Interesting article, thanks for shraring.
-
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
Women issues
- Thread starter soccermaniac723
- Start date
- Status
To meet the currently anemic "manning" levels???
("Man" used only for illustration purposes ...
)
WheelsUpHeelsUp
Banned
Good read but Lt Crackalack really tickled me.
Lt. Stephanie Miller , chief of women's policy for the chief of personnel, acknowledges "there probably are women who do do it intentionally."
No shit????
When she hears "rumors and speculation" to that effect, Miller said, she informs sailors that far more men don't deploy -- or get sent home midway through a cruise -- because of sports injuries, discipline issues or testing positive for drugs.
Could it be because it's 6 1/2 times MORE men in the Navy?
Also, last I heard Sailorettes also have sports injuries, discipline issues and test positive for drugs.
"Generally when I show the data, they're like, 'Oh, wow, I didn't really know that,'" Miller said. She also pointed out that women who become pregnant while on sea duty don't get a permanent reprieve: They are sent back to a ship when their "post partum operational deferment" ends."
If these "guys" are truly surprised they must be the dumbest bastards alive. Does she not think many a enlistments would run out before the year gifted skate duty runs out? To make it "fair" make it the same as "brig time" (dead time) but with medical, IOW the time is made up, every minute of it.
We can put this on Carter and the end of the draft.
Don't get me wrong, I have worked with women who have done stellar jobs IF the job was tailored to their skills. In my Airframes shop they made great "training PO's" since they couldn't budge a C9 brake assembly.
Lt. Stephanie Miller , chief of women's policy for the chief of personnel, acknowledges "there probably are women who do do it intentionally."
No shit????
When she hears "rumors and speculation" to that effect, Miller said, she informs sailors that far more men don't deploy -- or get sent home midway through a cruise -- because of sports injuries, discipline issues or testing positive for drugs.
Could it be because it's 6 1/2 times MORE men in the Navy?
Also, last I heard Sailorettes also have sports injuries, discipline issues and test positive for drugs."Generally when I show the data, they're like, 'Oh, wow, I didn't really know that,'" Miller said. She also pointed out that women who become pregnant while on sea duty don't get a permanent reprieve: They are sent back to a ship when their "post partum operational deferment" ends."
If these "guys" are truly surprised they must be the dumbest bastards alive. Does she not think many a enlistments would run out before the year gifted skate duty runs out? To make it "fair" make it the same as "brig time" (dead time) but with medical, IOW the time is made up, every minute of it.
We can put this on Carter and the end of the draft.
Don't get me wrong, I have worked with women who have done stellar jobs IF the job was tailored to their skills. In my Airframes shop they made great "training PO's" since they couldn't budge a C9 brake assembly.
Don't talk to me about "quality over quantity" ... 'cause very soon we're going to have neither; we'll just have a broken military. Somehow those lousy ol' draftee forces did just fine in the past, politics aside. Why, they actually won a couple of wars ....
Please don't tell me you two are serious.........:icon_roll
As for an all draftee force, it ain't going to happen anytime soon so why whine about it? Also, with today's increasingly complex weapon's systems and the training needed to utilize them, we need smart and dedicated voluteers willing to put years in to learn those weapon systems. Just ask the Israeli's and their draftees how they did in last year's war against a dedicated volunteer force.
Simple fact, we need the women in the military today......like it or not. And I would much prefer them than a draftee who is angry at the world and the military. The policy ain't going to change, no matter how much you whine. Would you like some cheese?
Who's whining??? You're getting worse, not better with age.
And the Israeli's didn't "do bad" because of their military ... it was how that military was utilized.
You just flunked another history course. I didn't even know you were in class ....
WheelsUpHeelsUp
Banned
I doubt you ever served with draftee's. Some/MANY of them did damn good work once and if they adjusted to military life. They COULD (and were) have been successful business owners, private pilots, electronics technicians and college grads. The draft board didn't go along skid row and say "him, him, him and him." Most everybody was eligible, even Elvis.
Ministers if I recall correctly and some others were exempt. Take your wave who often CANNOT do the job and I'll take my chances with an angry draftee who in most cases adapted. He had a choice, shit however high ordered or go to the brig.
To get back to the original post....
The Navy spends a shit ton of money training and maintaining aviators, estimates vary of course, but it can be very precisely defined as a shit ton. They are extremely selective (okay, maybe not as selective as they should be) but the fact remains that for every kid like me in a primary slot there are probably 10 kids who would have given their front teeth to be in that slot. Then there are the kids who got slots, but were NPQ'd medically. And then there is a certain cut that get attrited (at every stage) because they can't hack it, or simply because they didn't hack it fast enough and finished primary with too low an NSS to move on. Bottom line, having a slot in the naval aviation training pipeline is a serious responsibility.
The Navy chose to invest a lot in you and you owe it to the Navy (and the country as a whole) to work your ass off and do the best that you can. Marginal performance, regardless of the reason, doesn't cut it and no matter how good you are you can get better. The Navy doesn't give a half a fart about your biological clock, nor should it. They need a pilot, and it makes no difference to them whether that pilot is a 22 year old single dude or a 29 year old mother of a toddler, so long as they do the same job to the same level.
Aviation training involves a ton of time and dedication. If, for whatever reason (like say having a 2 year old during primary), you can't give a ton of time and energy to the job then you shouldn't take up the slot in the first place. There is literally a line of people behind you that would kill for your slot; chances are one of them would have the time and energy to give the taxpayers their money worth.
I wasn't BDCP and as such I have no idea whether the rules say that you can have a kid in BDCP. It is probably allowed, but there are plenty of things that are allowed in life that probably aren't the best idea, like going to tattoo parlors while drunk. I understand that you probably think my opinion is unfair or harsh and that you should be able to have a kid if you want to and have it when you want to for that matter, but in the end you took this job to serve the Navy. If you must have kids before your clock really starts ticking, take a designator that will allow you to still serve effectively during the pregnancy and beyond. There are jobs in the Navy (mostly restricted line) that are reasonably kid friendly. Being an SNA isn't one of them. SNAs exist to serve the Navy's needs; not the other way around. As an IP told me, the Navy isn't your personal flying club (damnit).
Some serious red flags should be going up for you when nearly everyone with wings (and those of us currently pursuing wings) thinks you would be nuts to consider trying to do flight school with a toddler. As should be evident, having children in general is very difficult at any stage in an aviation career. By having a toddler in flight school you would very likely be setting yourself up for mediocrity at best (in your flying for sure, and likely in your family life as well due to the strain), failure at worst. If you take an aviation slot you owe it to the Navy to put yourself in the best position to succeed. It seems very unlikely to me that having a toddler to care for during training is compatible with the job.
I am not trying to be a dick, but I am single with no responsibilities beyond the flight school and it is all that I can handle. One of my friends who was and is doing very well in the program got a dog during primary and he almost had to give it away because he didn't have time for the puppy and primary, and you want to try it with a toddler?
The Navy spends a shit ton of money training and maintaining aviators, estimates vary of course, but it can be very precisely defined as a shit ton. They are extremely selective (okay, maybe not as selective as they should be) but the fact remains that for every kid like me in a primary slot there are probably 10 kids who would have given their front teeth to be in that slot. Then there are the kids who got slots, but were NPQ'd medically. And then there is a certain cut that get attrited (at every stage) because they can't hack it, or simply because they didn't hack it fast enough and finished primary with too low an NSS to move on. Bottom line, having a slot in the naval aviation training pipeline is a serious responsibility.
The Navy chose to invest a lot in you and you owe it to the Navy (and the country as a whole) to work your ass off and do the best that you can. Marginal performance, regardless of the reason, doesn't cut it and no matter how good you are you can get better. The Navy doesn't give a half a fart about your biological clock, nor should it. They need a pilot, and it makes no difference to them whether that pilot is a 22 year old single dude or a 29 year old mother of a toddler, so long as they do the same job to the same level.
Aviation training involves a ton of time and dedication. If, for whatever reason (like say having a 2 year old during primary), you can't give a ton of time and energy to the job then you shouldn't take up the slot in the first place. There is literally a line of people behind you that would kill for your slot; chances are one of them would have the time and energy to give the taxpayers their money worth.
I wasn't BDCP and as such I have no idea whether the rules say that you can have a kid in BDCP. It is probably allowed, but there are plenty of things that are allowed in life that probably aren't the best idea, like going to tattoo parlors while drunk. I understand that you probably think my opinion is unfair or harsh and that you should be able to have a kid if you want to and have it when you want to for that matter, but in the end you took this job to serve the Navy. If you must have kids before your clock really starts ticking, take a designator that will allow you to still serve effectively during the pregnancy and beyond. There are jobs in the Navy (mostly restricted line) that are reasonably kid friendly. Being an SNA isn't one of them. SNAs exist to serve the Navy's needs; not the other way around. As an IP told me, the Navy isn't your personal flying club (damnit).
Some serious red flags should be going up for you when nearly everyone with wings (and those of us currently pursuing wings) thinks you would be nuts to consider trying to do flight school with a toddler. As should be evident, having children in general is very difficult at any stage in an aviation career. By having a toddler in flight school you would very likely be setting yourself up for mediocrity at best (in your flying for sure, and likely in your family life as well due to the strain), failure at worst. If you take an aviation slot you owe it to the Navy to put yourself in the best position to succeed. It seems very unlikely to me that having a toddler to care for during training is compatible with the job.
I am not trying to be a dick, but I am single with no responsibilities beyond the flight school and it is all that I can handle. One of my friends who was and is doing very well in the program got a dog during primary and he almost had to give it away because he didn't have time for the puppy and primary, and you want to try it with a toddler?
Why are you planning to have a child if you do not want to raise it?
Flying for the Navy is a total committment and so is having a child.
I don't give a crap how many people you know that have done it "successfully", you can either do one or the other well but you cannot do both.
If you decide to try both I truly feel sorry for your children that will be without a mother during the most important part of ther upbringing. You are not planning this for your kids; from what I can tell on this thread, it is all about you and what you want.
I am guessing you are not a big Dr. Laura fan.
Why don't you go have your flying career and then adopt later on?
Good luck on your decision.
Steve
Flying for the Navy is a total committment and so is having a child.
I don't give a crap how many people you know that have done it "successfully", you can either do one or the other well but you cannot do both.
If you decide to try both I truly feel sorry for your children that will be without a mother during the most important part of ther upbringing. You are not planning this for your kids; from what I can tell on this thread, it is all about you and what you want.
I am guessing you are not a big Dr. Laura fan.
Why don't you go have your flying career and then adopt later on?
Good luck on your decision.
Steve
I doubt you ever served with draftee's. Some/MANY of them did damn good work once and if they adjusted to military life. They COULD (and were) have been successful business owners, private pilots, electronics technicians and college grads. The draft board didn't go along skid row and say "him, him, him and him." Most everybody was eligible, even Elvis.
Take your wave who often CANNOT do the job and I'll take my chances with an angry draftee who in most cases adapted. He had a choice, shit however high ordered or go to the brig.
Same here. I served with many draftees, as well as many who had been given the choice of jail or military. While most of them still hated the Navy, the vast majority of them were good shipmates and did their jobs well.
I'm definitely not "whining" Flash, maybe I'm just overstating the obvious. This "Diversity" issue is a huge deal and is gaining momentum everyday. The Navy is obsessed with matching the cultural and ethnic makeup of its forces with that of American society. Apparently, that is the only way we are going to meet our recruiting goals (according to the Navy that is). Sounds good on paper and makes great political talking points when trying to increase recruiting numbers and selling equal opportunity. But it's not working (IMO). We need more people (qualified people that is) and maybe the draft needs to be considered further. At the end of the day, I want Navy SEAL's like LT Murphy kicking ass and taking names in my Navy, not an organization that mirrors the cultural and ethnic fabric of modern society. Where am I wrong ???
One thing to consider: the OP asked when it would be best to have a child (training command, shore, etc). Many of you have stated your dislike of women who get pregnant while on sea/shore duty and leave behind their workload for everyone else. So what you should be telling her is to go ahead and have her kid now or in the training pipeline. Why? Because it doesn't impact you. She's only shooting herself in the foot, not everyone else around her. If she has a kid now, there is no slack for anyone else to pick up and a job doesn't go undone.
Wrong assumption. I want her focused 100% on learning how to fly and fight her airplane, not her breast feeding schedule. As an NFO (and prior Aircrewman), I want only the very best flying my arse around the skies.
I know where the Navy is going with this Diversity issue and how they're trying to afford equal access to our ranks, and I know we're going to be forced to deal with the pregnancy issue (as it relates to career timing, etc), but flight school is NOT the place to learn how to be a mom and how to fly military aircraft.
You're not wrong ... it's just that some herein are as obsessed as the rest of our "kinder, gentler Navy" with their touchy-feely PC vision of a perfect, far-far away, Alice-in-Wonderland, doesn't-exist-in-this-or-any-other-life .... Navy .... and it doesn't exist in society at large, either.
I don't think they're ever going to "get it".
Neither will the activist civilians who have run (ruined??) the Navy over the past 25 +/- years ..... .
I think the general answer on when the best time to have a kid is a resounding "NEVER" from the airwarriors mob, and it has nothing to do with hating women. I really don't think that it is based off of a misogynistic attitude, but a simple response to the question. As far as your career is concerned, when is the best time to have a kid? NEVER. That is probably true for any career (and for both genders for that matter), but it is especially true in naval aviation. Obviously people will want to have kids, but they should know that their career WILL suffer to a degree, and it will suffer more so for women than for men. Biology is a cruel bitch, but such are the facts of life. The point most people are trying to hammer home is that before training is the ABSOLUTE WORST TIME to have the kid if she is serious about being an aviator. That's it.
- Status