Discussion in 'Academy/Military News' started by Just_A_Mom, Mar 7, 2011.
Here we go again...
Well if ever there was a self-fulfilling prophecy this would be it- a congressional panel entitled the "Commission on Military Diversity" found that the military needs diversity. Who could have seen that one coming?
God, can we just fast forward through the inevitable indignation, rancor, vitriol, and subsequent references to the famous case of Rubber v. Glue and just lock this one already?
Allow me to predict the future:
Someone white and male will say the report is crap. Someone white and female will call him a misogynist doo-doo head. Someone else with a non-descript username will imply that others are racist. 14 pages of the same 3 arguments will ensue. Mods will warn everyone to play nice and be constructive. Two more people will take potshots. Thread will be locked.
this is almost uncanny- you were reading my mind!
However, let's not jump the gun- Human beings possess the ability to surprise us all. Perhaps this will be the dawn of a new age?
In the meantime folks - consider it a personal challenge to disprove Scoutpilot's prediction!
I'd be interested in seeing diversity statistics for the entire military before attempting to form any sort of opinion on this. I don't think there's quite enough information in the article to circumvent typical biases in peoples thinking. A more complete picture is needed to avoid filling in the blanks with personal opinions.
Movie: Young Frankenstein
Scene: After the Monster (Peter Boyle) ecapes Dr. Frankenstein's (Gene Wilder's) laboratory, the local constable (no idea who played this part) sees the villagers in front of Dr. Frankenstein's castle, pitch-forks and torches in hand, screaming for blood.
The constable uses his left arm to raise his wooden right arm in the air, calling for the angry mob to quiet down, and says (in a very heavy, and very fake German accent):
"A riot is an ugly thing."
Pause for dramatic effect.
"And it is about time WE'VE HAD ONE!"
Which is it that the report wants....military leadership that better reflects the racial, ethnic and gender mix in the armed forces or those in American society? My understanding is that the enlisted ranks of each branch don't reflect the racial, ethnic and gender mix in America society.
Lets see...do I want the person leading my white son into combat to be white?? No!!! I want him or HER to be qualified...end of argument. How bout them Yankees
Constable: Kenneth Mars. A great actor who died February 12th. Was great as the Nazi playwright in "The Producers". "Mien Fuhrer never said 'BABY'"
You'll probably need to wait for the congressional panel entitled the "Commission on Military Qualifications regardless of race" to release their report before your wants are addressed and the argument ends.
The Report is Crap.
The idea that the military is not diverse enough therefore it must be doing something wrong requires specific data to show how this is happening to be accepted as a fact.
Yes, the lack of combat arms experience does limit certain areas of scoring for the OML, but can they explain how a woman achieved a general rank going through logistics? I thought not. Yes, there are fewer paths for women to achieve top ranks, but the fair measurement of whether gender is a factor in promotion is whether in the same paths both men and women (how do men and women without combat arms experience compare in promotion rates?) are treated equally. This is not discussed in this article.
All of this comes from a father who is OK with women serving in combat roles (their option not their requirement) if the military (through testing) decides that they are qualified to do the job.
The military has the best merit-based promotion procedures of any institution on the planet. While it has a reputation of being slow on occasion to deal with some diversity issues (debatable), when the military does take an action in this regard, it is well thought out and carried out without issues (unlike other segments of society).
Unfortunately, journalists on the outside try to view the social change mechanism of the military through the same prism that they only wish they could apply to the rest of society. Perhaps since the don't see dissention in the ranks that they feel should be there, they wish to stir some controversy up?
Bruno, you are wise to put out the challenge to keep the dicussion away from the usual path. Hopefully we disappoint scoutpilot's expectations!
Another anecdotal thing that just came to mind.
Goaliegirl called me today and while talking told me she and the other female cadets were called to meet with the unit leaders to poll to see if there were any issues effecting women that they could address. Goaliegirl was puzzled as to why they needed this meeting.
That tells me that she feels like she is treated equitably and that the unit is bending over backwards to do the best for their female cadets they can. Can you ask for anything more?
Naturally. Just goes to show the type of people who frequent this forum, I suppose.
This was on the front page of ArmyTimes.com. It is there whether or not folks like it or agree with it. It is NOT going away.
If some parents or kids have a serious problem with this issue being in the forefront they should either get used to it or find another line of work for themselves or their children.
Glad you can make your contribution to the downhill slide. True colors shine through.
But, perhaps you can expound on just what this means.
Do you means that the report is not true? Just drivel that someone made up? Do you mean that it doesn't matter if the military stacked with blacks who are led by whites? Are you from Tennessee?
The first shots are fired across the bow.
The personal insults begin, let's all note by whom.
Shameful personal attack #2.
An obvious attack implying racism by LITS. If not, please accept my apologies and explain your reference to Tennessee when talking about blacks being led by whites.
(My post in no way violates any of the TOS of this forum nor any of the instructions of the Mods to keep this thread in a civil discussion. It is an attempt to stop the personal attacks as soon as they begin)
And here we go.
Think of this as a bowling alley not a baseball game. There aren't gonna be 3 strikes thrown -
a general warning here -the next one will close the thread and result in appropriate measures for those involved. This forum is not going to turn into a soap box for anybody's pet causes, nor is it going to turn into a forum for barely veiled personal commentary about each other.
Many of you may have noticed that it is almost NEVER the candidates who post commentary on this particular forum- that is because by and large they are disillusioned by the obnoxious and repetitive squabbling that passes for "adult" commentary on many of the threads in this forum. This isn't going to play anymore. So this is the first warning- strike 2 and the thread is down.
I want to know what the race and gender mix of the group that wrote the report.
Oh wait, congress requested it. Okay then, the 75% white male ruling class must want something MORE equal that thay are. That's right... they're the one's that insist on the "Do as I say, not as I do" rule of governance.
Separate names with a comma.