<p>AFDAD, I was really suprised to hear the 20% statistic. I think it was based off a survey after the sexual assault scandal. There had been a lot of what some would call “babying” towards the cadet wing. I know there were some policies and restrictions on legitimate training out of fear that incidents against women could occur. Those policies caused a TON of resentment. That might have had an influence on the classes that took the survey. Honestly, I always thought those who believed women should not be here are part of a tiny fringe minority. A lot has changed in the past 5 years, I think this might be a prime example of that change.</p>
<p>Time: I too want to know how Wings of Honor is comming!</p>
<p>What type of training at AF would have been restricted (males only?) I was trying to think of any training at WP that didn’t allow women and boxing class was the only thing I could think of (women take combatives). The field and weapons training is pretty intensive, but and I don’t think any women were excluded from any of that.</p>
<p>none was restricted to males only, it was flat out restricted for EVERYONE because they worried that females may be discriminated in the training. Then, to keep it “fair”, no one could do it. </p>
<p>AFDAD, you’ve hit a point many do harp on (a big one for those I know that have animosity towards the females here). It appears from what I HEAR and SEE that females do typically get let off the hook easier than males in athletics, academics, honor, and everyday discipline. In no way am I saying that females have it easier, but I have seen and heard of those in serious trouble being retained or punished less harshly than a male under similar circumstances. I’ve also seen the opposite, but more often the latter.</p>
<p>I would agree that if women are let off the hook easier for sub-standard physical, academic, honor, and everyday discipline issues then there is a serious problem. That kind of separation of expectations doesn’t just happen, it is taught by a culture. Cultures are very hard to change if they are still institutionalized. Now I understand better why so many leadership positions had to change at the academy over the last few years.
I am still curious–what training existed at the AF academy prior to 1976 that no longer exists there now because there are women cadets? On the surface it seems that if it was something like Combat Survival Training, to prevent women from having that training makes no sense given that women fly combat missions these days. Was the training eliminated for all because there are women there, or because it is now reserved for later (post academy) in one’s career IF they are in a military specialty that requires it (both male and female)?</p>
<p>It was removed due to the rape scandal and the potential for people to see it as inappropriate. In 1994 (I think), full SERE was replaced with CST because of alleged sexual assault. Recognition was also removed as a highly reactionary move to dissociate the academy with anything resembling “hazing.” </p>
<p>While I can’t say anything in particular that was stopped because of female attendance in 1976, but the replacing of the “Bring me Me” wall with the core values is an example of “political correctness” and its effects on this place.</p>
<p>Hmmm..Im not so sure that “Political Correctness” as that term is thrown about today is really “to blame” for the removal of that “Bring Me Men” wall.
The service academies, particularly the older ones, like WP and Annapolis have gone through some rather dramatic and sometimes very socially “disruptive” changes over the years as they have attempted to keep up with the values of society. For Annapolis and West Point the most significant changes to “tradition” happened when African Americans were granted admission, and they didn’t just walk in one day and get immediately “assimilated”. The early (and sometimes not so early) treatment of African American cadets and Midshipman was shameful by todays standards. Even up until the 1950’s African American cadets couldn’t attend the West Point Hops. Traditions are usually a good thing when they bind the entire group together such that they all benefit from the experience, but they need to be modified and sometimes eliminated when they no longer reflect the evolving standards of society. I imagine there are a number of women who “today” don’t feel threatened by the idea of the tradition of the “Bring Me Men Wall”, but for the women who entered the academy in 1976 it was probably not a welcome sight. There have been a number of interviews done of women who were part of those first co-ed service academy classes—some of their experiences were not pretty. Removing that Wall and other changes similar to it in the other Service Academies seems to have been done not because of “politics” but because it was the right thing to do.</p>
<p>I would have to disagree with the generalization that women have it easier here. It’s true that some people are hyperactive about making sure that women have a fair chance here despite the ratio, sometimes going a little overboard. And it’s true that we have different standards on the PFT. But please remember that in many aspects, such as training sessions and training events, we are expected to perform the same as the guys. When we go on ruck runs, we all carry the same amount (a total of about 40 pounds, which is over a third of my body weight). And today in the PT Challenge for Commandant’s Challenge, we had to run 6 miles as a squad and I was in the first group of people to finish. Of the first 10 people to finish, 5 were females. Along the way we had to do different training exercises, where I did 75 pushups, 95 situps, 150 flutter kicks, and 8 pullups. Many of us work very hard to meet and exceed standards.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to excuse the mediocre behavior of some women or any favoritism or bias, however, it does kind of bug me when it gets portrayed like we have it super easy here at the Academy. Lots of us really do challenge ourselves. I know for myself that in many areas it’s almost like there’s something to prove here as a female. You have to work hard and keep up physically without becoming butch or just some resentful *****. Excuse my language, but that’s how it is… there’s a balance.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to say that anyone on here was saying women don’t work as hard. Just had to throw my two cents in there so that you all know there ARE lots of females who work very hard here and avoid playing the system. Just throwing that out there… :)</p>
<p>I figured someone would take my comment that females “have it easier.” (redhead, I’m shocked it was you! :P) The better way of saying it is that when it comes down to expulsion or HARSH punishment, females, TYPICALLY are let off better than their male counterparts. This happens in honor boards, academic boards, athletic boards, etc. But I don’t mean to say that they have it easier overall.</p>
<p>Boy, if women are held to a lower standard in academic and honor boards things are really out of kilter. Are you saying that for an honor violation for example, there are cases where a female and male were guilty of the same infraction and the female got a lighter punishment than the male because she was a woman? Ugh! Hopefully this is the exception more than the rule? If not, then the general attitude towards women is never going to get better and for the academy that is a situation that is “self-inflicted”. This would be detrimental to all cadets. Is this one of the things identified that the academy says its trying to correct?</p>
<p>Haha, you should be surprised! Usually I’m gung ho the other direction (probably because of my roommate :)), but I just wanted to say something because I don’t want people who read these boards and don’t know much about the Academy to assume that all girls here are pathetic. But I know you, and I know that’s not what you were saying, just clarifying… sir ;)</p>
<p>Hmm… I think this is getting a little blown out of proportion, and part of that is probably our fault. When you’re here at the Academy, you understand the dynamics and it can be kind of hard to explain to those who aren’t cadets. It’s true that there are some discrepancies between men and women, but I don’t think it’s to such a gross extent that any of us are really that perturbed by it. I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong…</p>
<p>This is like picking at an old scab. There are difference between men and women. Both have a place at the Academy. Neither should be given preferential treatment in Academics, Boards or any other thing where gender should not play a part. That said with few exceptions a female Cadet will rarely have the upper body strength to bench press 200-300 pounds, and most of the guys need to get over it. They do have an obligation to put out 100% of themselves in all the activities, and all the other cadets around them will no who is doing that and who isn’t…That said I really hope this thread dies.</p>
<p>I think this thread is ok, as long as people don’t start twisting words or throwing insults around. It really is difficult to articulate a cadet issue to the world, as much as parents or outsiders would like to think they understand based on talking with people at the academies, its pretty difficult because things seem more serious than they are. Doesn’t help that we can’t show the proper emotions and gestures in words! </p>
<p>The issue of the gender gap is touchy. The Academy is very careful about treading on equal opportunity type stuff. I can’t go into detail on this because I don’t think its appropriate because the type of examples are very personal to some people. </p>
<p>The military is very image oriented, and people are judged on what they present! If more of one group is seen on a probation than another or if a group tends to get more lenient punishment than another, people assume, its all too natural. This isn’t to say that everyone suddenly blames one group because of what is seen, but it makes many suspicious!</p>
<p>I hate being so general, but I think if I provide specifics people will concentrate too much on those rather than the general trends!</p>
<p>I for one appreciate hornetguy and redheads willingness to come on these boards and discuss issues like this–without their perspective we only get a few pieces of a complex puzzle. Just the discussion itself tends to get enough neurons firing in my brain that I feel like I am a bit more informed after reading their posts than I was before. I am looking forward to the same discussions with my cadet when she returns home this week from AF and then again at Christmas leave when she leaves there for good to return to WP. I can say that so far she hasn’t reported running into any of the “gender-related” problems at either AF or USMA. Her comments have always centered around individuals and their willingneess to be a positive part of the academy experience, and not on whether they represented some particular group that was somehow “sub-par”. Great discussion folks!!! THANK-YOU!</p>
<p>There aren’t very many gender issues that I have seen. However, when there is one, it often becomes a big deal to a few people. I think this thread has been diving pretty deap into issues that most cadets (based off my experience) don’t spend much time on. The whole thing started because of a fear that people will see the events of the late '70s and apply it to USAFA today.</p>