-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
SECNAV to Implement Sweeping Changes
- Thread starter usnavymle
- Start date
I was aware of their current duty and how it was criticized as 'lighter' duty compared to others but was not aware that they took part in the 2006 war and not heard anything about their performance, I was aware of the IDF's poor performance overall in that war though.
You do hit on a big point that is sometimes lost in this debate, that there aren't that many females that want to go for the 'combat arms' in the first place. I know the Marines were looking for something like 120 volunteers to go through IOC and only got 29. The countries that have opened up their combat arms have seen very small percentages of women volunteer, the last hard figure I saw was a little less than 3% of Canadian 'combat arms' soldiers were female. A RAG classmate of mine in Prowlers got engaged to a female Canadian armor officer, she happened to be the only female officer in armor at that time and when she told them she was leaving the service she had several Generals call and plead with her to stay.
Finally, as far as I am aware no female as ever passed through a special forces/operations selection course even in countries that have opened up them to women. I am worried there will be pressure from the top to ensure at least some pass when they are opened up to women.
As for Congressman Hunter, I think his letter is a bit bombastic and really isn't helping much.
Not to dive into a "he started it" debate, but publicly questioning the integrity the Marines involved with this effort didn't help much either.
If he (SECNAV), hasn't figured out by this point in his career that there are some things you can say in your office that you don't say in front of microphones...
True, but what was it about sinking to that level my Mom taught me?
Then there is this opinion which is a much better and more knowledgeable refutation to the SECNAV's claims. The career equivalent of dropping the mike and walking off stage...
I think you're making Rep Hunter's point stronger. If the SECNAV is going to go out in public and wittingly or unwittingly undermine the credibility, professionalism, and integrity of individuals like the Navy Cross recipient...True, but what was it about sinking to that level my Mom taught me?
Then there is this opinion which is a much better and more knowledgeable refutation to the SECNAV's claims. The career equivalent of dropping the mike and walking off stage...
(I'm leaving some of these thoughts hanging because I'm still on AD and he's till the SECNAV).
That is what so many of us have warned about from the get go. Oh sure, there is always talk about standards not being lowered and eschewing favorable treatment. But it never is like that in the end. Hell, most people think gender norming means current standards or same standards for both male and females. It is as predictable as the sun rise. First open up all combat arms with trumpets announcing a new era in equality. We are all so enlightened now. When women can't pass the training in the numbers desired or can't be retained past service obligation, blame the service for rigging the game. In defense the services then pressure training commands to ensure greater female success. That begins the informal preferential treatment in training. Moral suffers among male members and the very few kick ass females because of the unequal treatment. When the female numbers still don't satisfy congress and or outside interest groups, the standards will be adjusted to ensure an outcome that ensures the military is no longer accused of being sexist, on the wrong side of history, missing out on un tapped talent, etc. The only thing not ensured is maximum combat effectiveness.
I was thinking the same thing about the Representative (as a GS though....). Were the SECNAV's comments appropriate? I don't think so at all, but I am not sure the Representative is the best person to rebut them, the good Sergeant Major did a much better job.
To be accurate, I think the microphone was knocked out of his hands, and he then decided it was better to walk off the stage then risk his career and reputation (outside the Corps).True, but what was it about sinking to that level my Mom taught me?
Then there is this opinion which is a much better and more knowledgeable refutation to the SECNAV's claims. The career equivalent of dropping the mike and walking off stage...
I am concerned because I saw some of the detrimental effects of passing folks no matter their performance first-hand when I first went through flight school. I went through among the first big wave of women, Navy and Air Force, and there were a few that were passed simply because they were females. It was detrimental to everyone's morale except to those who slipped through', especially to the women who passed solely on their merits and had their competence questioned simply because folks had seen their compatriots get a free pass.
Fortunately by the time I went through flight school again 4 years later things had settled down and if a student wasn't cutting it they were shown the door, male or female, with few exceptions. But they could do that because there were significant numbers of female flight students and winged aviators, still a small minority but enough to reach a 'critical mass', a critical mass I am not sure we will get to with the combat arms and especially special forces/ops.
I agree with the gist of Hunters letter, but I also cringed at how poorly written it was. No doubt farmed out to a junior staffer. I find Hunter to be a bit of a sophomoric blow hard.
I have no idea what his or any other Rep's schedules are like, but you would think that if you're writing a letter asking for what he's asking... You would make it "suck less."
Ah...MARINE?!
C'mon guys... SECNAV is fighting for diversity! How can that possibly ever be wrong?
Sometimes that's what it takes to get a point across.