Now We're Sure To Win The War!
At the risk of having too much recent discussion about women and their role in today's Navy, I couldn't let this one slip by. Check out newly-released NAVADMIN 304/09, which features rules for permanent cosmetics. I guess I didn't know that a lack of such a policy was a problem, but this article on the Navy website set me straight. Excerpt:
A Sailor who elects such a procedure must pay for it herself, be prepared to take leave if necessary to recover and be available for shore-based medical care for two weeks following the procedure.I bet Al Qaeda doesn't have a permanent cosmetics policy, so their retention will go down! Another win for the Home Team.
The updated cosmetic policy applies to new Sailors, including prior-service veterans, officer candidates and midshipmen and was expanded to reflect the changing norms of society.
"Due to the increasing popularity of permanent makeup, the update may increase the size of the recruitable population," said Lt. Cmdr. Heather Kline of Navy's Personnel, Plans and Policy Division. "It could also help with retention by providing an option for female Sailors to always look professional and feel good about themselves while saving money on cosmetic purchases."
But now, what happens if society's norms continue to change, and male Sailors want to get some permanent eyeliner so they can feel good about themselves? I guess then it'll be time for another war-winning NAVADMIN!
posted by Bubblehead at 10:13 PM
24 Comments:
For every warfighter that goes to sea or air, there are at least 30 REMF (rear echelon m...f...) bozos on staffs that dream this stuff up for their "Contribution"
Send THEM on the IAs - maybe they can admin the Taliban to death!
Send me to sea!
10/28/2009 3:59 AM
The rules on permanent makeup were actually devised by the same people who spent the last eight years creating and implementing the asshat NWUs. At least helping "female Sailors to always look professional and feel good about themselves while saving money on cosmetic purchases" took less time than developing carrier aviation.
10/28/2009 4:14 AM
You are all being a little childish. "Permanent makeup" was covered by existing rules--it is considered a facial tattoo and is thus not allowed. So, if you have 'permanent eyeliner' you cannot enlist. Which is pretty silly considering you can apply eyeliner every day if you feel like it.
Anyway, most of you just need to go take your enzyte and quit worrying about what women do with their faces.
10/28/2009 4:39 AM
OK, so what happens if they go and get it done and it does not meet the requirements set for for good taste? Since it is permanent are they forced out? Do they have to pay for cosmetic surgery to have it removed or do they just wear a bag over their head?
10/28/2009 5:50 AM
And you have to wear a bag over your head too, just in case hers falls off.
10/28/2009 6:03 AM
Anyway, most of you just need to go take your enzyte and quit worrying about what women do with their faces.
I think that is the point that those of us who are rolling our eyes at this new NAVADMIN are trying to make as well. Worry about something that truly matters.
10/28/2009 6:17 AM
Ahh, a "Force For Good" continues.
10/28/2009 8:24 AM
That's 'A GLOBAL Force for Good" and don't you forget it!
10/28/2009 1:03 PM
I let people reenlist that technically had 'facial' tattoos...it just seemed like a lame reason to deny it. No you don't get kicked out if the ink doesn't meet regs, but you might not be able to reenlist.
BTW, there are more important things, but not every NAVADMIN is worth reading. Still, every single aviator copay message got screened to my broadcast underway. I would rather have read about eyeliner than aviator perks.
10/28/2009 3:31 PM
Can't wai o see the NSA Bahrain O-6/E-9 gestapo attempt to emforce/administer these latest guidelines
Hey Shoe measure any inseams lately?
10/28/2009 3:47 PM
Can't wait to see the NSA Bahrain O-6/E-9 gestapo attempt to emforce/administer these latest guidelines
Hey Shoe measure any inseams lately?
10/28/2009 3:47 PM
It just boggles my mind that with all the things we KNOW need to get done and with personnel shortages across the board that the Navy had a team of people working and vetting this NAVADMIN for who knows how long before finally releasing it (for no perceivable benefit).
Guess it is time to sell that Revlon stock? Oh, wait, don't have any.
10/28/2009 8:52 PM
Again, I'm amazed at the lack of proper planning and forethought in the comments.
Anonymous started to cover it with
"And you have to wear a bag over your head too, just in case hers falls off.
10/28/2009 6:03 AM"
But forgot the final step - cover the whole mess with a flag so that you can at least do it for "Old Glory".... this kind of half-assed planning is what got us to the point where our largest ship purchase next year will be capable of towing 17 water skiers..
10/29/2009 2:49 AM
Everyone is looking at this wrong. A retired E-9 has made himself a empire as the uniform czar as an S.E.S.(like all of the Obama czars, tasked with screwing up the thing they are tasked to run, big government is apparently the solution, but I digress). So the big question is why aren't we seeing more out of this office?
10/29/2009 5:51 AM
Wait till the gays start getting these "upgrades"!
10/29/2009 6:25 AM
First, its a professional appearance issue and their ought to be some standard. You guys have probably spent more time bitching about it then anyone actually spent writing those regs. Those of you who feel that the rest of the regs of appearance and uniform are a waste of time are at least consistent. The rest of you, who are pricks about the uniform and appearance regs then bitch about this are just hypocritical (about 50% of the chiefs I've had and 100% of the XOs).
Second, with some exceptions, these sort of things tend to be a response to fleet requests for guidance, not the other way around. My guess is that someone at Pers-something-something got tired of answering the question over and over.
10/29/2009 7:26 AM
This is not bitching about a specific reg. Its the feeling that the Navy's level of overhead is simply way too high. Too many flags, too many makework jobs for the well connected, too much "optimal manning".
This is a peacetime Navy in a time of war. Everyone needs to re-read Eisenhower's speech on the Military-Industrial Complex. The old general called it very well indeed.
Simple math: when # of flag officers >> # of ships, then you are hosed.
10/29/2009 9:45 AM
My God, The Sonar Girls will be going crazy. At least now their mascara won’t run when they cry about missing a movie.
10/29/2009 4:06 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
10/29/2009 4:13 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
10/29/2009 4:14 PM
Whew...third time's a charm?
SPEAKING of useless legislation, read the Governator's latest Veto memo. Read VERY CAREFULLY down the left margin. Methinks it was intentional and, IMO, artfully done!
http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/2009bills/AB1176_Ammiano_Veto_Message.pdf
10/29/2009 4:17 PM
Squidward's simple math is excellent. Perhaps Congress should pass a law to further limit O-7 plus numbers using that math. For the Army we could use BCTs.
10/30/2009 5:00 AM
The earlier comment on admiral-count versus ships made me go look. There are indeed 322 flag officers in the Navy right now...and only 283 ships.
Not that anyone's counting.
11/01/2009 7:03 AM
I think it is great that the navy is allowing women to get permanent makeup. Feeling good about yourself is important, and often feeling good about how you look is a big part of this. I find it hard to imagine that women in the navy have a lot of time to work on their makeup...
11/24/2009 4:29 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home