.

Before this statement, I've enjoyed some of Gary Owen's previous snarky articles and the works written in his real name.  Without directly identifying him, he came a long way into a world where he now has access to everything from progressive mediums to national veteran organizations, including the VA's official blog. Gary Owen's reality is not the reality of a female combat veteran of color. However, it is my reality along with navigating benefits and care amid similar prejudices, among many others outside of veteran status, working against me.

Your Logical Fallacy, "Owen": Appeal to Authority
Just because a few women at NGO's or grad school have something to add, doesn't mean it comes without bias or is entirely true.  Discounting a female combat veteran with firsthand experience with 15+ years in mental health in favor of a few non-veterans who could also cite articles is, well, hilarious and sad.  Assuming I didn't do my "homework" as you've insinuated was a mistake, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt and read these three papers which are now fit for the recycle bin.

Having the female combat veteran narrative mansplained to me is nothing new, but the frequency hasn’t made it any less repugnant. Yet in the articles shared, I can see one blaring irony from this Twitter interaction: when women are underestimated, discounted, and sidelined – whether they are military or civilian, American or Afghan or Iraqi – vital opportunities for socioeconomic and political change are miserably lost.

While skeptics may insist on “critical thinking” regarding female-based teams working in direct combat operations, it was critical thinking that initially launched these programs in the first place. What is being pushed here is just more “criticism” of women, and not the long-term effects of military occupation. Such programs were not the inventions of women, but male infantry leaders who sought a different solution to an ongoing problem.

Once successful, programs like Team Lioness became politicized and formed a canvas in which patriarchal males whimsically painted their insecurities, vitriol, and misogyny. The same skewed views, fallacies, and contradictions can be seen in dissecting FET and CST, even with the aforementioned female authors.

The onus of empirical data does not solely fall on the individual female veteran, but the Department of Defense. And before we start hurling spears at female military personnel and veterans, one must take the same scrutinizing lens and apply it to the various mistakes and blunders implemented by men as well throughout centuries of warfare.  That empirical data may be telling.  Just putting it out there.


Alien (Female Vet) vs. Predator (Patriarchy)

In the end, when you choose to muzzle the female combat veteran voice or put a tourniquet on her own narrative, you don't have much of a balanced, educated discussion - or critical thinking - when assessing the roles of women in combat.  When you practice subjugation, objectification, marginalization, and humiliation - just of a different flavor - with the women of your own country, one might pause before wagging a finger at the patriarchal behavior in Pashtun men in Afghanistan.  They, too, enjoy setting women up to fail, silencing them, and maintaining anachronistic ideals regarding gender.  

It's not enough to say you believe in any sort of success in Afghanistan when you discount half of the population: women.  But when one discounts, degrades, and/or gaslights women in their own country, and in their own military, what does that say about any chances for success in gender equality anywhere else in the world?

If you want to think critically about women-based programs during war, don't just tackle the individuals in the programs, think of:

a comprehensive assessment backed by research that is free from prejudicea vetting process that selects the most qualified womena training program that not only targets cultural competency for women, but one that includes further training for men as wellapproaching gender inequalities and disparities in our own military and veteran communityrefraining from enabling legionnaires of the patriarchy and their propaganda that further undermines and objectifies womenOnly then we can possibly see any movement regarding gender roles, whether in the US or Afghanistan, but until then, don't expect me to believe that degradation equals "critical thinking".  When someone claims to support women in combat 100%, but believes a program I personally participated in deserves criticism without any clear plan for unbiased assessment, then I'm far more inclined to view the solidarity as feigned, and any existing alliances as potentially predatory.

Today, I had someone in a veterans housing program tell me that integrating women in combat roles was "political correctness" and not "common sense". He, of course, had no idea what a Lioness was so we had a history lesson - taught by yours truly - on what the fuck it is and who started it: Marine Corps and Army infantry officers looking to un-f*ck Ramadi. And they couldn't do it without women.

The term "political correctness" is thrown around way too much these days without understanding what the hell one is talking about or what it really means. This douchebag's "political correctness" spiel was essentially him high-fiving all the VA personnel that deny me care, benefits, and dignity. It is nothing more than a nod to slanderous articles and comments that degrade women veterans all over various media outlets. His scoffing at women's strength not only speaks of positionality and privilege, but is also taking a giant shit on the VA claim that has taken 10 years to go anywhere because I happen to have ovaries and that makes misogynists 'haz a sad'.

It should go without saying that coming from a culture, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (NHPI), where women are expected to be resilient, that this mansplaining and gaslighting garbage is the real "political correctness" we need to worry about. It is nothing more than a veiled movement to protect the weak, fragile egos of small men who need far more help than I can give outside a stiletto deeply embedded into their fourth point of contact.

This male veteran is someone who works directly for veterans to include women. So tell me, is it "political correctness" f*cking veterans over and not sociopathic patriarchs and their legionnaires continuing to take and manipulate their way into retirement while all else suffers? If you believe women are not strong, not intelligent, not capable, well, I'm sorry for your mother, because your piss-poor perception is also a reflection upon the women in your own family. That is all.

The memoir genre is reportedly flooded these days and I've discovered several of its nuances by following and reading the works of Mary Karr, a contemporary master of memoir writing.  In Stephen King's On Writing , he raves about Mary Karr and her obvious gift for being incapable of writing an uninteresting sentence.  I couldn't agree more.  As I'm reading through her latest release, The Art of Memoir , I'm recalling both the joys and the horrors of the process as I've finally linked with a literary agent and completed my upcoming memoir, The Desert Warrior .

While Karr's style is unique, and she capable of luring a reader in to a whirlwind of her life experiences.  However, once I finished The Liar's Club , I even wondered how the hell anyone got me to read a book about an industrial East Texas town.  If no one - especially if Stephen King kept quiet - told me that the book was excellent, I would never have bothered.  There's nothing about rural, industrial, or even cosmopolitan parts of Texas that interest me whatsoever unless it's about brisket joints in Austin or Wendy Davis.  Yeah, that's about it.  But Mary Karr changed my mind through the act of sharing a specific period of her life.

While reading memoirs is a must if you're writing a memoir - and believe me, you will need to read exponentially more pages than you actually write - I would also like to save you time.  Below, I've included steps and a few hyperlinked writing resources for you if you decide to write your memoir one day.

Things you should be able to accomplish, in order, for your memoir should be:

1. Write a good 15-20 pages of the book.  Minimum.  Don't worry about finishing the book right away.  Here's some sage advice from William Zinsser, author of Inventing the Truth, On Writing Well, and other fantastic books that eloquently explain the genre.

2. Write a Book Proposal to clarify to agents and publishers why they should publish your book and why it will sell.

3. Write a Query Letter to acquire a literary agent. Some agents may request your first chapter or two, and some may ask for a Book Proposal - which often includes the first 1-2 chapters of your book. Don't send the queries just yet though! Writer's Digest has an excellent series called "Successful Queries" which features examples of query letters that actually worked in getting an agent.

4. Use a site like Query Tracker to keep track of who you query. You don't want to make the mistake of querying the same person twice, or querying someone who already said no.

5. Research which literary agents to query. Some agents only represent fiction, some only romance, and others nonfiction, or mystery. Query agents that represent the memoir genre if you're writing a memoir. Query only fiction with agents who represent your type of fiction, and so on.

6. For some extra advice on the memoir writing process, here's an extra post to help clarify what may feel like quite the lonely process.



So there's my two cents on shortcuts that will save you extra time an energy that could be used in actually writing your book.  Don't wait for someone to tell you that you're a writer.  Go out there are write, write, and write some more until you are able to purge every morsel of your core into a book you can appreciate and be proud of for years to come.

Follow MB Dallocchio on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

How dealing with combat operations and managing crises as a young female Army sergeant on Team Lioness taught me to both lean in and asserting myself sans apology.




In 2004, my life changed forever as my team and I set foot in Iraq.  On a wintry, starry night flying from Balad to Ar Ramadi, we held our rifles and loads of gear we'd have with us for the rest of our year-long deployment.  We were miles away from Ramadi, but you could feel and smell it prior to touching ground.  Really, the scent of burning trash and feces was undeniable.

  We waited until dark to take the flight to Ramadi on a helicopter into the even colder and windy night air that dropped us off in an area so dark my eyes only adjusted to see a hill of sand and a road lined with concertina wire behind us.  As we carried our gear from the chopper and headed to the Motel 6-looking Iraqi Special Forces compound, I fixed my eyes and my mind on my new home.

  It wasn't long before the young specialist, named Mattingly, on my 4-person team and I were queried about a program called Team Lioness .  Team Lioness was a group of females that were attached to Marine infantry and Special Forces units to conduct personnel searches, checkpoint operations, and house raids.  As a program, it had launched from the brainstorming sessions of male Marine and Army officers in Iraq's Al Anbar Province who saw the need to incorporate women into these traditionally male combat arms units in some of the bloodiest counter-insurgency battles of the Iraq war.

   While Mattingly and I became part of Team Lioness , the other two males on our team - previously critical of women in the military and seemingly gung-ho for combat - nervously bowed out of combat missions all together.  In the coming months, I was able to partake in missions with units I never expected to work with directly outside of my medic and mental health duties.  Some of the lessons learned were hilarious, terrifying, and sometimes depressing, but I walked away with a new perspective on life.  Many of those lessons learned on the battlefield ring true today as a professional, a grad student, and now a mother.

Here are a few morsels of knowledge acquired from Team Lioness that women anywhere could use:



Don't minimize who you are to make anyone feel better















Downplaying accomplishments to play up your attractiveness or likability is so Stepford Wivish.  If your professional skills or other cool talents scare off potential friends or allies, let them run so they can make space for people of value.  Women have every right to take their business seriously and be unapologetic for their success.   We don’t need to downplay what we've accomplished to be liked and if you find yourself doing this, ask yourself at what cost might it be to your own self-worth.  Being coy under pressure may be the result of social pressure to fit in, but you don't have to submit and hide your strength.  Being confident, strong, and capable are fantastic leadership traits that should be valued most by you first.  Everything and everyone else is secondary.  When you believe in you, others will too.

There is nothing strategic in being a hot mess 














Pop culture makes it easy for women to retreat to demure damsels in distress and chastises those who speak out in opposition.  It's not an easy role, but there's nothing strategic or tactical appearing to be a helpless hot mess.  Don't do it.  Making yourself appear visibly disorganized or flustered may make you appear as a target or liability rather than an ally or peer.  In situations where others are counting on you to get a job done - whether on a battlefield or in a boardroom - lacking the appearance of confidence or courage may hurt you.


Grow greater, not complacent - even in relationships













Combat is filled with tests. Tests of your courage, tests of your ability not to fall apart while watching your battle buddy die, tests of your physical endurance under stress, and tests of your overall sanity.  In love, as in war, you must not lose yourself, but rise to the occasion - but you should not be alone in doing so.  There's a problem in not growing into a better, stronger, more capable version of yourself when in a romantic relationship or even in friendships.  If you learn nothing from war or love, you might be doing it wrong.  If you find yourself or your partner to be complacent or even apathetic, whether in war or in a relationship, prepare for pain.


Stop the dumbing down of young girls
















Toy commercials of Bratz dolls, Barbie, and other hyper-sexualized and stereotypically gendered products constantly flood media outlets send out a bizarre message to young girls - a message that says to mind your looks and abandon your wits.  In dangerous situations, abandoning a sense of empowerment, awareness, and overall capabilities to keep oneself alive could prove costly if not deadly.  Instead of buying your niece or daughter a doll made up of twist-ties for clothing and makeup that would make RuPaul blush, take them to a museum or gift them with some GoldieBlox gear.  In war, and in life in general, you cannot afford to be sans awareness or dumbed down.  And we cannot afford to let this happen to the next generation of women either.


Check yourself and defend yourself













Women are often targeted for violent crime and pop culture is partially to blame for this.  Women are often depicted in the media as helpless and victims of crime, and life often imitates art and vice versa.  Women, or anyone else, who are victimized are not to blame.  However, learning to think and operate tactically can help you identify and avoid threats, and even de-escalate or, ahem, "neutralize" in a dangerous situation when needed  This story of Krav Maga and gun violence in an interpersonal relationship helps sum this point up, but beware of triggers.


Victims aren't to blame, it's the offenders



One the more disturbing images from Iraq that haunt me is the extent of exploitation I've witnessed, not just by insurgents, but locals as well as those I served with - which was another level of betrayal explained in other blog posts.  Call out sociopaths and offenders for what they are and if you're lucky, you'll get to do what these women (above) in India did to these reported rapists.  Covering for, or excusing, behavior that is detrimental to others or yourself is doing favors for no one.  If you see injustice, speak up, speak out.


Locate your allies and network













No woman is an island, and it's in your best interest to know where the exits are in a building and where your friends are in times of trouble.  Developing professional and interpersonal ties is to your benefit, but this is an area that you can never quite leave to complacency.  Figure out who you can trust in various situations as not everyone will have the same strengths or weaknesses - and return the favor by being an ally for someone in times of need as well.


Speak up with confidence



The tragically cool, interrogative tone as described by Taylor Mali (above), just isn't helpful when you need to be heard. In order to be taken seriously, don't qualify your f***ing statements with, you know? Right? or any other terms that only take away from your ability to assert yourself.  It isn't enough to feel what you're saying, you have to at least sound like you not only know what you're talking about, but to sound credible as well.  Speaking as though you're constantly asking questions can make you appear as though you have little to no faith in your statements.  As a lioness in the wild prepares to lunge forward toward a threat, prepare to show your "teeth" through demonstrating confidence and assertiveness.

Stop apologizing for having a voice














Don't prepare people for your strength by saying sorry before saying something assertive or even controversial.  Own your voice, and get in the habit of speaking up without qualifiers, ums, or other fillers when you can take the time to say what you need to in the manner you need to say it.


You are valuable, and anyone who tells you otherwise can pound sand
You are needed, you are valuable, and we need you to have a backbone to fight for the next generation of women too.  And if anyone tells you you're not good enough, strong enough, smart enough, or anything else that demeans your worth, feel free to say this:

There are a few poems or pieces in which I think to share via blogpost, but this is certainly an exceptional one. "Apolitical Intellectuals" by Otto Rene Castillo sheds light on societal complacency and how we must push ourselves toward the greater good and become a better version of ourselves. "Apolitical Intellectuals" questions the inertia of supposed leaders in times where critical analysis and corresponding action are needed most. The poem sets the scene in a time where social change is needed while leaders remain inactive, even in their impending demise. That time is now.

Otto Rene Castillo is a renowned Guatemalan poet and revolutionary who was born in 1936, and was forced into exile following a Guatemalan coup in 1954.  Upon return to Guatemala, he became an active member of the Guatemala Workers Party while also founding a theater group.   Castillo was later assassinated by the Guatemalan military in 1967.



"Apolitical Intellectuals"by Otto Rene Castillo
One daythe apoliticalintellectualsof my countrywill be interrogatedby the simplest of our people. 
They will be asked what they did when their nation died out slowly, like a sweet fire small and alone. 
No one will ask them about their dress, their long siestas after lunch, no one will want to know about their sterile combats with "the idea of the nothing" no one will care about their higher financial learning. 
They won't be questioned on Greek mythology, or regarding their self-disgust when someone within them begins to die the coward's death. 
They'll be asked nothing about their absurd justifications, born in the shadow of the total lie. 
On that day the simple men will come. 
Those who had no place in the books and poems of the apolitical intellectuals, but daily delivered their bread and milk, their tortillas and eggs, those who drove their cars, who cared for their dogs and gardens and worked for them, and they'll ask: 
"What did you do when the poor suffered, when tenderness and life burned out of them?" 
Apolitical intellectuals of my sweet country, you will not be able to answer. 
A vulture of silence will eat your gut. 
Your own misery will pick at your soul. 
And you will be mute in your shame.

Over the past week, coverage of race and identity have been a hot combination of a topic.  However, there are few articles available that are describing insidious traits and behavior that surpass mere appearance.

Contemplate recent events depicted in mainstream media involving race and consider the following:

Can you think of anyone who has the following traits?


Exaggerated self-appraisalUnreasonable personal standards created to see project oneself as exceptionalInability to identify with the feelings and needs of others, and only attuned to those feelings if it is relevant to boosting one's own self-imageRelationships, personal or professional, that only exist to serve self-esteem regulationFeelings of grandiosity, overt or covert, condescending behaviors and belief that one is "special"Attention and admiration-seeking behaviorAll above traits exist over long periods of time and consistent in varying situations, not normative for a specific development milestone, and are not the result of substance use or a medical condition.
Sound familiar?  Well, if it does remind you of people like Rachel Dolezal, you would be correct in what some mental health professionals are thinking but not saying loud enough.

The list you've just read above is an abridged version of the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), an Axis II diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition - and in spite of all the hilarious memes on social media of Dolezal, this is an issue that should be setting off more alarm bells than we're seeing in mainstream media.

According to psychologist Martha Stout in her book The Sociopath Next Door,  4% of the population in the US fall into the NPD category are sociopaths who lack basic emotions of empathy or conscience as we know it.  Unlike psychopaths who may experience joy or empowerment through inflicting physical pain, sociopaths are highly interested in attention and pity.

4% might sound like an insignificant figure, but that roughly equates to 12 million Americans who lack a moral compass and are dangerous when left to their own devices in positions of authority (political, corporate, organizational prestige and status, etc) or power (e.g. weapons, the ability to humiliate and destroy with minimal or no repercussions and accountability).

Because sociopaths lack empathy or sympathy, they are dangerous in the fact that they will cause damage or harm, physically or indirectly, in order to achieve personal pleasure or profit.  They are great at putting on airs, pretending that they feel compassion or relating to others, but only as a means to a selfish, disturbing end.

In Dolezal's case, there appears to be issues of self-worth that is fiercely masked through an aggressive sense of entitlement.  People like Dolezal often demand special treatment, even if it means hijacking an identity completely different from the self in effort to achieve personal goals, no matter how odd or eccentric.  Such traits listed above include a blatant disregard and disrespect of the people around them, including those they may claim to represent.

NPD or Sociopaths have their mind on the prizes of fame, power, and prestige - no matter the cost.   These fantasies and ideations of grandeur are so intense that they may appear to lose touch with reality.   They may display arrogant and unapologetic behaviors, and exploitation and devastation of others is not of any serious concern to them.

If one chooses to "out" a sociopath, one may be met with not only condescension, but an outright negation of any accountability regarding the damaging effects of their own behavior.   Such negation can include projection, lying, and distorting events for pity.  Such confrontations can also result in shame that leads to anger, in which they will have no trouble inflicting harm or humiliation upon others as the damage to their fragile egos cannot be tolerated.

Prestige and appearance of power is very important to sociopaths.  Anything that leads to camera time or admiration is their catnip.  They often will easily vacillate between admiration and contempt for others as their own self-judgement is just as unstable. In spite of any apparent conceited behavior, sociopaths are often emotionally bankrupt and hold no real feelings of self-worth. Instead of responding through symptoms of depression or anxiety, sociopaths turn to manipulation, exploitation and attention-seeking behavior.

Sociopaths can be discovered through a keen, clinically trained lens, but often in close, intimate relationships, we can easily overlook red flags alerting us to potential danger.  It can be quite difficult to identify who these people are unless we are trained to do so.

If we're going to talk about mental health with regard to people like Rachel Dolezal (indirect, institutionalized violence), are we going to have a serious, nuanced discussion about Narcissistic Personality Disorder and other Axis II diagnoses any time soon? This diagnosis is not to be used as an excuse to persist in negative and damaging behaviors; this population, if the severity fits, merits inpatient psychiatric treatment.  And to have any meaningful discussion on sociopaths means we need to discuss this part of the population in terms of mental health intervention, treatment, and policy.

In the meantime, so long as we turn a blind eye to the criteria above, we will see a continued rise of sociopaths in politics, social justice organizations, law enforcement, community members, and even within the realms of our own personal lives.

My fall semester roomie on the left and yours truly on the right 
@ Dobrá čajovna in Prague, CZI spent a lot of time alone when I studied abroad in Prague, Czech Republic from summer 2006 - summer 2007.  There was a reason I didn’t go out as often as other Anglo-Saxon American students while studying Czech in Prague, even when I had extra money to spare. My Los Angeleno roommate in the fall 2006 semester at Charles University loved to eat out and on occasion when we’d go together, the dining experience wouldn’t be as pleasant as it was before she met me.

Staroměstské náměstí - Old Town Square in PragueTo put it simply, Prague natives are tolerant of visitors, almost apathetic. If you’re of European descent, you’ll be treated marginally well for the most part, but if you fall into an outside category – i.e. East Asian, Middle Eastern, Latin American, Roma (aka Gypsy), or any other ethnicity – you were a suspect. Although, there was an exception to this rule, if you were African-American you were superficially associated with hip-hop culture and corresponding cool, which many young Czechs seem to adore, so you’re likely to be treated without contempt at a restaurant, and far better than anything you might experience in Southern states in the US.  In other words, you were still objectified as a novelty, but not profiled as a criminal.

Me? Well, I get it. I could pass for anything depending on the day, depending on my makeup and hair, but it was all the same. I was treated with suspicion and disdain by local law enforcement in Prague who likely viewed me as Roma or something else unknown but somehow threatening. Czech women on public transportation would clutch their bags when they saw me enter the tram or metro, and men would walk up to me and say perverse things to me and pass quickly as though they wanted to let me know how my ass, face, or body as a whole appealed to them; and restaurants just didn’t want me seated at their tables in general.

They didn't know many indigenous Pacific Islanders, I'm sure, and it turned out to be what I thought: a case of mistaken identity.  My ambiguous looks had earned me a seat in the Roma box, and it might as well have been a social coffin.  Like Cary Grant in North by Northwest, I was pushed into a game of tag and I was - well, the ethnic minority version of - "it".  Being an ethnic minority and a woman in the US, this game was not exactly news to me, but old colonial hat.


Throughout my time in the Czech Republic, the subject of “gypsies” came up quite frequently among the younger American students who were apparently judging and joining the bandwagon of racial stereotyping. I asked Zdeněk, a Czech study abroad staff member how the Roma were typically regarded in various parts of the Czech Republic and what his personal views were.

“It’s a very sad situation, you see. They come from a long line of misunderstanding that turned into many forms of prejudice,” Zdeněk started.

Bury Me Standing by Isabel FonsecaEvery day in Prague, I was watching this brand of discrimination and inquired about Roma rights and news, observing a palpable racial tension in Prague. One of my professors at Charles University recommended the book, “Bury Me Standing,” one of the few books that cover Roma history and a long history of institutionalized and culturally ingrained racism. It was a consequence I had to deal with on a daily basis and it was unavoidable, but relatable to what I was going through in my own country as an indigenous woman, and now a combat veteran.

Although I had nothing to do with Roma culture ethnically, I felt responsible to say something, anything, I could about it as I would hope for anyone not to forget us either. There was nothing in it for me personally to promote awareness of their history and erasure in society, but I knew how it felt all too well.

As the midterm mark of fall semester passed and one of my bigger papers was due next, I finally had to buckle down on a paper for my Czech and Eastern European Politics class. Above all topics I could’ve selected, I went with writing on the Roma population Zdeněk and I were discussing at length. When first considering the provisions for writing on this particular subject, it was not merely chosen for the sake of fulfilling a class requirement. One must take into account various biopsychosocial aspects of racial persecution as it is a controversial subject in any country, and this was a trigger of mine that induced flashbacks of personal trauma.  If nothing else, this was an attempt at sublimation at least, and a step toward an answer to healing generational trauma at best.

However, with the focus being on state discrimination in the Czech Republic towards the Roma minority, and being a minority myself, experience proves to be an even greater ally in the search for possible solutions to such a long-standing problem. As personal biases themselves can prove to be obstructions as well, I chose to hone in on the statistics: homelessness, suicide rates, educational achievement, and a host of other categories and their trends akin to any conquered peoples. Throughout my conversation with Zdeněk, bear in mind that this observation is coming from my own limited experience in the Czech Republic, but an extensive personal history with colonialism.


The Roma themselves as a minority community simply cannot recover from centuries of discrimination by the state’s assistance alone and if their active participation is absent from the changes to be made, all progress towards eliminating racial stereotypes will falter, Zdeněk explained. It would behoove any state to be proactive in mending broken communities through the formalization of language and the education system, enforcing anti-discrimination policies, implementation of equal opportunity, and general public awareness of the complex issues and the impact it has on every community.

While the Roma are unfortunately looked upon as the degenerates of society, mostly as petty thieves, the psychological effects of ethnic history and a lack of common formal language are not to be overlooked in the shadow of state discrimination. Although society may be aware of one’s own culture ranging from the arts, literature, and recorded history, the psychological nuances impact society in ways that are often overlooked. However, the Roma are deeply lacking in all those departments, elements that create culture which stem from history, language, and ultimately ethnic identity.


Europe is home to 10-12 million Roma, but their identity is often a subject that is filled with inaccuracies and distortion. Roma history begins over 1,000 years ago and tells a story of diversity, creativity and survival. The inaccuracy of Roma history itself is still carried out today as I, a then newcomer to the Czech Republic, have heard these stories firsthand. Stories involving the Roma being "punished" for being the descendants of those who had created the nails that were driven into Jesus Christ during his crucifixion and that their penance involved roaming from place to place begging as though it were a personal atonement for their ancestors’ sins. From being the blacksmiths of death to being described as fringe from an ancient Egyptian society, such falsehoods are still spoken of today in spite of historical publications, which are unfortunately limited.

Reportedly, Czech or Slovak Roma origins extend much further than Christ’s death, dating their departure from India around the 8th century. Their migration carried them through the terrain of central Asia, then 12th-15th century Mesopotamia and Turkey, and by the end of the 15th century they were dispersed across Europe as far as Scandinavia and the British Isles. Not only does this prove the term “Gypsy” to be a misnomer, but it also further distorts an ethnicity’s actual roots while elucidating the current language dilemma.

Communication breakdown appears to be a chief problem in Roma community integration and takes priority before any other racial equality measure is to succeed. The lack of a common Romani language dialect and the deficiency of the appropriate acquisition of the Czech language are two problems that must be remedied before the next generation will have to deal with the same difficulties. The varied travels of the Roma are evident in their languages and very little has been done to organize the assorted dialects through any careful, academic documentation.

Even within Czech borders, the lack of linguistic organization has left the communication gap wide open. Communication on the side of the Roma with the Czech language is also a grave issue and leaves them with little room for advancement as they are the minority, but this situation has been passively addressed by placing young Roma in schools for the mentally disabled and special needs. Not only does this slow the progress of integration into Czech society where they could function as contributing citizens, but this unnecessary and racially insulting move has therefore hurt progress by educating Roma children that they are not normally functioning citizens. This approach of avoiding the restoration of intercultural communication is a prime example of state and institutional racism.

State discrimination of the Roma certainly takes root in the excuses for inhumane treatment derived from historical distortion and communication negligence. Whether or not some Roma choose to fulfill their state-sponsored prophecies of stereotypes, there is no excuse for concentration camps, eugenics, discrimination in employment and housing, and educational deprivation. While 95% of Czech Roma were murdered in the concentration camps of Lety and Hodonin in WWII,  It would also be a shame not to mention the fact that while most European concentration camps appear to be preserved in some way for sensitive historical purposes, Lety, a Romani concentration camp site during WWII is now, and still is, a pig farm.  Slovakian Roma migrated west into Czech lands after 1945, making up the vast majority of today’s Roma demographic in the Czech Republic.

Although we are now in the 21st century, we are still seeing residual problems which have simply been accumulating like cancer cells without a cure. Shadow reports such as those given by the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC) or the League of Human Rights highlights many obscured facts about state discrimination against the Roma such as education segregation, limitations in employment and housing opportunities, and forced sterilization.

While I have touched up on the issue of education, the looming problem of unequal housing and employment opportunities remains. The state’s responsibility is to implement such conditions for all of the nation’s citizens and incidents such as the recent mass eviction of the Roma by the town mayor of Vsetin is a major oversight by the Czech government, whether by intent or plain ignorance.

Back to forced sterilization, of all the abominable state discriminatory issues that come to mind in terms of contemporary Roma issues is the sterilization of Roma women.  If that makes you cringe, read about how the US government did it to Native American and other minority women too.  In 1971, a “coupon” of sorts was introduced to Roma women by social workers of the former Czechoslovak government. Mostly illiterate and unable to comprehend the parameters of the alleged coupon, Roma women were subjected to tubal ligation, an irreversible sterilization technique which involves the cauterization of the fallopian tubes. If the women refused to undergo the procedure, they faced the possibility of having their children taken away or simply being declared as psychologically incompetent and forced into a psychiatric ward. Purportedly, the most recent incident of involuntary or coerced sterilization was documented in 2004. This is another unfortunate example of the not only state discrimination, but the depraved practice of eugenics as well.

Prior to my own arrival, I had already been informed to be aware of “Gypsies” and this was further enforced by locals of Prague. While the Roma are still inaccurately called “Gypsies” to this day, the statistical data of 60% or higher of Roma unemployment versus the Czech 10% to the common image of them as mere petty criminals is no excuse to treat any human being as less than. While there are many socio-economic problems surrounding the Roma community in the Czech Republic, the steps towards solving these problems has to involve addressing the imperial sabotage of an ethnic minority - a familiar story, once again.

While there are 200 non-government organizations in the Czech Republic aimed at assisting the Roma, the nature in which the state continues to persecute the Roma as well as the Roma community’s lack of cultural mobilization is still a plague on the social order of the country.

While I was new to the issues involving Roma Rights in 2006 in this chat with Zdeněk, discrimination on any level from institutional to interpersonal is a symptom of a sick society, and that was nothing new in my eyes. In the United States, we have our own problems in current discrimination and it would be presumptuous throw stones from a glass house by solely criticizing Czech society. How Native Americans are treated, how indigenous Pacific Islanders are treated, and how any marginalized group in the US undergoes varying forms of discrimination by the dominant ethnic group in power are very similar to the Roma population here in Europe. Additionally, the problems and fallout are mirrored in this brand of persecution.  While our migration and journeys have been different and distinct in their own way, the societal ills are startlingly similar.

Yet as someone who has experienced racial discrimination on an institutional and interpersonal level, from slurs to direct aggression, even by American students in this same nauseatingly entitled study abroad group, remaining objective in reaching a viable solution is critical as the answers exist.

Having a critical eye on the insidious nature of imperialism is imperative in any society that has become completely complacent and/or ignorant to the immoral acts against any targeted minority group. As we have taken into account by history, turning a deaf ear to blind hatred can lead to even more extreme acts of persecution.

Achieving a goal in an objective manner of reason, such issues can start to be overcome after years of subjective and intentional neutrality, complacency, hatred, and discrimination on all levels.  As Zdeněk and I continued to discuss these issues, the more I began to realize that not only was I being mistaken for being Roma in Prague, I was also in a Roma position back in my home country, an undesirable.  An indigenous female combat veteran who was now dealing with service-connected disabilities - and I was being toyed with by the VA health care system who apparently did not want to acknowledge my service or injuries.

Instead of continuing the repetitious game of blame-tag, actively taking steps in order to further integrate minority groups after centuries of social and institutional ostracism would aid in the progressive destruction of state discrimination. Steps such as language formalization, governmental intervention for racial equality, promotion of Roma arts, and public awareness of Roma issues will indeed help repair the damage that has already been done over a millennia.  But state solutions won't solve everything.

While Romani languages may sound complicated, the similarities in root words in addition to many foreign add-on words could in fact be incorporated into a standard form. As various dialects of languages such as Spanish or Arabic have a wide range of dialects, standardization has already taken place. From Machu Picchu to Madrid or Rabat to Riyadh, standardization of a common language has proven to be effective in overcoming communication problems. Having the Roma first-language taught at home formalized will aid the process in not only understanding Roma, but learning Czech more efficiently as it will be easier to educate possible teachers in a modern standard form of Romani. Even though formalizing Romani across Europe will be a daunting task, starting it at a country's level and associated needs is much more pertinent to contemporary social afflictions. This should also, in effect, begin to instill a greater sense of ethnic identity.

As passivity or complacency make for poor excuses, they are even bigger mistakes made by a governmental body as they have an extensive responsibility towards its citizens - regardless of whether we're looking at the US or the Czech Republic.. The only aversion that should be made here is the avoidance of discrimination. Publicizing racial equality and rights across the board in national issues is one way to begin a trend of the promotion of tolerance rather than letting skinheads run amok.

Clear and concise guidelines and provisions for equal opportunity need to be placed in plain view of all citizens when wither applying for a job or buying a home. If such guidelines are violated by real estate agents or potential employers, clear ramifications for fostering discriminatory behavior should be punished in accordance with any alleged offense. The public education system would also do well to desegregate school and not shove Roma children into an institution for the mentally handicapped in order to create contributors to society as well as people who believe they will be allowed to contribute.

Promotion and recognition of Roma music, art, literature, and history is an important aspect in addition to language formalization to creating a stronger sense of ethnic identity. While being able to become integrated into Czech society, maintaining a sense of community belonging and self is crucial to an individual’s progress. As seen in various ethnic communities in the United States, community pressure which stems from ethnic identity is a cause for further motivation to succeed, depending on that community’s given ideals. Promoting the Roma arts would not only instill a stronger sense of self and community, it would also help other Czechs to become more educated in Roma culture past the negative stereotypes and into a more positive image, conducive to forming bridges across cross-cultural gaps.

Media attention shedding more light on Roma issues is vital to the aforementioned steps toward progress. The showing and distribution of Roma human rights reports and an opening of racial dialogue would certainly be a responsible step for the Czech media to take. Racial dialogue, and not simply pointing fingers, would do well to ease the tension of such relations and bring some deep-seated racial anxiety to the surface.



As we can see in our respective nations, there’s always more work that needs to be done regarding the issue of defeating discrimination. Being proactive and objective regardless of personal bias, working toward the greater good of a society, and integrating minority groups are all unquestionably possible. Taking the steps of formalizing language and the education system, implementation of equal opportunity by the government, and general public awareness of culture are just the beginning of this lifelong process.



Language, art, music, literature, cuisine, and more are what makes a culture, and when you take that away from any ethnic group, it is a form of psychological amputation, if not death.  You can't expect any group to get on their feet when they've been amputated at the knees for simply being other than the dominant race and/or religion.

Following through on all such suggested aspects, are in my view, ways to actively take control of the state discrimination issue and subdue it. The responsibility doesn’t lie with one particular group. The state, Roma community, media, and the general public all have this responsibility to uphold if any of them have an opinion on the Roma community, positive or negative. If the repair of past assaults against the Roma community is to take place, objective observation in measuring outcomes and effective social justice program implementation must happen.

By taking responsibility and doing our part, minuscule or great, treating the any minority community as an integral part of society as they deserve in the most basic of human rights is something we can replicate successfully and would only improve upon our progress as a so-called civilization., By simply validating that we may be different from one another, but we are all human and deserve the same level respect and right to justice, we may begin to see the end of a terribly vampiric imperial cycle of institutional and direct violence that has plagued human history.

There should be no reason to bury anyone standing, rather, we could be evolving as a species by taking the colonial boots off of the necks of our neighbors, and extending a hand that says, "We are equal, let's start behaving that way."

Resources on Roma Rights:


Decade of Roma InclusionDženo AssociationEuropean Roma Rights Centre (ERRC)League of Human RightsRomani in Europe Overview

While much of the desert theme belongs on my other site, www.thedesertwarrior.com, I decided to share this morsel of arid goodness here.

Since being back from Iraq, this was one of the most therapeutic things for me in dealing with post-war trauma. I found a sense of peace in the desert and driving through such surreal vistas provided a sense of comfort in which little else could remotely compare. This is what peace of mind looked like through my eyes.

Song: "En el muelle de San Blás" by Maná

Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Ad by the US Census BureauThe following is an excerpt from "Quixote in Ramadi" on the ridiculousness regarding combining Asians and Pacific Islanders into one group - and even more so for a celebratory month.  When you see Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI), you only tend to hear about the Asian side and sometimes we're not even in the acronym and Asian American groups continue to focus on their issues and exclude Pacific Islanders.  Pacific Islanders, an underrepresented and marginalized group with social issues akin to Native Americans, are in their own category and should not have to tolerate cultural hijacking and misappropriation by Asian groups.  Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders simply do not belong in the same group, so why keep up the charade any longer?

Combining Asians and Pacific Islanders into one group is drowning out the voice of an already small percentage of not only the U.S. population, but in the world as a whole. Pacific Islanders have a different set of challenges altogether and since we get stuffed into the same box so often, even by so-called Asian-Pacific groups, we get lost in the shuffle.

All the socio-economic problems of Islanders evaporate in the vast sea of Asian progress and achievement when it comes to combining the two statistics. Islanders are several times more likely to drop out of high school than Asians on top of coming up drastically short in comparison on both undergraduate and graduate degrees.

When I see Asian-Pacific, my eyes see imperialism all over again. Combining the two groups only provides more marginalization and invisibility for Pacific Islanders in general, whom are already a grossly underrepresented minority. If there’s anyone shaking their heads right now, let’s clear the air by making the distinction of who’s Asian and who’s Pacific Islander:

ASIAN

Asians, as presented by the US Census Bureau, are from East Asia and the Indian subcontinent, i.e. Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, China, Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, etc. On the other hand, Asia isn’t limited to these specific regions. Asia is the largest of the seven continents. Regions included are the Middle East, Asia Minor, Central Asia, Russia, as well as the regions the Census Bureau suggests.


PACIFIC ISLANDER

On the other side, the Pacific Islanders’ Cultural Association’s definition of Pacific Islanders explains that the three following Pacific regions are classified as being Pacific Islander:

POLYNESIA The islands scattered across a triangle covering the east-central region of the Pacific Ocean. The triangle is bounded by the Hawaiian islands in the north, New Zealand in the west, and Easter Island in the east. The rest of Polynesia comprises Samoa (American Samoa and Western Samoa), the Cook Islands, French Polynesia (Tahiti and The Society Islands, Marquesas Islands, Austral Islands, and the Tuamotu Archipelago), Niue Island, Tokelau and Tuvalu, Tonga, Wallis and Futuna, and Pitcairn Island.

MELANESIA The island of New Guinea, the Bismarck and Louisiade Archipelagos, the Admiralty Islands, and Bougainville Island (which make up the independent state of Papua New Guinea), the Solomon Islands, the Santa Cruz Islands (part of the Solomon Islands), New Caledonia and Loyalty Islands, Vanuatu (formerly New Hebrides), Fiji, Norfolk Island, and various smaller islands. 

MICRONESIA The islands of Kiribati, Guam, Nauru, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (CNMI), the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia (Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei, Kosrae, and the Caroline Islands).

If it's not in one of those three boxes, it's not Pacific Islander. Period.


While you may or may not be fascinated with Pacific culture or heritage in general - I don’t expect you to be a professor of Pacific studies - if I’m asked, that’s the real deal. I don’t expect anyone to know the average rainfall of Saipan per year or a detailed list of indigenous flora and fauna, but it shouldn’t my job to be Rand McNally to everyone I meet. Especially when my native land is owned by the United States, it’s a bit embarrassing for an American not to be aware of US land.

If one wants to know more about the Pacific, I have a few good recommendations as to where one can begin their research. But half the time, the pursuit of my ethnicity by others is not so innocent. I usually get a tantrum-like sigh when I explain there is a difference between Asians and Pacific Islanders, followed by, “Well, aren’t you all the same thing?!” No. We’re not.

One my former neighbors in Hawaii, a tall Samoan woman named Tupe once told us a story that illustrated this difference. At a party where a variety of people were attending, possibly a military function, Tupe was introduced to a group of people who were from the mainland US and a Filipino doctor. The doctor then asked what ethnicity Tupe was and she responded that she was originally from American Samoa. Unfortunately, he made the fatal mistake of asking the question that many Islanders have heard that none of us like: Are your people civilized? 

Without a blink, Tupe grabbed the much shorter doctor by the neck, lifted him in the air, and stated, “You’re from a third world country, stop bullshitting just because you’re in front of white people.” 
When she told us this story, my mom’s family nearly died – of laughter.

In Hawaii in the early 1990s, there was an unarmed Hawaiian man on O’ahu, the third largest but most populous island in the Hawaiian Islands, robbed a convenience store and as a result, was shot to death by local police. Not too long after that incident, a Japanese businessman in the financial district held his office hostage, shot fellow coworkers and was not fired upon once, but ended the standoff by suicide.

Native Hawaiians are a small portion of the population in Hawaii, but if you examine dropout rates and the prison system, you’ll find that Islanders, not just Hawaiians, have socioeconomic issues that need to be addressed. Yet when Pacific Islanders are lumped together with Asians, our problems disappear due to being grouped with an exponentially larger racial category.

One shouldn’t have to be quizzed so much on something that has nothing to do with one’s work ethic or mores. Simple inquiries, if so desired, are fine but please keep them brief. There’s much more to me than the shape of my eyes and body or the color of my skin and hair. I’m sure others out there in my shoes feel the same way. Yet no matter how much other people make a big deal about my facial features, I do my best each and every time to be polite.

Even though I’m getting questioned, I try to make the person full of questions feel comfortable for two main reasons. One, I may not really know the person and whether they’re curious, ignorant, or just plain racist, it’s not wise to judge that right away and if they have any bit of intelligence, they’ll at least deal with the answer to the question like an adult. Two, if I don’t give them the neat answer they like, which is usually the case as Pacific Islander in many people’s eyes is brand new to them and people are typically uncomfortable with the unknown, I want to prevent a pointless and heated discussion where someone completely ignorant to my heritage is trying to convince me that I’m something I’m really not.

Perception is funny like that. Even though I know what I am, people who know little about me perceive that it is fitting to tell me who I am and what I’m allowed to be. Euphemisms, for example, are one of the forms of speech in American culture that affects perception. The word genocide is not a popular word in American History texts because it demands the reader to take a deeper look at history and what it means to really be an American. It calls the reader into guilt and actually doing something about it.

Why are so many people afraid of guilt? The United States is not alone in this. Not too many countries that I’ve seen like to reflect on their mistakes and, in turn, divert their attention to someone else’s problems. The critiques and analyses of another nation’s issues ensue, but the U.S. has been great at publicly airing its dirty laundry while others kick their dirty clothes into the closet. We are not alone, and every country’s media has an agenda.

Some may argue from the guilty, “post-colonial” standpoint that there is enough guilt, but I disagree. There is a lot of talk of guilt and not enough accountability and action, which is something that should be embraced by more of us. Therefore words like genocide are replaced with watered-down sentences of terms like ethnic cleansing - sounds like something my mom used to do working as a housekeeper for white families.

Why are we so afraid to call things as they really are? It’s not the fault of the any one group of people as a whole, as I really believe anyone who resorts to groupthink, no matter what race one is, is at fault. Therefore, anyone who tolerates bigotry agrees with the behavior. As coddling a child too much can lead to a spoiled brat, the same principle applies in race relations. If you are constantly coddled by your own group or any group for that matter, you can become entitled, complacent, and yes, spoiled.

As for me, I don’t really have a single group, amidst Irish or Anglo folks, I’m too dark, too "exotic", and simply not one of them (although, technically, I am). Amongst Chamorros or other Islanders, I’m much more accepted, but still a halfie (although, I’m still one of them). I’m a visitor to both of my groups, which has ultimately formed a different perspective on life. I don’t have the comfort of my own group, so I’m not exactly dependent on any cliquish safe-haven as I have nowhere to run and hide. So I’ve needed to adapt in order to survive in various situations more than some, learn to be grateful for what I have and laugh things off more quickly, even out in the streets of Ramadi. Yet I never imagined getting pushed into survival mode by people wearing the same uniform. Laughing didn’t save me later.

Read more of "Quixote in Ramadi" on Kindle

There were several lessons learned in writing my first novel, Quixote in Ramadi.  While many of those lessons were learned the hard way, and through the solitary pursuits of researching literary agents late into the night or tearing through Writer's Digest, those concepts that were so alien to me years ago are now coming in handy for writing my second book, The Desert Warrior.

Let me tell you that memoir writing can feel like quite the lonely process - but it doesn't have to be.  The following is a list of tips for those who are beginning the memoir writing process or are merely contemplating the arduous task of documented introspection.

1.  It's a memoir, not an autobiography.  Unless you're an internationally-known public figure or celebrity, you are probably writing a memoir, not an autobiography.  While you may wail and grind your teeth over not sharing your detailed ancestral history and everything you've done since birth through the present, take comfort in the fact that memoirs can cover specific periods of your life.  This means that you can write more than one memoir, and in accordance with a different period of your life.  In short, autobiographies cover detailed background information and historical accounts in addition to a person's life from beginning to the present, and a memoir is a snapshot of a period of your life.  You can choose to narrate from beginning to end but, through a literary agent's eyes, you will still be writing a memoir.   What aspects of your life do you find extraordinary or unique?  How do you think your memoir will help or entertain others?

2.  The quality of your writing is directly related to your reading list.  Sherman Alexie, one of my favorite authors, said, “Read. Read 1000 pages for every 1 page that you write.”  While that may seem like an impossible task - and no one is expecting you to tally that many pages each day in order to be published - you can accomplish quite a bit of reading through literary journals, blogs, and articles in addition to a pile of books.  What's on your reading list?  Do you think your reading list is conducive to the subjects addressed within your memoir?

3. Read other memoirs.  Considering that The Desert Warrior is laced with delicious morsels of insight on intersectionality, I not only had to compile a diverse reading list on race, gender, and socioeconomic status, but I also had to find memoirs that covered the contemporary female veteran perspective of the post-war homecoming process.  Say that ten times, fast.  For that, I chose Kayla Williams' Plenty of Time When We Get Home.   While our experiences were different, even as women veterans who served in Iraq, it also gave me insight as to what readers may want to know as well as how I personally connected with the story.  What do you want your readers to know?  What makes your story unique, and why?  Were there any memoirs in which you felt a connection, and how?

4. Read books on how to craft your memoir.  While I found that Stephen King's On Writing provided exceptional insight into the writing process in any genre, I found a few other books that assisted me in understanding how I should structure my memoir (see Additional Resources below) and what mattered in the storytelling process.   One of the memoir how-to books that stood out to me above all else was Paula Balzer's Writing & Selling Your Memoir.  She explains the memoir writing process from start to finish while providing fantastic examples of successful works and why they were successful.  Which memoir writing books have you read?  What did you learn?

5.  Take a memoir writing class.  In my home city of Las Vegas, Nevada, the pickings for memoir writing classes are pretty slim.  One in which I took through the College of Southern Nevada was not what I expected.  While there were a few decent writing exercises, there was a lot more pontificating from two authors who wrote one book each in the spans of their lives, one in which was self-published - and it was painfully obvious as to why.  If you can't find a class in your vicinity, read as much as possible on the genre and try to attend writers' meetups or related workshops to sharpen your skills.  Are there memoir classes or writers' meetups in your area?  Is there anything about the memoir writing process that leaves you with many more questions that have yet to be answered?

6. Create your hook.  According to Writing & Selling Your Memoir, a hook is defined as a "certain something that makes your book marketable."  The hook is not only designed to capture the interest of a literary agent - you'll need one if you want your manuscript to be published through a traditional publisher like Penguin Random House, Simon & Schuster, HarperCollins, etc. - but to capture the interest of your audience as well.  You don't have to be an extraordinary hero of epic proportions, but your story should have a unique angle.  What is your unique angle?  Why is it important to you that your story is read by the general public or a specific audience?

7.  Don't get too caught up in ritual, but be disciplined.  There are writers who have their specific rituals before they begin writing.  Whether it's an OCD pattern of behavior or a set of steps to perfectly set the scene for writing the next great memoir, I would argue against taking too much time to prepare yourself for actual writing.  Some of my best writing is done on my phone through Evernote - and between the hours of 1-3am when I'm in bed with DVR humming in the background.  Sometimes I make an espresso and have it on my nightstand to indulge the insomnia and my chatterbox of a muse - but I do NOT recommend this for anyone else.  The more time you take to prep for writing is time spent not writing.  Figure out when and where you do your best writing, and stick to it.  Make deadlines for yourself and be disciplined. Write something, anything, every day.  But don't create too much of a fuss over pageantry and rituals that you cut into valuable writing time.  Where and which times of the day or night do you do your best writing?  Do you write every day, and if not, why?

8.  The first draft is for you.  The second draft is for your readers.  In Stephen King's On Writing, King says he discovered the differences between the first and second draft from his first newspaper editor, who said, “When you write a story, you’re telling yourself the story. When you rewrite, your main job is taking out all the things that are not the story.” In Quixote in Ramadi, I realized long after I released it that it was really for me, not for potential readers.  It was a collection of excerpts from my journal, painful details of different periods of my life, but I could have pared it down a bit.  It's easy to get caught up in your own content before realizing someone else will need to be able to understand it too.  What's important to you in your memoir?  What is important for your readers to know?  Is there anything in your first draft that might be considered trivial to your potential readers?

9.  Find a good editor.  On a similar thread in On Writing, King mentions a response from an editor he received regarding his fiction: “Not bad, but PUFFY. You need to revise for length. Formula: 2nd Draft = 1st Draft – 10%. Good luck.”  I had a tough time finding an editor - one that I felt comfortable working with and didn't cost me a kidney - for the second draft of The Desert Warrior.  I didn't have one for Quixote in Ramadi, but for War Trauma and Its Wake, I worked with a team of editors that collaborated with Routledge.  However, I was lucky enough to find one for my current manuscript who not only has the credentials to edit, but also comprehends the subject matter.  Rates may vary, but don't be too afraid to dish out between $35-$60 per hour for their time.  It may seem like a lot, but consider it as an investment in your success.  Have you looked into copy or content editors - or both?  Are you aware of the differences between copy and content editing?

10.  Research literary agents.  It might seem like a daunting task, but there are a few decent databases in which you can find an agent that represents authors in the memoir genre.  AgentQuery, Poets & Writers, Publishers Marketplace, and Writers Digest are just a few that may assist you in finding representation.  However, bear in mind that agents can receive hundred of queries per day, so take your time in writing your query letter.  Know the difference between a query and a book proposal.  Also, do a bit of research on the literary agent and the agency. Background knowledge on the agent and agency can go a long way and help you in not only crafting your query, but helping you decide if this is who you might best represent you.  Create a list of agents you would like to approach and learn more about the query letter writing process.  Which agents did you find?  Were there any that you felt could adequately represent your work?

11. Overcome fear and insecurity.  So you're not Hemingway.  Big deal!  He's dead and you're alive reading and writing today, so get to it!  Sure, you might not be a celebrity or some other public figure, but you might have an important story to tell.  Don't get caught up in who you are now; focus on where you want to be and plan accordingly.  While writing Quixote in Ramadi, I was a bit concerned about being misunderstood as well as potential backlash.  After numerous rejections from literary agents, one agent finally had the stones to tell me what was wrong - but after I had already self-published.  The story, which was critical of the Iraq war, was one that would most likely scare off agents who don't want to deal with any potential PR fallout that might be construed as unpatriotic.  Additionally, it needed to be edited, edited, edited.  It was, as Stephen King was told by his editor, "too puffy".  There was a different way to tell the story without losing substance or straying from the facts.  He also recommended I publish it as a novel to avoid specific types of backlash, something in which I was able to change quickly via Amazon.  While I watched other veterans share their story and gain representation over the years, I felt muted.  Yet I didn't give up - and neither should you.   Is there anything stopping you from writing or publishing your story, and if so, what is it?  What are your fears or anxieties in the writing process?  Are you writing for yourself, or to tell the world a story?

After regrouping and gaining further insight into the memoir genre, I did receive more responses from agents as well as even better news that I'll share as soon as a few more details are finalized.  All the information above was acquired over the years and not though a single source.  So make note of what lessons you learn and which resources you acquire throughout your memoir-writing journey.  In the meantime, keep writing, keep reading, don't stop believing in yourself or the value of your story, and most of all, don't give up!


Additional Resources:

The Desert Warrior, my art site and book list

Inventing the Truth: The Art and Craft of Memoir by William Zinsser

On Writing by Stephen King

Writing & Selling Your Memoir by Paula Balzer

Writing Down the Bones by Natalie Goldberg

Writing your first draft from Standout Books