Military Mean Girls: When the Uniform Doesn’t Automatically Mean Sisterhood
When Uniforms Hide Unclean Hearts: Examining How Military Service Doesn't Automatically Manufacture Maturity or Erase High School Cruelty.
You see this photo? That's Christa, and there's me. This is the article picture to show how mean girls will smile in your face and still have an ugly spirit, and how they can't be influential because they're mean and masculine for Uncle Sam while being Auntie Tom.
There is a particular kind of disappointment that comes from watching women associated with institutions built around discipline, service, accountability, and professionalism participate in the same "mean girl" behavior many women thought they left behind in high school.
For me, that conversation has personal roots in Jacksonville, Florida, and reaches back to Terry Parker High School. Several women became part of that experience for me, including Christa "Chris Chris" Parker, Bethany Larson, and Jassandra Jackson.
This article does not attempt to determine anyone's character in its entirety. Nor does my personal experience represent the United States military or women who serve honorably within it. I am writing about behavior I personally experienced, statements I remember hearing, circumstances I witnessed, and how I interpreted those experiences.
And they left me with a larger question:
What happens when the maturity we associate with military service does not translate into how women treat other women?
THE UNIFORM AND THE WOMAN WEARING IT
Military service carries enormous cultural significance in my family.
My father served in the United States Navy for 28 years and became a Master Chief. Because of him, when I hear "military," I do not automatically think about uniforms, social-media aesthetics, or titles. I think about commitment, accountability, sacrifice, leadership, longevity, responsibility, providing for a family, and showing up when showing up isn't convenient.
That upbringing shaped my expectations.
It also taught me something important: wearing a uniform does not automatically manufacture maturity.
Service deserves respect. But service members remain individuals, and questioning an individual's interpersonal behavior does not require disrespecting the institution in which that person serves.
My experiences with Christa left me questioning what I perceived as a contradiction between military professionalism and the way she communicated about other people. I particularly found comments criticizing Navy members' bodies and weight troubling. Military fitness standards are one conversation. Degrading someone's appearance is another.
She's ultimately jealous. The bird brain was watching my relationship with Dominic Jackson from her phone at sea, air, or in the sky. Who knows, because she changes branches so much now. Can you keep up with me?!
I also experienced interactions that I perceived as unnecessary attempts to insult or antagonize Black women through social media and direct messages.
And that is where my conversation about the "military mean girl" begins.
WHEN HIGH-SCHOOL ENERGY FOLLOWS WOMEN INTO ADULTHOOD
Women grow up.
At least, we are supposed to.
High-school disagreements should not have to become lifelong competitions. Adulthood gives us careers, families, businesses, education, relationships, and responsibilities that should eventually become larger than teenage social hierarchies.
A woman can dislike another woman. She can disagree with her. She can decide they will never be friends.
None of those things require harassment, unsolicited messages, humiliation, or attempts to recruit other people into interpersonal conflict.
I experienced interactions involving Christa that I interpreted as antagonistic and unnecessarily personal. Instead of allowing those experiences to pull me into the same behavior, they made me think seriously about professional identity.
That becomes particularly relevant when someone wants to enter a profession connected with the legal system. If your aspiration is to become a paralegal—or work anywhere within law—professionalism cannot simply become something placed on a résumé. Legal environments demand discretion, documentation, boundaries, and the ability to encounter people you personally dislike without allowing those feelings to dictate professional behavior.
There is also an irony to this situation that I cannot ignore: Christa is the cousin of Ce'tia, whose brand I have previously promoted and supported. That connection made the hostility I experienced feel even more unnecessary. But Ce'tia is responsible for Ce'tia, and Christa is responsible for Christa. Supporting one Black woman's business does not require me to tolerate disrespect from someone related to her, just as conflict with one relative should never become an excuse to condemn an entire family.
MILITARY SERVICE IS BIGGER THAN SOCIAL MEDIA
I have also questioned the way military identity can sometimes become part of someone's social persona while their interpersonal behavior appears inconsistent with the discipline that identity is supposed to represent.
However, fairness requires an important distinction.
Serving in, attempting to serve in, transferring between, or exploring opportunities involving different military branches does not, by itself, prove that someone is incapable of commitment. There can be circumstances outsiders simply do not know.
My criticism, therefore, isn't that changing military paths automatically makes someone disrespectful toward the military.
My concern is the contradiction I perceive when military identity is invoked as evidence of discipline while interpersonal behavior reflects something very different to me.
My father's 28 years of service gave me a particular reference point for sustained military commitment.
Twenty-eight years.
Master Chief.
Leadership.
Responsibility.
That is the military standard I grew up witnessing.
BETHANY LARSON AND THE LIMITS OF ACCOUNTABILITY
Bethany Larson also became associated with this chapter of my experience.
There are serious circumstances involving people connected to her life that contributed to how I understood what was happening around me.
One of those individuals was the late Joshua Curry, the father of Bethany's child.
My raw expression regarding that history was:
"Bethany's dead baby daddy Joshua Curry caused harm to women."
I am preserving that statement because it represents my allegation and emotional expression. I am not presenting it here as an independently established criminal finding.
That distinction matters.
Bethany cannot automatically be held responsible for something a man allegedly did simply because she had a relationship or child with him. Women do not inherit men's culpability through romantic relationships.
Likewise, someone's death does not automatically establish or disprove allegations made about his conduct during his lifetime. Those questions belong to evidence.
My criticism of Bethany, therefore, concerns Bethany's own interactions with me and what she personally said, knew, or did, rather than assigning another person's alleged wrongdoing to her.
That is accountability without guilt by association.
JASSANDRA JACKSON AND WHAT I PERCEIVED AS "SETUP" CULTURE
Another person who became part of this history was Bethany's friend, Jassandra Jackson.
My recollection of one particular event is serious:
"Jassandra Jackson had Jameisha Sparrow come to my house with a gun trying to be nasty."
That is my account of what I experienced.
I perceived what happened as intimidation and a "setup" tactic.
Because allegations involving firearms, threats, or coordinated intimidation are extremely serious, I am not presenting my interpretation as a judicial finding regarding Jassandra's or Jameisha's intentions or criminal liability.
But experiencing something I perceived as threatening changed the way I viewed the surrounding interpersonal conflict.
Military organizations necessarily teach planning, discipline, coordination, and operational thinking for legitimate national-defense purposes. That does not mean interpersonal conflicts involving service members should automatically be characterized as military operations, and I am not alleging that the United States military authorized, encouraged, or directed anything that happened to me.
My criticism concerns individuals.
WHEN VIOLENCE BECOMES A HIGH-SCHOOL MEMORY TO CELEBRATE
My experience with Jassandra raised another issue for me: the enormous difference between acknowledging something ugly from your youth and continuing to glorify it in adulthood.
One high-school story I remember Jassandra discussing involved what she described as beating another person in the head with a lock.
I am describing my recollection of what she communicated. I am not independently establishing here that the incident occurred exactly as described.
What disturbed me was how I perceived that story being carried into adulthood.
"Jassandra's only memory of her being in high school was beating someone in the head with a lock. She's embarrassing and she's a mother of 5 kids? Praising literal violence that she did? Sick."
Those were my words because that was my reaction.
But my criticism is not that she has five children. There is nothing inherently shameful about having five children. The question is what adults model for those children.
If an adult recounts an incident of serious violence as something to celebrate instead of something she regrets, learns from, or has outgrown, I believe that deserves criticism.
There is nothing admirable about attacking another person. There is nothing "tough" about glorifying violence years later.
A stronger message to children would be:
"I made bad decisions when I was younger. Violence was one of them. Don't repeat what I did."
That is growth.
That is accountability.
That is breaking a cycle.
WHY THOSE EXPERIENCES CONNECTED FOR ME
My recollection of that high-school story affected how I interpreted my later experience involving Jassandra and Jameisha Sparrow.
I had heard a story that I understood as celebrating violence. Later, I experienced a confrontation that I perceived as involving intimidation and a firearm.
I cannot turn my perception of that sequence into proof of another person's intentions.
But I can explain what it did to my perception.
From my perspective, hearing violence discussed in one context and later experiencing a frightening confrontation in another naturally affected the way I understood the people involved.
Past violence should become a lesson.
It should not become a personality trait.
"DON'T CALL ME RETARDED AND THEN EXPECT SILENCE"
Another part of my frustration came from language I experienced as degrading.
"Jassandra wants to call me retarded."
That word bothered me beyond the personal insult. It has historically been weaponized against people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Using it casually to attack another woman's intelligence is unnecessary.
My anger produced an equally harsh response:
"Her having 5 children is below the poverty line to speak on anyone and be messy about Bethany's dead baby daddy."
That quotation captures how angry I was. But reflection also requires me to separate legitimate criticism from the insult my anger produced.
Having five children does not establish that someone lives below the poverty line. Poverty also does not make someone inferior. Motherhood and income level do not determine character.
The stronger criticism is much simpler:
Someone's family size does not give her permission to demean another woman's intelligence, just as another woman's education, career, or financial position does not give her permission to demean a mother.
CLASS DOES NOT DETERMINE CHARACTER
Another raw statement I made was:
"I do feel as though low socioeconomic individuals such as Chris Chris and Bethany Larson have embarrassed Jacksonville."
That statement captured my anger, but socioeconomic status itself isn't what makes someone honorable or dishonorable.
Jacksonville contains working-class families, military families, wealthy families, single mothers, and people experiencing financial hardship. None of those classifications automatically determines integrity.
What embarrassed me was the behavior I experienced.
My issue isn't someone's bank account.
My issue is how women treat women.
SINGLE MOTHERS IN UNIFORM ARE NOT THE PROBLEM
Being a single mother in the military is not embarrassing.
It does not make a woman less disciplined, less feminine, or less deserving of respect. Women across the Armed Forces balance motherhood with extraordinarily demanding careers.
Jacksonville is deeply connected to military life, and families throughout the community manage deployments, childcare, relationships, relocations, and demanding schedules while continuing to serve.
My criticism, therefore, isn't:
How can a single mother serve?
The better question is:
How does someone entrusted with serious professional responsibilities carry those standards into the way she treats other people?
Motherhood isn't the indictment.
Conduct is.
WHAT MY FATHER'S SERVICE TAUGHT ME
Perhaps this subject affects me differently because I watched military leadership inside my own home.
My father did not teach me to respect the Navy because somebody looked good in a uniform.
He taught me through longevity.
Twenty-eight years.
Master Chief.
Responsibility.
Providing for his family.
Showing up.
That is why I distinguish between respecting military service and automatically approving every action taken by an individual who happens to serve.
The institution is larger than any one personality.
Accountability requires precision.
TO THE YOUNG WOMAN CONSIDERING MILITARY SERVICE
Ultimately, this conversation is bigger than Chris Chris, Bethany, Jassandra, Jameisha, or me.
Young women—especially young Black women—should understand that getting older does not automatically heal an unclean heart.
Neither does a uniform.
- Do not carry high-school cruelty into adulthood.
- Do not join the military believing rank makes you superior to another woman.
- Do not enter someone's DMs simply because you believe humiliating her will make you powerful.
- Do not recruit friends into conflicts they did not create.
- Do not mock someone's intelligence.
- Do not ridicule another service member's body.
- Do not weaponize motherhood, poverty, or education.
- And do not confuse intimidation with leadership.
One of my rawest descriptions of what bothered me was watching women:
"Go serve a country with an unclean heart."
That is the message I want young women to understand.
Serving your country should challenge you to become more disciplined. It should not provide another identity behind which unresolved cruelty can hide.
The country does not need more "military mean girls."
It needs women who understand the enormous responsibility attached to service.
YOU CAN OUTGROW THE CONFLICT
These experiences ultimately taught me something valuable:
You cannot control another woman's character, but you can refuse to allow her behavior to corrupt yours.
Young women do not need to spend adulthood recreating high-school hallways.
You don't have to like every woman. You don't have to become her friend. You don't have to agree with her lifestyle. You don't have to admire her.
But you can leave her alone.
Being nasty isn't leadership.
Being cruel isn't confidence.
Being loud isn't authority.
Violence isn't an accomplishment.
And another woman's humiliation will never become evidence of your success.
Whether you become a mother, service member, paralegal, entrepreneur, executive, artist, or anything else, adulthood should require evolution.
The strongest story about your teenage years should not be how badly you hurt somebody.
The stronger story is being able to say:
"That was who I was. Look at who I chose to become."
Sometimes walking away from conflict isn't weakness.
Sometimes it is the first evidence that you have finally outranked the mentality that created it.
EDITORIAL & LEGAL NOTICE
This article is a first-person commentary reflecting the author's personal recollections, experiences, perceptions, emotional reactions, and opinions. Quotations attributed to the author intentionally preserve portions of her original language and should be understood within that context.
References to alleged intimidation, firearms, violence, criminal activity, "setup" behavior, or other wrongdoing involving identifiable individuals describe allegations, recollections, or the author's interpretation of events. They are not presented as judicial findings, criminal convictions, or independently established facts unless expressly supported and identified as such through authoritative records.
Descriptions of statements allegedly made by other individuals similarly represent the author's recollection unless independently documented.
No criticism of an individual should be interpreted as criticism of the United States Armed Forces generally. Military service, motherhood, family size, socioeconomic status, disability, grief, career changes, and professional aspirations do not themselves establish misconduct, criminality, or deficient character. Responsibility for another person's alleged conduct should likewise not be assigned merely through friendship, parenthood, family relationship, or romantic association.
The broader purpose of this commentary is to discuss interpersonal boundaries, professionalism, women's relationships, digital hostility, violence, accountability, personal growth, and the author's expectations of leadership and military service.
