November 20, 2019
  • 7:50 am SHANIA -OFFICIAL VIDEO for SOLDIER – RELEASED
  • 7:50 am WHY THE DEFECTING SOLDIER INDICATES THAT NORTH KOREA IS NOT READY FOR WAR WITH U.S?
  • 6:12 am 30th Communications Squadron Mobile Optics
  • 6:12 am Chris Brown Goes Sneaker Shopping With Complex
  • 6:12 am WORLD ORDER “Let’s start WW3”
6th Annual Forum on Women in Leadership, Women in Military Leadership


David Ferriero:
Good evening. I’m David Ferriero, the Archivist of the United States and it’s a pleasure to
welcome you this evening to the William G. McGowan Theater. Tonight we present the Sixth
Annual Forum on Women in Leadership. Our program tonight is Women in Military Leadership, featuring
a distinguished panel of former military leaders who happen to be women. They will reflect
on their own careers and discuss the changes which have occurred in their roles, opportunities,
expectations, and obstacles for women in leadership positions in the armed services, a particularly
timely topic, given the Department of Defense’s lifting of the ban on women in direct combat
ground roles. Before we get started on tonight’s program,
I’d like to alert you to two other programs coming up soon here in the McGowan Theater.
On Wednesday, March 20th, at noon, we’ll present a program, “Fear Itself: The New Deal and
the Origins of our Time.” Eight decades have passed since Franklin Delano Roosevelt rallied
the nation in his first inaugural address with his famous quote, “The only thing we
have to fear is fear itself.” Professor Ira Katznelson reinterprets the causes and consequences
of the new deal and its aftermath, putting new emphasis on the role of Congress and Southern
legislators in the formation of depression era foreign and domestic policy. And on Thursday,
March 21st, at 7:00 p.m., we’ll screen the film, “Earth Days” in conjunction with our
exhibit in the O’Brien Gallery, “Searching for the ‘70s, the Documerica Photography
Project.” The film was made by Robert Stone and looks back to the dawn and development
of modern environmental movements. It is being presented by the Charles Guggenheim Center
for Documentary Film in partnership with the 2013 Environmental Film Festival here in the
nation’s capital. To find about — more about these and our other programs and exhibitions,
refer to our monthly calendar of events. There are copies out in the lobby, as well as sign-up
sheets where you can receive it virtually or in the regular mail, except on Saturdays. [laughter] Another way to get more involved with the
National Archives is to become a member of the Foundation for the National Archives and
the foundation is important in supporting the work of the Archives, especially our education
and outreach programs. And there are applications for membership out in the lobby also. And
here’s a secret. So far, no one has ever been turned down for membership. [laughter] For tonight’s program, we want to especially
thank Sue Gin McGowan and the William G. McGowan Charitable Fund, Inc., which has generally
supported this series for six years, and a specific welcome to Diana Spencer, executive
director of the Fund. We also want to thank our partners for this program: the Women’s
Forum of Washington, D.C., the Military Officers Association of America, and the Center for
Women Veterans of the Department of Veteran Affairs. As you may know, here at the Archives, we
have millions of military and related records. Many of them have their origins in wars we
have fought and include records of individual units, accounts of famous battles, and, of
course, stories of heroism, including the records of some 350 women who posed as men
to serve in the Civil War, and a letter from Annie Oakley to President William McKinley
offering to raise a troop of 50 sharpshooter women who would supply their own rifles and
ammunition to fight the Spanish-American War. And in St. Louis, we have the military personnel
files of the men and women who served during the 20th century, including the service records
of our panelists. These personnel files are important to our veterans so they can document
their eligibility for veteran’s benefits. And each day we process over a thousand requests
for information from those veterans or their families. To find out more about our military
records, go to archives.gov and click on “veterans’ service records.” Earlier I mentioned the Foundation for the
National Archives, our private partner in this terrific public/private partnership.
I now have the honor to introduce the chair and president of the foundation — the Foundation
for the National Archives, A’Lelia Bundles. A’Lelia is the president of the Madam Walker,
A’Lelia Walker Family Archives and author of “On Her Own Ground, the Life and Times
of Madam C. J. Walker,” the award-winning New York Times best-selling biography of her
great-great grandmother. She’s currently at work, and I wish she would finish, on the
first comprehensive biography of her great-grandmother, A’Lelia Walker, whose Harlem renaissance parties
helped define that era. After a 30-year career as an executive and Emmy winning producer
with NBC News and ABC News, A’Lelia now devotes her time to writing and serving on non-profit
boards, mostly this one. She’s also an accomplished and engaging public speaker and has spoken
at dozens of events and on all the major television and radio networks. Please welcome A’Lelia
Bundles. [applause] A’Lelia Bundles:
That’s right. I spend all my time here at the Archives [laughs]. Thank you very much,
David. It’s always a pleasure to be here and to be with David. On behalf of the board of
directors of the Foundation for the National Archives, I welcome all of you to the Sixth
Annual Forum on Women in Leadership. As the Archives’ private partner, we are proud of
our role in helping to build this beautiful McGowan Theater, and in supporting an incredible
slate of free public programs, including author lectures, film presentations and events like
tonight’s distinguished panel of women in military leadership. How many of you have
been here before? How many of you? So, you know all the incredible things that we’ve
been doing all year. We could not have a more timely topic this evening. Women in the military
is a topic that’s been in the news on several different platforms for the last few days.
There’s always something interesting going on in this theater. This year alone, we’ve
talked about Civil War, emancipation, the environment, Congress, and you know that you
can go to the nara.gov website and find videos of many of the programs that have been on
this stage. We owe a debt of gratitude to the William
G. McGowan Charitable Fund, a long time champion for public programming at the National Archives.
The Fund, of course, made the gift that built this beautiful theater and the rare wood on
its stage, and continues to offer generous annual support. In addition to its support
of the Archives and our foundation, the Chicago-based McGowan Charitable Fund promotes, nurtures
and funds many other signature programs throughout the United States in education, health care
and medical research, and community programs, especially those supporting vulnerable populations,
including the elderly, victims of abuse, those with disabilities, and those who suffer from
hunger, homelessness, unemployment, or illness; populations that are often ignored. We are
very pleased that our board member, Sue Gin McGowan, continues to believe in us and have
passion about us. And while she is not here this evening, Diana Spencer, who David told
you is the executive director of the McGowan Charitable Fund, is here. And I’m going to
bring Diana up, but I just want to tell you Diana loves what we do, but she’s really passionate
about the fellows, the McGowan fellows. There now are 30 McGowan fellows from 10 of the
nation’s top business schools. And we know that in 10 years when they have — when they’re
celebrating their — seven years when they’re celebrating their 10th anniversary, that they
will have begun to solve some of the problems of the world. Diana Spencer. [applause] Diana Spencer:
Good evening. Well, I’d like to welcome everyone, on behalf of the McGowan Fund board of directors,
to our event this evening. We’re very happy to sponsor this event again tonight. And I
was going to tell you a little bit more about the McGowan Fund, but A’Lelia, thank you so
much, did a wonderful job of kind of the entre into that. So, in addition to the support
of this theater, we do support efforts across the country, wherever our board directors
live. In the areas of education, we try to improve high school graduation rates. And
health care and medical research, all around heart health. We have supported a medical
research program that developed — develops devices, artificial heart pumps and things
in tissue engineering, all to help end stage heart failure. What’s new is that we are looking at things
in prevention around heart disease. So, we’re looking at programs in childhood obesity,
which I’m sure everyone here is familiar with Michele Obama’s work. And we’re looking to
see how we can start on the front end getting rid of problems before they develop into end
stage heart failure later on. So, that’s a very exciting thing. We also have our community
programs, which is just what A’Lelia said. It’s programs for very vulnerable populations.
So, we’re responsive grant-makers, and whatever our communities bring into us, the requests,
the needs that they have, to serve their community, is what we do through that program. We are
— we’re not a national organization, but we are in seven communities across the country.
The Archives is our primary program here in Washington, D.C. As you may know, Bill McGowan,
in MCI Communications, was headquartered here, and so we’ve had a presence here for a long,
long time. Nearly eight years ago we moved the organization to Chicago, and myself, so
that the board could be more involved. So, over time, we have reduced, kind of giving
to those social programs because, before everyone gets mad at me, because we give where our
board directors reside because the trustees of this organization get very involved. They
go, they make site visits, they’re good stewards to the grants, and it’s very important that
they be on hand to meet with our grantee organizations. So we don’t have anyone residing in the D.C.
area today. We do give in Chicago and Aurora, Illinois. We’ve given in Northeastern Pennsylvania,
where Bill McGowan was from. He still has family there. We give in Kansas City, Kansas,
Upstate and Western New York, Colorado, and Reno, Nevada, all where trustees live. So, just to tell you a little bit more about
a direction that we’re going to is, something that you’ll here in philanthropy today is
impact investing. And everyone’s trying to measure the outcomes of what you do. So, what
difference does it make if you give a grant to a program and they’re trying to help kids
if you don’t know if it’s really advancing the kids or not? So, everyone is looking at
this, and we take a very hard look at the organizations we serve. From time to time,
I’ll have a moment where I think, “Ah, boy.” First of all, I feel like I work for Bill
McGowan. You know, it’s his organization. His family lives his passions and his core
values. Sometimes just it seems like on a daily basis; I do it every day, they don’t.
But, from — everything I do, I think, “Oh, what would Bill think about this?” And there’s
been a couple of times where I’ve thought, “I don’t know if he would like this grant
so much. I don’t know if he would like this investment.” But what I can say with pleasure,
is that I know he would love our partnership with the National Archives. He would enjoy
the programs. He enjoyed debate. He was very intellectually stimulating and stimulated.
And so, he would enjoy the conversations, the dialogues, the important work that goes
on here in this theater named for him. So, we’re very happy to be here, happy to
support. We’re also — I have — I would be remiss if I didn’t say thank you to David
and his team. They work so hard to put on these programs. We know it, we appreciate
it, and we also appreciate the speakers who come in for virtually nothing to do these
very important conversations. So, thank you all for coming. Come back often. [applause] A’Lelia Bundles:
Thank you, Diana. And now it’s my pleasure to introduce our distinguished panelists.
Gale S. Pollock, major general, U.S. Army. I don’t think I’ve ever introduced a panel
with this many wonderful titles with this much power. I love it. Clara Adams-Ender,
brigadier general, U.S. Army; Gina S. Farrisee, major general, U.S. Army; Sandra A. Gregory,
brigadier general, U.S. Air Force; Christine S. Hunter, rear admiral, U.S. Navy; and Carol
Mutter, lieutenant general, U.S. Marine Corps. Give them a round of applause, and I’m sure
that we’re going to see them. Gale Pollock:
Well, you heard us introduced in reverse order, so let me introduce you again to the group
that I’m delighted to be with this morning — this evening. General Mutter on the end,
Admiral Hunter, General Gregory, General Farrisee, General Adams-Ender, and the moderator. It’s
really a pleasure to be with all of you tonight and to have the opportunity to lead a discussion
with other women leaders from the military in celebration of Women’s History Month. I
think it’s very important that we pause for a moment though to thank the National Archives
and all of the leaders here in the Archives and in their supporting organizations that
believed it was important to recognize this group of leaders tonight. So, could we appreciate
Susan and David particularly. [applause] It’s also very important that you recognize,
as members of the audience, that we are all representing our own perspectives. We are
obviously not in uniform, so we are not speaking for whatever service we participated in for
however many years we did that. I have a number of questions that I will take the panel through,
and then we’ll open it for questions from the audience. And I hope that you will seriously
challenge these women leaders with your questions. I think that you’ll be delighted and amazed
at the perspectives that they’ll share with you this evening, and I’d like to start to
help you to gain a perspective on women in the military, so I’ll begin with General Adams-Ender.
General Clara, as many call you, I know that you are a student of history. Would you please
get us started this evening? Clara Adams-Ender:
I can do that. I’d like to first tell you how come I qualify to talk about history.
[laughs] There was a time when I used say — I’ve always been interested in history
— that I read and studied history a lot. And then I got to the point where I said,
jeez, maybe I can write a little bit, and so I wrote a few things. But now, having been
associated with the Army for 54 years, I am history. [laughter] [applause] I joined the Army in 1959, so do the math,
and you’ll be able to tell a little bit about that. We’re going to talk a little bit about
changes in roles and expectations, opportunities, and so on. And I’m going to take about three
or four minutes doing that, because I think I’m going — and I’m going to cover about
40 or 50 years of that period of time in a very short period. I entered the Army as a
private, as I said, in 1959. I could not enter ROTC. Women were not allowed to join ROTC
at that time. They took their first women ROTC in 1960. We could not have children and
be on active duty. If I had gotten married at the end of my schooling — and I was on
a scholarship — but had I gotten married at the end of my schooling, I would have been
discharged from the military immediately. And we did not have to go on active duty after
having gotten married. Most women worked outside. I mean, I’m sorry, most women worked inside
the — in jobs such as health care, nursing, medicine, those kinds of things. And most
men were — and administration, secretaries, typists, so on. And most men worked outside.
I noticed that immediately, because I’d grown up with my brothers, and so I used to spend
a lot of time outside. And I found that my brothers were not there. You know, they were
all still outside playing around. Yeah. The opportunities were limited most, as I
said, to health care and to administration. Few — there were few women in leadership
positions; no female generals, no female generals in the ‘60s — in the ‘50s and ‘60s.
And I received some good counsel, though, during that period of time after I was in
— especially during the time that I was a captain, from a number of male general officers
who used to come to an area that I was managing in health care training. And they would — while
I was there telling them about what I was doing in that particular area, they’d talk
to me about what I needed to do to be a leader in the military. And I found that quite interesting.
Yeah. In the 1970s were when we saw the first major
breakthroughs. The first female general officers were made general officers in 1970. The first
was an Army nurse. She was General Anna Mae Hayes, and she’s living till today. She’s
93 years old this year and she lives in Arlington. And the second one — and they were both promoted
the same day — was Elizabeth P. Hoisington, who died in 2007. Women were also allowed
during the ‘70s to remain on active duty and to be — and if they were married, to
be pregnant. Women could claim their husbands as family members for the first time. Before,
you couldn’t. The men could, but you couldn’t. The — and I was talking earlier about the
fact that many of the manuals and so forth that were written, it was clearly a man’s
Army, no doubt about it. Many of the manuals and regulations, all of the manuals and regulations
that were written, were written in the male gender. None in the female gender. Now, they
used to try to tell us that it was — what’s that word they use for that? Non-gender specific.
Hello. Yeah. [laughter] I figured out what that meant very quickly.
In the 1980s was when we saw really the major breakthroughs begin in the military. The draft
was eliminated. And when the draft was eliminated, we moved to an all-volunteer force. I was
in recruiting at that time and so I know that area very well. Men could not — men would
not volunteer and they wouldn’t volunteer because the Army — the military wasn’t paying
enough money for them to get shot at. And that’s one of the main reasons why they wouldn’t
volunteer. So they said, go back and get more money and we may join. So, the Army decided,
what I knew at that particular time, that they’d go out and they’d see what they could
do to recruit women. And they recruited women because women have never had to be drafted
to go into the military. They came in, they found that their brothers, cousins, and all
those folks had told them, and boyfriends and husbands had told them information that
wasn’t wrong because they were told they couldn’t cut it in the military. They found out they
could. They joined. They went back and told all their sisters, “Come over here. There’s
opportunity.” And so they came. And they saved the all-volunteer Army in the beginning until
the service could get the monies that they needed to pay the men to come in during that
period. When the military got more money, then they
came in. The DACOWITS, the Defense Advisory on Women in the Service, played a great role.
From the ‘80s, then we’re going to the ‘90s, and until now, we have seen continuous and
steady progress. We may not necessarily be where we want to be, but we are not what we
were. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Clara Adams-Ender:
Yeah, sure. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. So, following on historic perspective, I’d like to start on what’s a very hot topic
today, elimination of the 1994 ban on women in direct combat units. General Mutter, will
you start us on this one? Carol Mutter:
I’m happy to. Women are in the combat, and the law is just finally catching up with reality,
I think. I think part of the difficulty with the discussion about women in combat is that
we jump immediately to women in infantry and that’s not necessarily the case. All of the
services are going through the process now to define what are the physical, mental standards
required for each military occupational specialty job’s specialty to include infantry, tanks,
artillery, and so on. And women today are required in front line units to do things
that the men can’t do, and especially in Arab countries where you have road blocks where
the women have to be searched by women, so on. And women are going into the villages
and are talking to the women and families, the children. They know where the weapons
caches are; hello? So, there’s a lot of good things that women are doing today in a combat
zone. The commanders are having to do a lot of weasel wording, if you will, to say that
the women aren’t really assigned to the combat unit because they’re not allowed to be assigned
to the combat unit. Well, that makes things dangerous. I’ve heard some say that they have
to be — the women have to be ferried out in the mornings and back in the evening, every
evening. They can’t stay out. And so, therefore, they’re exposed to more danger because of
going back and forth on those dangerous roads every day. So, there are a lot of things like
that where we can eliminate those kinds of strange and unusual and unnecessary rules
by saying that women are allowed in combat zone in a combat area. And so, I think it’s
for the best and the services are going about it right, defining what the physical and mental
requirements are for each job specialty, and only men and women who can meet those qualifications
will go into those jobs. Gale Pollock:
General Farrisee, you were involved with personnel and assignments. Can you talk to us a little
more from your experiences about women in a combat zone? Gina Farrisee:
I think the most important thing that the future holds is we do not change any standards
based on the fact that women will now be allowed in certain military occupational specialties
that they are not currently. There are women who can do those roles and there are women
who want to do those roles. They should be allowed to do that. I do not see that they
are going to force anybody into a position, and I think they need to make a big campaign
of that so people understand this is not pushing people into places that they don’t belong
or that they’re not qualified for. It’s still going to be about the best qualified person
for the position and that you’ll have to meet the standards. As General Mutter said, women
are already serving in many of those positions and what we have done is done the right thing
for all the services to allow commanders to use their best qualified soldiers in the way
they need to be utilized without having to use some kind of tricks and wording and other
things to get them there. So, it’s been a great service for all of the military and
for women to be able to receive the awards that they justly deserve by being assigned
to those units. Gale Pollock:
Admiral Hunter, can you talk about how the women being assigned to the various ships
has helped or hindered them, perhaps, in their promotion and their aspirations for leadership? Christine Hunter:
Sure, thank you, Gale. I, as the other panelists are commenting, I’m struck by the fact that
this beginning to have women directly assigned to combat roles in ways that are kind of above
the line rather than behind the scenes or as the general talks about, in roles where
they’re directly involved but they perhaps are not on paper assigned to those jobs. It
strikes me that over our professional lives we have seen women move into many, many career
fields in the military. So, when I first joined the Navy, I was part of the first generation
of women onboard ships. I went to my first ship. We had a crew of about 2,000 people.
There were 10 women. So, they put us all in groups so that we could at least have a few
peers in the organization. And I learned some very important things from that role. I learned
that you should know your job and do it as well as you possibly can. I’m a physician,
so I had a professional skill at that time. You should find a mentor. And I found a Marine
Corps captain who taught me the ropes of being in the military and succeeding in that environment.
And you should know those around you because they’re going to take care of you, that small
unit mentality. And so, for me, that was the Navy hospital corpsmen. And all the things
that I didn’t know as a fresh and brand new graduate from medical school, those Navy hospital
corpsmen had years of experience. And they might not have M.D. behind their name, but
they would take care of me, just like they take care of sailors and marines all around
the world. So, those are important lessons to learn about
succeeding in a context. And I think then, over my career, we saw women introduced to
aviation. And as we learned, some were successful, some were not successful, some maybe went
ahead too quickly. And we learned how to adjust and pick out the ones that would achieve.
And more recently, the Navy has looked at introducing women to submarines, a very restricted
environment, not quite the same as on-the-ground combat, but still what can be a challenging
environment. And so, we do this gradually, we bring different groups, we try to put them
in together where they can have a couple of peers, and be sure that they’re well supported
and have those mentors, and some backup or top cover. We are women in the vanguard generation
who were able to break some barriers, be able to give them an example to look up to, and
hopefully we can look back and be some of those mentors. Gale Pollock:
You mentioned aviation, so that seems like a wonderful segue way into our Air Force general.
Would you please talk about the Air Force and how direct combat affects some of your
members? Sandra A. Gregory:
Well, likewise, with some of the other generals and admirals here mentioned that women have
been in combat for a long time and now the laws are catching up. So, I have the privilege
of — one of my roommates when I was a lieutenant, was one of the first women to go through pilot
training. So, that year I really got to see it up close and personal when it came time
to — how women were assimilated. And this was the — really only about the second group
of women who were actually in an integrated environment with a man, because the first
couple of pilot training for women were just segregated as women only. So, now when they
integrated — so I get to see the highs and the lows and, you know, what happens when
you almost wash out academically and the rigor that was in the system, that they did treat
the women the same. And so, when they did measure up to the same standards, they achieved
graduation and got their pilot wings. But what was interesting is some of the initiation,
perhaps, is in part of the culture there or something, the initiation where other services
were sometimes saying, “Oh that’s one of the first women to go through pilot training,
and she got bit in a place that wasn’t very nice,” and she was just standing in a place.
And so, these are some things that were things that had to be part of that — well, didn’t
have to be, but were an actual part of the acculturation that went on at that time, that
we hope that that does not happen anymore. But for women in combat, they were flying
missions. They’re now flying drone missions. They’re flying with intel missions. They’re
flying as — they have flown for weapons systems officers and navigators for a long time, and
crew members. So, even back, for instance, back in Libya when we did the raids on Libya
and there were tanker air crews with women on them. So, I mean, it’s been time now for
the laws to catch up. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. In many of the media discussions now about direct combat, they’ve been addressing
what they call the different cultures of the services. And I’d like each of you to address
your service perspective from your experience. And then it will be interesting to see if
the women from the different services experienced the same kind of issues, or if each service
had a different challenge for the women that were involved. So, General Farrisee, why don’t
you start us on that one? Gina Farrisee:
As far as culture, I think all the services probably for their combat arms officers, they’ve
not experienced having women there with them. So, they’re very concerned with how did that
affect their mission. And I’m only going to be able to — had to meet the same standards
so that it doesn’t affect the mission. And I really think that’s the biggest issue that
everybody is concerned about, so long as it doesn’t affect the mission. And I’m not sure
everybody’s convinced that it will. But that goes to what General Mutter said about we
have to look at — we’re not talking about every woman going into being infantrymen.
That is really not what it’s all about. There’s certain many other roles and I think that
the culture has already begun to accept that and that that will continue to grow as some
of the positions are open to more women and they have that opportunity to prove themselves.
Many have already done that. They’ve proven themselves, and I think many more will continue
to prove themselves. And slowly the culture will change. Culture takes a long time to
change. Gale Pollock:
Well, since we’re talking about the Army right now, General Clara, are your experiences with
the Army culture the same as General Farrisee’s, that it’s very combat, infantry, tanker focused? Clara Adams-Ender:
Well yeah, yeah. I think so. The issue though — and I’ve gone through this with a number
of people over time — and sometimes I kind of get some strange and different looks whenever
I talk to them about why women — why all positions should be open to women in the military,
and any area. And I don’t deal with the whole business of whether or not they can pick up
the front of a Mack truck or any of those things that seem to become an issue. We always
start talking about the physical thing. Well, you know that most of the world is computerized
these days, and all it takes is a finger, all right? [laughter] And I do remember some of the things that’s
happened to me whenever I was first exploring this whole area of dealing with women going
into other kinds of positions and expanding opportunity. I was told that one of the reasons
how come they should never go into armor is because they could not drive a tank, you know.
And that’s supposed to be one of the big things that officers do as far as the armor is concerned,
is to be able to deal with tanks. Well, it took me about seven years to find out that
tanks are hydraulically powered. [laughter] All you need is a finger. [laughter] Loop it around very quickly. And I would like
some of those same people who told me that, and they said, “Well, we thought you’d never
find out.” [laughter] The whole — the basis of the issue, as far
as I am concerned, and as we look at what goes on as far as the service is concerned,
and I hope they’re grappling with these things these days, is that I do not believe in the
workplace that anything should ever be held against people that they can’t do anything
about. I can do nothing about having been born a female. But I certainly can be the
best female I can be, doing whatever job I’m assigned. And that is what I have seen women
do time and time again, when they were not wanted in positions. And so, I — but I’m
hopeful about what’s going on as far as the Army is concerned these days, and I only talk
about the Army because I’m much more closely related to it. I think many of the leaders
have a different attitude than they did when I was coming up. They know what women have
done whenever they’ve had them in war for the last 10 years. And for many of them, they
are all so willing to stand up and say, yeah, they do, indeed, need to have the opportunity.
And one of the reason how come it’s important, I think, to be able to deal with it much these
days, is because of the disparity in what happens when you deal with veterans. You see,
the thing that much of the disability is grounded in as far as the Veterans Administration is
concerned, is that — what did you do in the war? All right? What kind of medals did you
get? You get so much disability because you got medals, you get — and if you’re not able
to get the medal because you weren’t assigned to the unit, you see, there’s a disparity
there that should not be. And so, I’m very hopeful about what I see going on as far as
the future is concerned. Gale Pollock:
What about the Air Force culture? Sandra A. Gregory:
The Air Force culture, of course, we’re the baby service. And what I saw and continue
to see is that it’s remained quite agile in terms of change. I think it’s much more open
to change and it opened up a lot of doors of opportunity. Now, I was in financial management
for almost three decades. And so, that was a place where, you know, for a while, over
half of the major command, the large commands, the chief financial officers were women, over
half. And so, that was the result. Some are in the audience today. And so, it’s interesting
to see around the table that we did, as a result of some of the trailblazers like all
of us in our career fields, really pushed and continued to know our job, practice integrity,
be sensitive to others and bring our leadership to the table, and the doors were opened. So
I saw the culture, much of change and innovation — not that there weren’t road blocks at times,
and there still are in areas, so I’m not saying everything’s fixed by any means. But I found
the culture. And I also found it interesting — this is just my personal correlation, but
I really enjoyed working for men who had daughters, because I think psychologically they realized
I want to give that person a fair shot, because I don’t want to put a lot of education in
my daughters and have someone give them roadblocks just because they’re women. And so that’s
something I found throughout my career that it was good that they sometimes — they didn’t
treat you like a daughter, but I think that it was something going on that they wanted
to make sure that the next generation got a good shot. Gale Pollock:
Admiral Hunter. Christine Hunter:
Well, I think I could add to the story a little bit by talking about the ways in which the
Navy supports ground combat. So, certainly, we’ve had women on ships since I came into
the Navy. We introduced women in all types of aircraft that the Navy flies over the years.
But women have more recently made I think a significant impact in combat support roles
where they are on the ground supporting the other services in many cases. And so, I wanted
to call attention to our CBs, our construction battalion, our engineers, our heavy equipment
operators, those sorts of people who may go in to prepare a landing zone, the footprint
for a forward operating base, that sort of thing. Women have been very successful in
the CBs for years. They can do those combat engineer roles, they can do builder and steel
worker and all types of craftsmen, what we might have thought of as vocational trades.
And they excelled there and they’re able to definitely pull their own weight or punch
above their weight in terms of the physicality of those roles. And then the second thing I’d talk about is
hospital corpsmen, of course, because all of us know and many of you probably know that
the Navy supplies the hospital corpsmen for the Marine Corps. So there’s lots of opportunities
to go on the ground. And women have excelled in those roles. And when I’m injured, whether
it’s downtown D.C. or on a very foreign shore, if I look up and I’m still awake and I know
I’m hurt, I want a Navy hospital corpsman there and I don’t really care what gender. [laughter] Gale Pollock:
General Mutter. What do you want to tell us about the culture of the Marine Corps? Carol Mutter:
Well, the Marine corps is a very male, very macho culture, as everyone understands — Gale Pollock:
No, tell me it’s not true. [laughter] Carol Mutter:
I’m telling you something you don’t know, right? It’s always been a bit of surprise
to me to think — when people say, “You made general in the Marine Corps?” The marines
are very innovative, very forward thinking, first to use helicopters among other things,
first to nominate a woman for three stars, thank you very much. [laughter] So, I think there are definite cultural issues,
thoughts, ideas; “every marine a rifleman,” that’s the first to mantra for marines. We
have to learn how to fire weapons, and to know how to fire weapons. I remember during
Desert Storm when the Army women were — and men — were caught in the crossfire and were
having difficulty in fending off the enemy, they happened to be a maintenance unit. And
my first question was, “How much rifle training did they have? When was the last time they
cleaned their weapons?” And I think there was a culture there of, “Well, they’re maintenance
people. They don’t need to worry about that.” And so, the Marine Corps had an advantage
saying where “every marine a rifleman,” and I think there’ve been a lot of lessons learned
in those areas, as well. The Air Force and the Navy in general, notwithstanding
CBs, et cetera, I think are more technically oriented, and the Army and the Marine Corps
more ground oriented, and so I think you’ll find a lot of retired male Army soldiers and
marines who are very concerned about the women in combat issue, because they have been in
combat. They know how nasty it is. They know how difficult it is emotionally, mentally,
physically, and so forth, and maybe because they are fathers of daughters, they don’t
want their daughters exposed to that. But by the same token, I agree with you, there
were a lot of men that I worked with who were very positive about my making general and,
in fact, taking command of a combat-deployable unit because they were fathers of daughters
who were struggling to be, you know, a junior partner in a law firm and that type of thing.
And so, they saw those things going on. They knew I could handle the job and they felt
like I deserved the chance. The other point I would make is that I think
that the young men and women of today have had a totally different experience than we
have, and that these old retired generals have had, and it’s totally different today.
These young men and women have been playing soccer together since second grade. They have
been in the fight together in various ways all through school. And so, they don’t have
the same issues in working together as we might have had coming up because we were initially
separated. And it evolved over time for us. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. You mentioned to concept of “every marine a rifleman.” How did that affect your
style of leadership compared to the men? How would you describe those similarities or those
differences? And the rest of you can think about this question because I’m coming to
the rest of you, too. [laughter] Carol Mutter:
Well, even though we said every “marine a rifleman,” when I first went through basic
training the women were not required to qualify with a rifle. Because going through General
Clara’s history there — at that time I was commissioned in the Marine Corps in 1967 — women
were not in the deployable units. They hadn’t expanded into those roles yet. So there was
no need for us to have those skills. We had familiarization training and we thought we
were hot stuff because we got to fire a weapon. But we didn’t have to fire for a score or
for a — and we didn’t have to be issued a weapon and make sure it was clean and ready
to go at any time. That came later. And it was difficult. There was a challenge through
your career to evolve into more and more requirements that you weren’t prepared for because you
didn’t get that training in basic the way the men had gotten. And I was fortunate to
have people help me along the way, mentors who made sure that I got some additional schooling
or help along the way to make sure that I understood and knew how to do those things
as we evolved and were expected to do more. Thank you. Christine Hunter:
So, I think the question was about how our leadership style might differ from — Gale Pollock:
From your male counterparts. Christine Hunter:
— based on our experiences and journey as a woman. And so, I would say that my leadership
style is a mixture of thoughtfulness, life-long learning, being very decisive, looking at
the hierarchical structure that we all operated in, and then a little bit of mom. [laughter] And that’s where it was different and I think
it was enormously helpful. Let me tell the story. I was the commanding officer of the
naval medical center in San Diego just about the time that we learned that many wounded
warriors and warrior units around the country were not receiving the kind of care that we
hoped that we were all delivering. And so it was a crisis, and it was question of, you
know, how are we treating these folks who’ve given so much to us, and so much to their
country, and sacrificed so much? How will we know when we’re doing a good job, because
they may not feel free to tell us. Well, I had been at the command for about two weeks
when the first headlines broke. I had on a pair of jeans and a tee shirt. It was the
weekend. I said, “I better get over to the barracks and figure out what’s really going
on.” So, I walked the halls and I ran into a young man in a wheelchair, helmet on, obviously
disfigured with lots of injuries. He said, “Who are you?” I said, “I’m the admiral.”
He said, “Oh no, the admiral’s a big guy.” [laughter] I said, “Well, I’m the new admiral.” And he
said, “You can’t be.” And I got them all out of their rooms and we had a look through those
rooms just like your mom would do. And ever after that, all those wounded warriors knew
that we could have a dialogue, that I would be available, I’d be in the barracks. And
their counselors and leaders would say to them, “Treat the admiral just like your best
friend’s mom. You have to be respectful, but you can say what you need to say.” And I think
that that gave me a significant advantage over someone who was perceived to be less
approachable because of the stars on her shoulders. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Sandra Gregory:
The leadership style — we must have been twins — [laughter] — I say a lot of the same things, is that
really walking around, getting to know your people, caring about them, making sure that
you really put the “m” in mentor and mother at the same time. So, I think a lot of it’s
very natural. Plus, if you just have been given those leadership opportunities as you’re
growing up is, whether you’re being a leader at home or at school, or at church community,
whatever you’re involved in, is that those leadership skills just transfer very easily.
So, I was telling someone earlier in our discussion is that my first duty job as a second lieutenant,
I was 20 years old and I had 50 people working for me, which at that time, you know, I had
people old enough to be my grandparents, and I was not overwhelmed, but I just — I would
take all those problems home and it was this and that, and to include deaths of spouses
and it was a lot of interesting things that were tough for someone who’s 20, 21, 22 years
old at that time. I didn’t think I ever wanted children after that. So, I went to the doctor
and fortunately they talked me out of it or else I wouldn’t be a mom of two wonderful
sons today because I said, “If this is what motherhood is all about, I don’t want anything
about it because I’ve 50 of them now.” But going back to the leadership style was to
be very much nurturing and, yes, the mission stayed on line, but let’s bring everyone’s
talents to the pool. Everyone has a role in that, very inclusive, we’re all going to make
— you know, whatever that mission is. But we turned that organization around in 18 months.
They were ranked worst in the command all the way to the top. And it was the same mothering
skills, the same natural leadership that we’re going to make this happen. And they did it
themselves. That’s all you do is give them the confidence and you believed in them and
point them in the right direction. Thank you. Gale Pollock:
General Farrisee. Gina Farrisee:
My first job I had 300 in the company and I was the XO. They did not talk me out of
not having children. [laughter] I feel like I’ve thousands throughout my career.
I think there are a lot of similarities and just a few differences, but the similarities
as far as my male counterparts, was to always lead from the front, to make sure that soldiers
knew that you weren’t going to ask them to do something that you weren’t going to do
yourself, to take good care of yourself and be able to be physically fit and do those
things so those soldiers, especially your female soldiers, would follow. They would
have no excuses not to do the things they needed to do. And so, I think it’s very important
to be a good role model and to always lead from the front, whether that’s for your male
or your female soldiers, service members. I do think that the key thing though was — and
Admiral Hunter said it was — that you are approachable. I think you have to be approachable,
but I think that’s part of being a good leader. If you want to know what’s on the mind of
those folks who work for you, if you don’t allow them to approach you and for them to
think that you are fair and that you will listen before you make your final decisions,
then they don’t feel they can trust you. But when you’re approachable, you do learn a whole
lot more from the people who work for you. And I think that’s a very key point. Gale Pollock:
General Clara. Clara Adams-Ender:
I was chief of the Army nurse corps, and so I managed the Army’s 22,000 nurses at that
time serving all over the world. And I will tell you that nurses are a tough crowd. [laughter] And I know there’s a couple of them in here
and they know that. Yeah, see, they’re over there laughing. Yeah. But one of the things
that you learn very quickly, I did, was to draw on some of your experiences from the
past. And I never appreciated this before I got into the military, but I’ll tell you,
it served me in good stead many a day. I came from a family of 10 kids. And I was the fourth
oldest. And whenever I had to deal with people and behavior and that type of thing, I always
said, “Jeez, my sister used to act like that. Now what did I do — [laughter] — when she behaved in that manner?” And I’d
use that — those kind of personal experiences to help me through many situations. I had
a mentor very early in my career who saw me through many a situation and taught me, at
that time, I don’t need anything from you. I’m all finished with my career and everything,
you just go out there and help somebody else. And so, I spent a lot of time just trying
to make sure that I grew up a lot of other people so that they could see and understand
how it is to manage organizations and to take care of the people and empower the people
that you’re dealing with. That is, allow them to do things in their own way. You know, very
often we get into the habit of trying to teach people to do things like we want them to do
it. They can’t. They’re not you. They never will be able to do that. So, just then let’s
give them the direction and the authority to act, and allow them to do it in their own
way and they’ll get it done in ways that will make proud. Gale Pollock:
Several of you have talked about the importance of mentors. Can you tell us a little more
about your mentors and how you, now, try and make yourselves available to those that are
the up-and-comers that want mentors? General Mutter? Carol Mutter:
Well, when I joined the Marine Corps we were 1 percent female, so most of my mentors — and
we didn’t have the word mentor in those days, either. But most of the leaders that I looked
up to that helped me along the way were men, obviously, because there weren’t that many
women around. And they did help me along the way. I do think — the theme that you’re hearing
here about the differences in our leadership styles I think are that women are more collaborative.
And in the military, especially, men tend to be perhaps more dictatorial. But also,
the theme of caring, I think was there as well, and I always felt like the best male
leaders also cared. They’re people who cared. They may show it in different ways, but you
knew. They weren’t worried about their career. They were concerned about you and about getting
the job done, and that was the most important thing. And so, I learned from everybody that
I worked for and that I worked with. And with some of them I learned what not to do, and
with others I learned what to do. And I’m just kind of a sponge, so I just tried to
learn from everybody. Now, as I got to be about a lieutenant colonel, I looked around
the base and I said, “Whoa, I’m the senior female around on the whole base, and maybe
I need to be thinking about what do I need to do for the younger women around.” And so,
we would get together for lunches and share things. That’s where the networking really
— I — we had a built-in network when I was a young lieutenant. In fact, we had a female
lieutenant colonel on the base and there was a women’s table at the club for lunch every
day. And so you could go up to the club for lunch and sit at that table and know there’d
women from all over the base that would come, and there weren’t that many of us obviously,
there were six or eight of us, but if you had a problem with — and you needed help
from that organization, you had somebody you could call over there. And so, the networking
really — again, we didn’t call it that, we didn’t have a special word for it in those
days, but it worked. And so, we had people who preceded us, I think, who figured out
what worked, and who taught us what worked, and we were able to continue those kinds of
things and build on them and perhaps do even more along the way. So, it was a matter for
me of just watching and learning. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Okay, General Gregory, you’ve been itching to answer this question. I’ve been
watching you wiggle over there. [laughter] Sandra Gregory:
I think mentoring is just one of the most important things that we can do. And those
that have helped us — and it just doesn’t — you know, men and women, I think it’s important
to also mentor people who don’t look and think like us. And then that’s what makes us a stronger
service, that’s what makes us a stronger nation, that’s what makes us stronger neighborhoods,
that that’s where we really want to reach out. It’s okay to mentor people who look just
like us, but also go beyond that and then it’s amazing all the new ideas that you have
from a different perspective. So, likewise, what you had mentioned, General Mutter, is
we’ve had some great mentors, men and women along the way. So, we learned from them and
then give back. And I think one of the key points is to be accessible. And I think that
also the networking among the civilian women and the military uniform women can be extremely
and is very extremely useful. So, right now, I just want to be accessible. And now with
the email and texting, you know, that’s what makes life very interesting and that’s what
make leadership all worthwhile, is when you see that next generation continue to prosper.
And if you had one little tiny bit of it, you learn from them and they learn from you.
Great partnership. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Hopefully some of these questions have been ones that interested you. But, I’d
like to start to open it to the audience now. I’d ask that you please identify yourself
and then ask your question. I will ask you to get to your question because there’s a
bunch of people and I’m hoping that there are more than one or two questions out there,
because if you don’t have some, I do. And — but I thought it would be a lot more fun
to find out what’s on your minds. So, who’s going to be brave enough to start? Please.
Oh, and thank you for bringing to my attention that there are microphones on either end of
the auditorium. Jim Carr:
Good evening. My name is Jim Carr. And two-part question. I’m just curious how many of you
may have been Girl Scouts? [laughter] Okay. All right. Thank you. Gale Pollock:
That’s part one. Jim Carr:
And my second question is specifically to the three flag officers who were in the nurse
corps or medical. And that is the combining of Walter Reed Army Hospital and Bethesda
Naval Hospital on the surface looked very seamless. But we know there were a lot of
difficulties. So, I’m wondering if any of you would be willing to — now that you’re
retired — if you’d be willing to put yourself in the role of the administrator or the commanding
admiral or general, and what things would you be doing differently or would you have
done differently in the combining of Walter Reed and Bethesda? Gale Pollock:
Do I get to take a question? Female Speaker:
Sure, go ahead, Gale. Female Speaker:
Your turn. Gale Pollock:
Okay. I’m brave enough to take that one. One of the ways that I would have described the
transition from one campus to another is that it was an old and tired facility, and our
patients and our staff deserved a whole lot better. So, rather than talk about closing
Walter Reed and making it into this big emotional thing, “Gee, we need a new campus, we need
a new environment. And we have the luxury of partnering with a sister service to provide
a premium location in the world for military men and women and their families,” would have
avoided all that emotion and negativeness. And then, second, I’m out and I have told
the senior leaders this so it’s not like I’m talking out of school, if we would allow the
mid-grade management and below to simply run that organization, it would run like peaches
and cream. But we have senior leaders whose egos are a problem. And they have to be the
biggest elephant in the room. And because they can’t learn to work and play nicely together
— they all skipped nursery school — it’s been much more challenging than it needed
to be. But at the patient care level, I think that those men and women of all the services
that are there, and their civilian support, are doing a fabulous job. Chris, you were involved in a lot of that
as well. Christine Hunter:
Well, I would underscore your last point, Gale, that it’s not and it never is about
the patient care because patient care is a ballet, it’s choreography, it’s you’re in
the operating room and someone puts you to sleep and someone is conducting the surgery,
and other people are helping and they’re all working together and they’re all wearing scrubs
anyway. And the language is the language of the operating room or of the physical therapy
unit, or of the oncology ward, those sorts of things. It’s the language of physicians,
nurses, patients, allied health professionals all trying to deliver great patient-centered
care. We do have some challenges like any two groups that have been competitive in the
past, you know, for resources, for attention, for those sorts of things, and bringing them
together about something they each held very dearly, you know. It’s like two top-of-their-game
sports teams, two universities, two major businesses that are told to combine. You know,
whose name goes on the merged entity, you know? And how does that make people feel in
terms of something that they have given their lives to? So, it’s a challenging and complicated
thing to bring our top level iconography together. We could have merged, and did in many cases,
services in many other regions of the country a little bit more easily than right here in
the nation’s capital. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. General Clara, you’re the other medic on the panel. Clara Adams-Ender:
I have a — I agree with what you both said, but there is another element that I think
has been overlooked in all of this. And that is, how come? How come the merger from the
beginning? And I think if we would just settle in on that, probably would have saved a lot
of — the fact of the matter is, and I suppose being a student of history, I’ve always skipped
pretty much what goes on here and looked at what might happen in the future. And I think
what we are drifting towards is one medical service for the military, one health care
service run by somebody. [laughter] And that was one of the beginnings. And I
think we’re going to see more of this happen. I just — you know, I have just stayed — tried
to stay out of the fight because I was already out and I — and so I try to stay on the outside.
But I am just watching the events as they go. We see monies getting shorter and tighter
in terms of dealing with health care services. And we are going to see a lot more of those
combinations come in the future. And I think that what we’re looking at very often, especially
if we get a little testy with each other, is it happens whenever cultures clash. That’s
one of the — cultures — the clashing of cultures never goes as smoothly as the merger.
You ever notice that? Other organizations have known that and have seen — we’ve seen
that happen in many, many cases. I work with a place down in Southern Virginia and it was
an American firm. And these people understand, they worked down there, had never been out
of Southwest Virginia. And some — no, I’m not going to take it there. [laughter] But, anyway, they — whenever — the company
was bought by — it was an American firm before. It was bought by a Danish firm, and they sent
over a German to run it. Now, think about you, the guy down there who’s making parts
in this particular area, and he says, “Well, I never been out of Southwest Virginia. I
was run by an America company before. Now I got a bunch of foreigners up here. I don’t
even understand what it is they’re saying, let alone know where they come from. How am
I going to be able to survive in here?” Things have changed. And it’s going to take a while
to get that information down and for people to be able to deal with it. But I just deal
with the basic reason how come we’re doing it to start with. And that, you know, kind
of eases it for me, and I just watch everybody, because over time it will all settle in and
we’ll go on and we’ll even remember that there was a clash at all. But as they have said
before, where the rubber meets the road, as they always said about physicians and nurses,
if you want physicians and nurses to stop fighting, take them to the bed of the patient
and they will never fight there. Need to all get them back to the bedside and let them
take care of people. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Please, ma’am. Mindy Reiser:
Yes, thank you. My name is Mindy Reiser. I wanted to talk about the whole issue of diversity.
Some of you joined the military when there were not that many people of color, and certainly
that has changed. There are more people from different ethnic groups in the military now,
and I’m wondering how that plays out. We’ve already heard some of the challenges of different
cultures, and the military certainly has within it many different cultures. We hear a lot
about gays in the military. But I wonder about lesbians, and what’s happened there and are
women out, and what does that mean? So, I’d like you to talk about the challenges of being
in a leadership position with people from very different educational backgrounds, very
different family structures, and people who come from cultures where parental relations
are different, peer relations are different; how did this play out and how did you handle
it? Gale Pollock:
Who’s going to jump first? Gina Farrisee:
I will. Gale Pollock:
Go ahead. Gina Farrisee:
I think that diversity makes every organization stronger. There is something that everybody
can learn from it. And I think that because the services are made up of what this nation
is made up of, then it is very important to have that diversity. And I think it makes
your units, your work place stronger, so long as you as a leader are willing to listen to
everyone and you are fair across the board. Everyone has their opportunity to be a part
and that you are one team, and that you work as one team. So, I believe it strengthens
the service and I believe that the services see that. Carol Mutter:
The example I’ve always used is a football team of 11 quarterbacks who will never make
it to the Super Bowl. And so, you need different members of the team with different skills,
different backgrounds, different capabilities, in order to work together to do the best and
be the best. So, that’s one point I would make about diversity being a good thing, in
general. I lost my second point, so you can come back to me later. [laughter] It’s called almost-timers. Gale Pollock:
Okay. I’ll make a comment about the diversity piece, because we have to look at who we attract
into the military. It’s the young men and women of our country. And they — we’ve evolved
over time as far as what we find acceptable and what we don’t. And when you talk to the
young folks, they’re just — they’re not plussed about the fact that a woman is in charge.
They’re not plussed about the fact that they could have a gay or lesbian to their right
or their left. They want to know whether or not they’re going to be able to do their job
and cover their back when they need it. It’s the groups of us that have not grown up with
those experiences in a day-to-day basis that find it harder. But one of the challenges
that I think we’re going to start to deal with now, we’re a reflection of society, and
we’ve been society’s tool to modify behaviors for years. We eliminated segregation, we brought
women in, we practically without anyone noticing, we transferred from the “don’t ask, don’t
tell” into an open environment, and there’s been very little ripple around our services
about that. The challenge that we’re being asked to take on now is sexual assault. And
I will tell you that your military is going to figure it out, and then we’re going to
turn to the rest of society and say, “It’s time for you to start to police out there.”
Because we count. [applause] We’re looking to make a difference. And I
think that you will see that our diversity that exists now, because of the other social
changes that we have made, will enable us to survive and to thrive and to change that
culture that exists across our nation because of the strength of our teams. Christine Hunter:
I have one more comment about the question who supports you in this role. So, one of
your most difficult moments, general talked about, being CO of a deployable unit, is sending
your people into the fight when they may not come back. And you have to face that as a
CO if you send anyone to deploy. And what you want to know is who supports you in this
role and in your life. And our ability to include whoever the individual considers to
be their family is a great strength in sending people forth. Sandra Gregory:
I just want to echo that this is — the military has been the great equalizer, like you had
mentioned — like Gale had mentioned throughout the last few decades since we’ve had women
in the military, back to the Civil War, even. But what’s interesting is I find is not only
is it the great equalizer, but because of the training — we are wonderful training
mechanism. And as you’ve gone through this, and so that everyone gets the same kind of
training, whatever your specialty is. And it doesn’t matter what background you have
or what belief you have or how you practice different things in life. It’s all about how
you can perform that job and how you’re going to fit on the team. Period. Dot. Is it perfect?
It’s not always perfect. But it’s leading the pack for the whole nation. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. I’m going to — Clara Adams-Ender:
I need to just make one — Gale Pollock:
Please. Clara Adams-Ender:
— comment in relationship to — because she talked about much that had to do with diversity
at various times in her experience. I will tell you that I believe in the environment
today that diversity is a lot more valued than it ever was before. And the reason how
come I think that is because of the thinking of the people who are here at this time. And
I will tell you that I’m glad it has changed because I have seen some disasters about happen
because of that. For example, whenever we had discovered that aid — we had aides in
this country to a very great degree — I was chief nurse at Walter Reed at that time. And
I was about ready to go down and jump on the chief of staff of the Army’s desk because
the Army said we didn’t have any gays in here. [laughter] And we’d known forever. I mean, anybody who’d
ever been in at that point of time knew that that was not true. And so, we had to make
sure that we worked through a number of things and get to people and say, “You’ve got to
make sure that you clean this up and deal with this.” And I heard that he died the other
day. C. Everett Coop is one of the greatest surgeons general we’ve ever had in this lifetime,
because he defied the president of the United States to deal with that particular issue.
And it turned out very well. So — and I’m glad the whole issue of gays in the military
has come to the fore because they’ve been here all of the time. It was just unfortunate,
and I have dealt with a lot of unfortunate situations as a leader coming forth of people
who have had difficulties. But I do believe that the environment and the atmosphere has
changed to a very great degree. Gale Pollock:
Thank you very much. Please. Diana Spencer:
Thank you. So, I’m Diana Spencer from the McGowan Fund, and I have like a list of questions
for you. [laughter] I’ll ask probably one, maybe two. So, today
there is a big push in education to get women, young women, girls, starting early into STEMs:
science, technology, engineering, and math. Is there a push to get young women into leadership?
Are there programs for young women going into our armed forces, into the military? Or — and
if there’s not, should there be? Gale Pollock:
Who wants to go? Carol Mutter:
I would just say all of our officer training programs are leadership programs. It doesn’t
matter male or female. And if you make the cut to become an officer in one of the services,
you’re going to go through — officer candidate training is the — is where — we at least
in the Marine Corps, I think it’s true for all the services — that’s where you say,
will they make the cut? Will this person be able to lead? And then if you got to basic
training once you’re commissioned and you say, okay, this is where we teach leadership
101 to everybody, male and female. It’s not necessarily automatic. Now certainly, I do
believe that there are a lot of, you know, captains of sports teams in high school and
college. They learn a lot of leadership skills in a lot of different ways along the way.
And there are girls that have opportunities in that regard as well. We don’t necessarily
do a good job of recruiting those girls like we do the men who are captains of the football
team. But we do bring them in and then give them the tools they need to become the leaders
that we need them to be so that they do the best job for those young men and women that
the mothers and fathers of America send to us. Sandra Gregory:
One of the things that I’ll just piggyback on is that’s how we use the — I’ll call it
like a faucet — we can turn it on and off. So, if we need more engineers, people with
more high tech mathematical skills, then we’ll offer more, for instance, ROTC scholarships
for that. Or in officer’s training school, which is a 90-day program, then we’ll, again,
we’ll take more people who have those particular skills because they come with already a college
degree. And same thing with the academies, we’ll just gear more towards what specific
things that we need towards STEM. But it is a wonderful program, and like I said, that’s
how we gear our scholarships if that’s how we’re going to increase the number. And that’s
going to be based on, you know, how well rounded, what kind of grade point average, just like
any other college scholarship. But it’s going to be the needs of that particular service. Gale Pollock:
And I would also submit that when the services are looking for leaders, they’re looking for
people that are demonstrating potential. You’re not just doing a great job in your day-to-day
job. You’re demonstrating to those around you, at both your peer level and your superior
level, that you have the ability to do more. And as you start to assert yourself in that
way, I think that often other opportunities to develop those skills are afforded to you.
So, some — there will always be some element of self-drive, trying to move yourself forward.
But you mentioned you had a couple of questions. Diana Spencer:
Well, I do. Gale Pollock:
I’ll give you one more, but then I’m going to have to go over here. Diana Spencer:
I’ll just ask real quickly this one because this one is very interesting to me. So, I
see a lot of programs come through today for post-traumatic stress, and it just struck
me as all of you were talking, which I have enjoyed tremendously — but it just strikes
me that, you know, they’ve all been, except for one, all have been for men for post-traumatic
stress in coming out of the armed services. What do you know about post-traumatic stress
that’s occurring in women that are coming up? Is it there? Is it not there? Is it just
less prevalent, or less known about. Gale Pollock:
I’m going to jump right into that one because I was a student nurse at Walter Reed during
Vietnam, and I watched the women nurses come back then and have significant issues. It
is not a gender-specific disorder. You know, it has to do with what we’re exposed to. And
for the docs and the nurses and the medics who every day dealt with a severely injured
body of a young man or woman, you know, it’s almost overwhelming. It — I admire them so
much for their ability to continue to do their job, day in and day out. But it is not a male
— that is not a male club. Christine Hunter:
Let me add a little bit to that. I think that we recognize that post-traumatic stress affects
both men and women, you know, based on their experiences and their whole life experience,
you know, that experience in context with other things. And so, many of the programs
that were focused on women’s needs for PTS also incorporated elements of sexual trauma.
And that is fine if that’s the group that you fall into, and certainly there are many
needs, but young women said to me, “There isn’t a comfortable place for me to deal with
my issues. I don’t fall into the category of military sexual trauma. I do have combat-related
PTS, and I’m in a group of men with whom I don’t feel a close connection as we’re going
through our group therapy to try to work these issues out.” And so, there’s a real gap in
programs for women, and I think that all of us as health professionals are trying to step
into that, not only to figure out what techniques really are most effective for people to resolve
or address these issues so they can go on with their lives, but also, are there gender
differences in how we respond to treatment or the context in which we will feel safe
to engage in treatment? And both the military and the VA, and the joining forces campaign
that is reaching out to medical schools and professional training schools, nursing schools
across the country, are seeking solutions to that problem. So, maybe some of you in
the audience, you know, have a part of the formula that will work. And, you know, please,
we encourage you to engage. Gale Pollock:
I know you have a couple of others, if you give me a moment to go across? Please. Anne Miles:
Hi, I’m Anne Miles and I’m a retired lieutenant colonel in the Air Force and taught at the
Air Force Academy for four years back in the ‘80s, ‘90s — 80s and 90s. And, in fact,
one of my fellow professors has now been named to be the superintendent, Michelle Johnson.
And so academies are sort of in my mind at the moment, and some of your comments went
along those lines, so forgive me if I don’t phrase this exactly right. But what I’m interested
in hearing your comments on are whether we need to change, reform, look at the service
academies in terms of the way they deal with women, in terms of improving the way women
are treated throughout the military and the leadership roles that they’re going to be
privy to down the road. Some of the — specifically, I can mention that, for example, in a typical
academy class of 22, for example, there would be two women. So the proportion of women to
men in a typical academy classroom is pretty, you know, is wildly disproportionate. And
so, there’s lots of evidence to suggest that women do not participate in academy classes
the way they would in a normal college classroom, for example, because of that inequity. And
there’s lots of other inequities. I could go on and on and on. And not to disparage
the academies, I’m just saying that that is a reality. And so, anyway, I know that Michelle
Johnson will probably be interested in some of those sort of standard operating procedures,
but we really leave the academies pretty much off the table in most discussions about any
kind of changes within the military, whether it’s — whether we’re talking about joint-ness,
or whatever. And so, I know it’s a really hard question, but if you were, you know,
sort of chief of staff of the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, for a day, would you be
interested in looking at the service academy issues? Does that bother you in any way? Gale Pollock:
General Mutter. Carol Mutter:
In 2003, I was the chair of DACOWITS. I had retired at that point and chaired DACOWITS,
and that was when the Air Force academy sexual assault scandal broke, and DACOWITS could
— you all know what DACOWITS is, Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services.
We could easily have descended upon the Air Force Academy like everybody else did and
study it and try to figure out what was wrong, and we said, “No, they’ve got enough people
doing that. We’ll wait, maybe we should go back in four or five years and see if their
actually implementing the recommendations that all these other people are making at
this point.” But, I did, as the chair of DACOWITS, go and visit the Air Force academy, talk to
the superintendent. And I ended up talking to the superintendents of all the academies
at that time, including the Coast Guard academy. And you’re right, the academies are neither
fish nor fowl. They’re not active duty yet, so they’re not in the military yet, and so,
at that time, and it may still be the case, they all come under the direct leadership
of the chief of staff of the service, who has a few other things to worry about. And
so, they get very little supervision, oversight, attention. The IGs, inspector generals of
the services didn’t even go out and look at the academies at that time. And I don’t know
if that’s changed or not. But it should have. And we certainly made some recommendations
along those lines. But, yeah, I believe that there are a lot of things that need to be
— the academies need to be paid attention to. There are things that need to change.
Things have changed, but there’s more that can be done. And if nothing else, make sure
the IG goes and sees them on a normal schedule like they do everybody else. Gale Pollock:
One of the things that I think will positively affect change in the academies is women have
now been in the services long enough that they’re beginning to be in senior leadership
positions across the academies; department chairs, for example, the — what in the Army
we’d call the supe, the superintendent of the academy. So, I think as people become
more and more visible in those positions, we’ll start to see more change, which in our
— I think collectively — I hope we’ve communicated that we’ve all seen a great deal of change
and we consider it quite positive. So, I think that there’s good news on the horizon. It
won’t always be easy. But it usually ends up good. Sandra Gregory:
Gale, I want to mention something, and Dr. Miles, thanks for bringing that up. I think
what we have to create in the whole era of not just the service academies, but whether
it be ROTC or OTS or the basic training, we need to have the culture that we will listen
and pay attention to what’s really happening at the ground level. Just like in command,
whether you’re in command of a ship or of a hospital or of a huge garrison, we need
to be listening and then use the avenues that are there or make new avenues so that people
are really listened to if there’s something going wrong. And like I said, now I think
— for the Air Force academy, yes. With General Johnson going in, from one of the early classes
of women at the Air Force academy, she has seen the whole spectrum now. And so, I have
great confidence, just like others have worked hard to improve them, we still have some avenues
to work on. And so, I think that’ll be a new change and that’s why, perhaps, that’s why
she’s going in there. Gale Pollock:
Thank you. Please. Jess Bice:
Hi, my name’s Jess Bice. I’m an Army officer, went to West Point actually. I have a question
about ethics. So, over the last year I read the newspaper and I’m actually disappointed
because some of the leaders that I’ve looked up to over the last 13 years or so, have been
in the newspaper for ethical wrongdoings, if you will. I want to ask you, maybe if you
could provide an anecdote or story of a time when you were put in a position where you
thought something was unethical, and how you handled that, and how it came out. Gale Pollock:
I know that Admiral Hunter had been thinking along those lines because of the questions
that we had talked about that we could potentially use. Would — do you want to start that one
for us? Christine Hunter:
Sure. I think, you know, we — some of the news stories, of course, have been about personal
transgressions and people who have, you know, violated integrity boundaries. But I think
in every leadership position, you get placed in a situation where you have to do the right
thing even though it may not enhance your career or be good for your immediacy, let’s
say that, your immediate comfort. And so, when that happens to you, first of all, I
think you’ve got to examine how do you know what the right thing is? You know, you have
— we’re all swayed by our emotions. We’re all creatures of our surroundings, and you
feel like you’re ethically conflicted and you know you’re facing a difficult decision
as a leader, and you’ve got to make it right. That’s where those mentors, where those touch
tones, where — who are the people who are going to come to you and say, “You’re a little
off.” You know, where do you get that feedback? In the Navy, that’s — most often comes from
our command master chief, our senior enlisted leader. And when I see those failures, I go
home, and my husband and I, the dialogue we have over the dinner table is where was the
CMC? Because when I’ve been a little bit off, you know, that command senior enlisted leader
has walked through the door, closed the door, and said, “Captain, admiral,” you know, whatever
rank I was at, “we got to talk, you know, because my job is to keep you in a place where
you can lead this entire unit to the best of your ability and to our best outcome.”
And so, I would say that those sort of leadership challenges are sometimes I think a failure
of touch tones. And maybe that’s because you get too close to those people in your leadership
triad. And they become your friends, and they don’t want to tell you, or maybe it’s because
you never invested the time in the relationship and so they don’t feel welcome to make that
kind of observation. But I have been redirected to true north by a savvy senior enlisted leader
more than once. [laughter] Gale Pollock:
Please. General Clara. Clara Adams-Ender:
I’d like to talk about, she said an example of a situation that I had when I got to be
a general officer. I was one of the females that was there, and the Army had just implemented
a policy that said that whenever there were promotion boards that met and there were females
to be considered, there must be a female of equal rank or above on the board. Well, at
that time, we had four general officers in the — females in the entire United States
Army. [laughter] Okay. So I sat every fourth board, all right. [laughter] And this particular day I was there, and it
was a brigadier general board, and I was in a situation and in many of those situations
you have numbers of other officers that you have to deal with and to be able to do the
things that are necessary for individuals to be selected. And there was a young man
that was a colonel that was the deputy of a fellow that I knew, who was being pushed
— was — he was pushing him to make general officer. And I knew that that young man had
been considered in many situations to be a harasser of women, that he treated women very
badly in many, many situations. I’d seen him do that personally in terms of talking to
them and things of that nature. And this fellow that was promoting him, came to me and said,
“Listen, I’d like for you to support my guy over here because I — and he’s my deputy
and I’d like for him to go ahead,” and that type of thing. And I didn’t say anything at
the time, but I had an opportunity, because the day closed and I had an opportunity to
go home and think about it. And I will tell you, I had a very, very, sleepless night that
night. And I learned — someone told me one time, when you think through situations and
you think about the worst thing that could ever happen to you, it never will. And when
I went back that next morning, and I had practiced my speech and everything in front of the mirror,
I went back and I told him, “Listen, I can’t support you in this situation and these are
the reasons why.” And he said, “Oh, no, Clara, that’s okay.” He said, “I know you know the
situation.” And he didn’t support him either. And so — [laughter] — he didn’t make general officer. But, you
know, whenever an ethical situation comes up, and they do very often, it’s important
that you think it through and know where your ethics are at the time. And make sure that
if it’s on something that is of importance, you don’t want to be wavering on it at that
time. Because if you waver that time, the chances are you’ll forget SENA [spelled phonetically]
before too long. And so, I think that when you have those ethics and you know what it
is that you ought to be about doing, that you ought to keep on being about doing. Carol Mutter:
I had an opportunity to talk to similar groups at the Joint Forces Staff College in Norfolk,
Virginia, and I remember in the maybe 10, 12 years ago, talking to a group of majors
and lieutenant colonels, and they were very concerned at the time about all the different
deployments that we were being asked — the military was being asked to do at the time.
And they were being stretched very thin, and they thought a lot of these things were inappropriate
and they weren’t things that they should be doing, and the question was why aren’t the
generals throwing their stars on the table and saying, “We ought not be doing these things.”
And the answer is, I’d like to provide that — to have you think about it in a little
bit different perspective here, because, one, you do that behind closed doors. You do make
your ideas known, your concerns, your thoughts. You’re true to your ethics behind closed doors,
but it’s still the guy’s — the lead guy’s decision, and usually it’s a guy. But, you
know, the guy in charge has to make the decision and has to take the responsibility for that
decision. Now, yes, there may come a time in a situation where it is so important that
you feel like, “Okay, I just can’t handle this. If that’s the decision it’s going to
be, I’m going to resign. I’m out of here.” And I remember General Ralston, I think it
was, chief of staff of the Air Force, who did that over a situation about 10, 12 years
ago. Sandra Gregory:
General Fogleman. Carol Mutter:
Fogleman, excuse me. And he did that. He left as chief of staff of the Air Force, the number
one guy in the Air Force. And when he left, he had zero influence over what would happen
the next day. When you’re still there, you still can work inside the system to try to
change things. But it may be that you’ve made up your mind, “It ain’t happening and I ain’t
going to be able to change things, and so I’m leaving.” And that may be a time for you
to go. But those are the decisions that you struggle with. Is this something I can continue
to work at and change from the inside? Or is it something that I just can’t live with
anymore and it’s not changing, and so I’m going to leave. Gale Pollock:
I think a final thought on that is power corrupts. Or absolute power corrupts absolutely. And
I think that leaders in the military, in government, in business, they can — they lose true north.
And I think it’s good that we’re offended when they do. So — Carol Mutter:
On the other side, if I could say, I was head of manpower before I retired from the Marine
Corp. On any given day, I forget the number now, it was either one-third or two-thirds
of the general officers in the Marine Corp were under investigation. It is too easy for
anybody to make an accusation. And whenever an accusation is made, you have to take it
seriously. You have to investigate it. I was accused of a number of interesting things
— [laughter] — and under investigation. Female Speaker:
Join the club. Carol Mutter:
So, I am not at all happy. I hope there are no media people here. We’re on the record,
so forgive me, but, I mean, the media will run with a story before they figure out if
it’s true or not. And they’ll say, you know, unconfirmed, but they still run with it. And
poor General Allen got whipped up in this whole thing with General Petraeus. And I’m
very disappointed in General Petraeus. I had a lot of respect for him. But General Allen
didn’t deserve what he got and it was eventually proven that he didn’t deserve it. But in the
meantime, what did he and his family go through and his command and his ability to do his
job? It is too easy for people to make accusations and for it to make a huge difference in the
ability to accomplish your mission and lead those poor young men and women that need good
quality leadership. Gale Pollock:
I’m going to take one last question. Take two. Oh, I’m sorry. I hadn’t seen anyone come
to that side. So, I think you were standing up first. Okay. Female Speaker:
Good evening, ladies. I had a question in the context of I see a lot of, my female officer
peers getting out of the Air Force because they feel that they need to choose between
having a family and having a career. And I was wondering if you could talk about any
programs or initiative to retain quality female officers or anything that you would recommend
to do in order to be successful at both. Carol Mutter:
How many of us are married? [laughter] How many of us have children? And we still
— we did it, but it was not easy, was it? Sandra Gregory:
No, but there are a couple things that I’ve mentored people who have wanted to make some
of those same choices. First of all, I’ve got a great partner and he’s in the audience,
who is also a veteran of the Air Force. And we did this together. I would not be here
today as a retired one-star if it hadn’t been for my husband, Retired Colonel Tom Bradley.
And when I first told him I didn’t want children, when we got engaged and then the marriage
was going great and he said, well, I perhaps brought it up, and said “Okay, I’ll have one.”
And then we decided that we would have a nanny, that we were going to put a lot of money into
a nanny who fortunately stayed with us for 21 years. She died four years ago at the age
of 84. My husband wanted some beautiful, young nanny. [laughter] And I was the hiring authority and so — [laughter] — I hired — we hired Francis, who was 64,
and had had eight children of her own. Her first one was born with she was about 15.
She had a Ph.D. in motherhood. And I’ve had a lot of people here, some in the audience,
who, you know, sometimes their husbands decided to step out of the career path that they were
in and they’ve done that very successfully. Others who have continued on a civilian career
path or maybe went into the Guard or Reserves, there are many different ways. The biggest
thing when I mentor people, say, “I respect your choices, and I speak that you respect
mine.” We ended up having two children because nanny wanted us to have a second one — [laughter] — who’s a wonderful 22-year-old now. And
the other one’s 25. But, so it’s a partnership, when we get promoted, she’d get pay raises.
We always paid taxes on her and everything was above board when it came to the IRS. But
she said, “How — I don’t know how much money you make,” and this was when we were majors,
she said, “But you work a lot.” And so she was the partner. So that’s what, like I said,
worked for us. I know other people have had au pairs who have had great success. I know
somebody in the audience who’s had great — so, I think the key thing is as we mentor people,
there isn’t a one-size-fits-all. So, it took my husband a lot of understanding. We put
a lot of money into nanny. People always said, “We want to be your nanny, you know, you come
with a car and insurance and taxes paid for,” and they want to come and work. But we treated
her with great respect, the same leadership principles that we used as leaders at the
work place worked with Nan. And so, it was a beautiful partnership. She was my best friend.
I miss her a lot. Tom, you’re now my best friend. [laughter] So, I don’t know if that answered it, but
I tried to put a little bit of humor in it, too, but it’s a very serious, tough question.
And so, if you’re going to have, like I said, whether you have an au pair or nanny, you
can’t do it — I mean, it’s hard, I mean I know single moms who have done it, it’s eight
times as hard. My hat goes to you. But it is a tough choice, so, like I said, we put
money — our number one priority, which was our children and our mission to get our job
done. And so, I sort of rest with that. That worked for us. I wish I could make carbon
copies of her. She was phenomenal and she would tell me if I were , you know, “you’re
about two pounds away from being plump,” and my uniform didn’t look right, so she nannied
all of us. [laughter] So, like I said, and I think too, is to mentor
each other in our personal board of directors, is that we have to be sounding boards for
each other. And so, I remember a woman who later retired as a two star, she really gave
me some great advice. One of our classmates in air command and staff, when I was pregnant
with our first son, and it was hard being the token pregnant woman in a class of 435
men and about 30 women, was that — we shared questions on what to ask a nanny. And we laughed
about them later. You know, Francis was 63, you know, I asked her the normal questions,
do you use drugs? [laughter] What do you think about your philosophy of
raising children? You know, here she had eight, I had zero. [laughter] But, like I said, somewhere in the archives
I’ve kept that because it was, again, the partnering of other women to help me get to
the point, and I’m eternally grateful to that other major who shared those questions and
her experiences. And she, too, was able to keep nannies and au pairs for a long, long
time. So it’s those same leadership things. So it’s — hope — a long answer to — we’ll
be happy to talk more later if you’d like, but it can be done. But I couldn’t have done
it without my partner of almost 30 years, Tom Bradley. Clara Adams-Ender:
I want to just make one comment because I ran a female profession in the military, primarily.
The nurse corps at the time that I was in was 75 percent female, and that was 1987.
And I can tell you that the rest of the services were not at all interested in the fact that
I had mostly females, because they had to make sure that all these guys got the jobs
that they were supposed to get. And I was interested in the fact that the nurses got
to the places they needed to be so that they could take care of those guys who needed the
jobs that they needed. Whatever. So, we talked to married couples. And I used to say that
the nurse corps married everybody. [laughter] And they told — one infantry officer told
me when they stop saying that, say they have discerning taste. I said, “All right.” [laughter] But they married Air Force, marines, everybody,
you see. And so, as a result of that, we had to look at trying to get those — everybody
with a career together so that they could be in the position they needed to be in order
to be able to move ahead, because everybody’s trying to move ahead. And I will just say
one of the first things that you need to do if you’re going to deal with this is, get
together with your partner and decide whose career is going to be advanced and when, because
yours is just as important as the partner is. I — you know, I can’t say that I can’t
send this nurse over here because she’s got to go with her husband to this job that he’s
going to over here in this area. And I don’t have a position for her in that particular
place. You see the dilemma that is created there? The mission of the Army, or the mission
of the military does not change because you get married, you know. It really doesn’t.
And as a result of that, you have to work those kinds of things out. And if they don’t
work, then you might have to consider making other choices, because you do have other choices.
You may not like them, but you do have them. [laughter] Yeah, and that’s the way I think it’s important
for us to look at it. Carol Mutter:
The most important thing I just have to echo is your partner. Clara Adams-Ender:
Absolutely. Carol Mutter:
I had a wonderful — have still, a wonderful life partner who supported me unfailingly
in my career, and again, would not be where I ended up if it were not for him. So, that’s
number one most important thing. But, I’d also like to talk about this from a slightly
different perspective, because I think your question was getting at programs that the
military might put in place, too, that help, because the last Marine Corps command screen
board for colonels came out and there were not any women on the list. I emailed the commandant
and said how come? And he said, “I’m finding out.” And he’s now got a task force working
on why — and it’s because of family issues — 10 of the 11 women who were eligible for
a command took their names out of the running, and said, “I do not want to be considered
for command,” which obviously is key for the next step in your career. And it was for family
reasons. And, so the question is are we not supporting these women enough in their family
choices in order for them to feel like they can make the choice to stay. And I — they’ve
got a task force looking at it. I know DACOWITS is looking at it again. When I was with DACOWITS
for three years in 2003 to 2006, 2007, we looked at work/life balance issues. There
are a lot of reports and a lot of recommendations out there. One of the recommendations had
to do with having a sabbatical program where the women can leave for a few years — men
could leave, too, and take care of an aging parent. I mean, there are — or go to an advanced
degree program if the military wouldn’t send you. There are a lot of good reasons to have
a sabbatical program. Coast Guard has done this. They have learned the lessons about
how to do it well and what works and what doesn’t work. And I know DACOWITS is looking
at it again, and I know the Marine Corps is looking at it to say what are some things
that we can do to ensure we’re not doing things that force people out and, in fact, we are
proactively doing some things that can help them make the decision to stay. So, because
you’re losing a lot of talent and expensive training and expertise that you’ve put a lot
of time and money into for years in training people up to this point, and then they leave.
And we can’t afford to do that. Sandra Gregory:
I’ll just have one quick short one that – because I don’t know if I fully answered it either
and you just brought that up, General Mutter. One of the things that my husband and I said
to our career people was, “We would take any job that the Air Force needs us for, as long
as you keep us together.” And so, we knew that — and we had made the decision then,
I guess, that my career took a lead. But my husband got phenomenal jobs. He always had
a lot more fun than I did. [laughter] So, they kept me on career path within financial
management, but he has a résumé — like, for instance, he got to do strategic planning
and war gaming and quality. And he just did — and then international affairs, so he got
to have — so it can, like I said, but we were very flexible with our career monitors,
just like all the things that you had to deal with. Wow, we just said, “Listen, we’ll go
anywhere, and we’ll work hard, just like you do.” So it can be done and there are many
of us, I think, also is it’s important that the women who have done some of those same
things ahead of you, you shouldn’t feel like you’re on an island by yourself. Please call
on us, we’ll be happy to share with you one-on-one or in groups, brown bags, wherever you’re
working, we’d be happy to come. Gale Pollock:
Yes, I would encourage people to reach out to us. You know, if we can figure out how
to get to your location, we’re generally, you know, can be listeners. We can ask some
really tough questions about areas that you might not have considered. So, you know, reach
to the other women that are out there that are either going through or know people who
have gone through similar challenges. Sandra Gregory:
And our fees are small, they’re cheap. [laughter] I think we had one more question. Female Speaker:
The question was just asked. Clara Adams-Ender:
Oh, oh, all right. Gale Pollock:
I hope that the thoughts of my colleagues were interesting for you this evening. I know
we had fun just on email and thinking about, well, what would we really want to share with
the audiences tonight? I think we could have talked for days, but that wasn’t what we were
afforded. So, thank you all for your patience and for sticking with us through the evening.
I know that I’m — I’ll stay. This is my friend, Cruiser; we’ll be around for a little bit
if anyone has questions. And I would just really like to thank my colleagues here for
a great evening. Thanks very much. [applause]

Tony wyaad

RELATED ARTICLES
LEAVE A COMMENT