A book review: “Abandoned Shipmate: The Destruction of Coast Guard Captain Ernie Blanchard,” authored by Ladson F. Mills III.
In the later part of 2002 I walked into the first conversational encounter I’d ever had with a Coast Guard officer. Fresh out of boot camp that October, I floated around temporary duty stations while awaiting orders from my Cutter which was off the Coast of Ecuador. When I finally made it to my ship, I was nothing but excited about the Guard. Ready to do my duty with the upmost devotion. Ready to do what ever my country asked of me. My first night on the ship, as an 18yo kid, I sat on break-in helm watch, and that is where I spoke one-on-one with an officer, for the first time since arriving at boot camp 5 months earlier. Within minutes my view of the Coast Guard, and my view of where my life was heading, was turned upside down. In front of a QMC, BM, and my qualified helmsman, The Officer of the Deck (an officer) spoke directly to me and asked if I knew why someone would “wrap a hamster in duct tape.” We didn’t even know each other’s names at that point. Nervously I said I didn’t know “sir.” He said “its so it doesn’t pop when you fuck it.”
2002 marks seven years since Blanchard’s death. I wonder if my officer was in the audience when he made his raunchy jokes. By ignoring the reality of sexual misconduct, Ladson Mills misses an entire side of the argument in his text. In all honesty, “Abandoned Shipmates: The Destruction of Coast Guard Captain Ernie Blanchard,” by Ladson F. Mills 3, hits home for this Coast Guard veteran. But not in the way Mills intended. Every Coastie, enlisted and commissioned, needs to read this text. It offers a view of the O side of things many enlisted-men never get a chance to see.
The book tells us that Blanchard was under investigation for telling crude jokes during a Coast Guard Academy function. Those jokes, spun in an environment ripe with confusion over the defining features of sexual harassment, began the series of events that quickly escalated to Blanchard putting a bullet in his own heart. Mills argues that “political correctness” is the social feature that irritated the crowd. The jokes themselves seemingly went mostly unlaughed at and then faded away. It was the afront by the “Coast Guard elite” (a PR skirmish between the CG Academy and headquarters) to squash someone, anyone, on charges of sexual misconduct, to prevent it from ever happening in the future – thus protecting the “image of the Coast Guard!”
Mills does something wrong in his book. He leaves out the problem of sexual misconduct in the military, and in the Coast Guard specifically. As the “communication guy of the CG,” Blanchard simply should not have been joking about gender and racial stereotypes. Officers of Blanchard’s status are in positions of influence. And likewise, authors like Mills are in positions of influence. So, as people read this book, and end it with a feeling of spite and resentment to accusers of sexual harassment and sexual assault, Mills will be responsible for not sharing the second side of the story.
Mills is obviously sympathetic to the plight of Blanchard. And after reading this book so am I. Mills attacks the system, the Coast Guard Elite and the social phenomena “political correctness” as the culprits in Blanchard’s death. The Coast Guard Elite hung Blanchard to win brownie political points for their own careers. Likewise, Mills points to other politicians who use social trends to boost voter turnout, at the expense of military health. And all this is fine, and appealing, though where is the truth of suffering for shipmates? Which shipmates do we need to abandon here, if not someone like Blanchard? Mills suggest we should abandon Transgender personnel. He also tippy-toes around the idea of abandoning our women shipmates – though he won’t say it directly, in each chapter he emphasizes the burdens women have on units and superior officers.
So, I believe Mills is old school. And like Blanchard apologized, “We old seadogs also need to adapt and change the way we have always done things,” Mills needs to adapt as well. The problem here is not politics. Politics is going to be a problem regardless – in its nature it is the art of balancing and comparing unrelated ideas. The problem here is not sexual harassment – all genders/sexes will always be offended my sexual suggestive material so long as sexually suggestive material is labeled as immoral.
Mills concludes that Blanchard was innocent of wrong doings. Though we know that this high-class officer was indeed guilty of telling gender and racial based jokes to a group of CG Academy cadets. We know that the Coast Guard elite (both the Academy and Headquarters) used Blanchard as a political pawn (though Mills agrees this is nothing new), but Blanchard should have seen it coming. I was in my teens in the 90’s and I saw it coming.
I think the problem here is the labeling of sexual activity as immoral. Who cares if women and men within the same unit fuck? Any officer is trained to say sexual relationships are fraternization, that they are a burden to the mission. There is no evidence to suggest it would be anymore a burden to the mission than mass berthing-area fighting/wrestling matches. There is no evidence to suggest that fucking would lead to favoritism more so than buying someone a beer. There is no evidence to suggest that flirtation would go unchecked naturally. There is no evidence to suggest that it would take more time away from work than smoking. I understand that sex can evolve into love, but so can a conversation. I understand that flirting can be a distraction from work, but so can smoking or drinking or scuttlebutt. By labeling the action of sex and flirting (verbal or through touch) as bad, we push it underground, where activities become dark and scandalous. The problem here isn’t sex talk, political correctness, or Coast Guard Elite, the problem here is society’s moral view of sex as a burden, as something gross.
If a female or male does not want the flirtation or the sex, all they SHOULD have to do is say so. Any healthy, educated, sexually FREE population will be more adaptable to an individual’s needs, than any unhealthy secretive population. I point to 21st century sex studies that show sex (hetero and homo) does not have to include any long-term connection. Long term emotional and social connection formation from sex is an outdated idea that was never based on data – it was just assumed.
So, like my submariner shipmates at the Naval Diving Salvage and Training Center said: “It’s not gay if the balls don’t touch.” Let’s open up sex to the troops so we can move past this ironic world where men and women are treated like incongruent aliens. Blanchard should be living. Women should be held to the same standard as men, and men should be held to the same standards of women, and those standards should only be based on the requirement of the job. Sex should be free for those who want it and openly rejected for those who don’t, without feelings of shame on either side.
Welcome to the 21st century you old seadog.
