<p>"Membership of color guard at World Series was revised to reflect school's diversity"</p>
<p>"Leaders of the U.S. Naval Academy tinkered with the composition of the color guard that appeared at a World Series game last month so the group would not be exclusively white and male."</p>
<p>This is way way too much ado about nothing. Absolutely nothing inappropriate with the Administration’s actions in regards to this event.</p>
<p>mombee, I wish I could agree. This situation is of little or no consequence beyond those who might have been bounced from their 5 minutes of fame in Yankee Stadium. </p>
<p>But the message of PC and PR being more important than fairness, doing what is right (vs. correct). Well, as we’ve seen in the past week and defended by the head of the U.S. Army, this political correctness and drive to portray diversity will …and literally did …kill the military. 13 members, a baby, and wounding some 30+ others. </p>
<p>Don’t we see where this goes when merit, fairness is replaced by politics?</p>
<p>I respect many of your opinions. On this one,we could hardly be further apart. This is not a benign incident. It is merely symptomatic of the politics we are seeing consuming even these institutions founded and once guided by the simple notion that the best shall lead, and it’s the best we need, and the best will lead. No more.</p>
<p>And the very scary part of this is that it’s being driven and manifested in our military elite, those at the very top who are politically astute, obviously. Or they’d not be at the 3 and 4 star levels. They’re drinking the cool aid too, it seems. But more important and critical is that they are giving up their soldiers and sailors in order to be deemed compliant and correct.</p>
<p>This honor guard situation will fade quickly into the sunset of the Yard. But it is symptomatic of way more than “nothing.”</p>
<p>This is apparently an attempted controversy fueled by certain old grads who are disgruntled with the present diversity goals of the Navy. They fail to see that white males are no longer available in the quantities necessary to maintain a top quality Navy. They also fail to realize that a mature organization should reflect equal diversity ratios from the lowest seaman to the most senior Admiral. They also seem to forget the premise of any military organization on which the Commandant expounded at the end of the linked article:
It’s the military. Leadership can do anything they see fit. </p>
<p>First off, ever since President Truman desegregated the military in 1947, I challenge you to gather all military recruiting posters and commercials, all public affairs general photo releases, etc. and, from them, determine the gender, racial, and ethnic ratios of the military. Go back and look at all color guards for the last twenty years and attempt to determine the same. One could come to the conclusion that all branches of the military are at least half African-American and half female. Why should USNA be any different? Heck, when and if the new catalog goes on line, attempt to determine the same from it. I would also venture a guess that had an all while male color guard shown up at Yankee Stadium, the CNO would have been on the phone to the Superintendent first thing the following morning. All in all, it is just good free advertising.</p>
<p>First off, in this particular case, a group was assembled from a pool of 28. I do not know the particulars, but obviously a certain six assumed they had first rights of refusal. Were they the normal march-on color guard, the Fall Set parade color guard, I don’t know. What I do know is that there is a pool for a reason. Who represents the Naval Academy at a Friday afternoon formal parade in honor of a graduating classes 40th reunion is not necessarily who would be ideal to travel midweek to a public event. First group, spit and polish; second group, maturity (lack of demerits) and sound academics. I would ask the disgruntled member how the Academy could justify a pool of 28 if there was only one real team. Anyway, a misunderstanding by a too vocal six, a Commandant who attempted to do the right thing and was foiled by someone who forgot his shoes and cover, and a too quick group of disgruntled alumni who do not have, or choose to ignore, the facts.</p>
<p>And once more we see the classic PC response to a genuine, substantial issue.</p>
<p>The messengers are shot. Disgruntled alumni and a Mid who forgot his shoes. A genuinely fine, respected if PC and charismatic official is held up with the notion if he says it, must be true. </p>
<p>“Mature” (read as “legitimate”, “real”, “successful”) organizations are somehow obligated to reflect the skin colors, gender and ethnicity of the society they are engaged in. Where did that management principle come from? Why is a 20% quota of females considered fine and dandy?(Last time I looked, more females than men in the USA) Why is there no effort or plan to enlist fewer minorities in the enlisted ranks? In proportions reflecting that society you talk to?</p>
<p>Oh, btw, try to sell the notion of “maturity” to the Yankees, Steelers, Celtics, and a whole bunch of other “mature” entities that they somehow must change the way the teams look. To heck w/ winning. Gotta have some slow white girls who can’t jump, hit a curve ball, or run a 4.4 forty. </p>
<p>And opinions are proclaimed “facts.” </p>
<p>Classic response when genuine discussion and defense are lost. </p>
<p>White males are suddenly proclaimed to be “unavailable”. Make that undesirable. That is real news.</p>
<p>Anyone asking fair, right, if sorely uncomfortable questions gets endited as an aggressor just wanting to fuel controversy.</p>
<p>When will this silliness end?</p>
<p>Only when the real issues are asked and genuinely examined. Until racism, sexism, and a whole bunch of other “isms” will be fostered by the case mombee espouses and attempts to sell. For hers is the company line, even if it’s poisonous and diminishing to the notion that the best must lead. No more. The Ft. Hood Major exposed that falsehood, and his general confirmed it. Drink up.</p>
<p>First off, to correct a misconception you seem to have of my post. I never stated that military makeup should reflect society as a whole but that an organization should reflect equal ethnic, racial, and gender makeup from bottom to top. Among many other reasons, everyone joins the Navy to become CNO. The E-1 Hispanic female should be able to look up the ranks and realize that she has an equitable chance of promotion. The Navy manipulates entrance requirements to attain the quality enlisted force which they find acceptable. Availability vs quality. A female must have higher qualifications than a male. This is why one sees a higher ratio of females in the technical rates than in the non-technical fields. It is also why the current male-to-female ratio is what it is. The Navy is balancing and meeting it’s overall needs.</p>
<p>A current relevant example to this forum is females on submarines. Do you honestly think it is PC which is driving this? It is a well known fact that USNA has been ‘drafting’ submariners for the past several years. The only graduates lately who have not received their first commissioning choice have been those who have been ‘persuaded’ to go subs. I am surprised that it has taken as long as it has to realize that better qualified women are available who will allow the males to also be better satisfied with their career selection. Plans are underway to modify a few subs for enlisted women. When they arrive, there will be female leaders and mentors on board already to guide them. A win-win situation except for a few on the periphery who incorrectly perceive the demise of their white male bastion and scream PC.</p>
<p>You know what Whistle Pig? Image is everything. Color guards used to have certain physical requirements for a visual effect and image. How many women or asian’s are over 6 feet tall?
These types of things are often decided on arbitrary and capricious criteria. I saw the color guard on TV - didn’t see anyone screw it up either. If she could do the job then what is the big deal? Life is just not fair -get over it.</p>
<p>To equate the selection of this female midshipman with Major Hassan shooting his own soldiers is particularly vile. especially to her. I hope her parents are spared your rhetoric.</p>
<p>No, image is just that. As political figures constantly expose …image often has nothing to do with reality.</p>
<p>And as Capt. Carpenter has stated, there was nothing arbitrary or caprecious about who got to march. </p>
<p>And now we see another tactic. Your alleging “vile”. Such extremist language doesn’t make your point anymore right. Only PC. Indeed, while variations of the same theme, these are both classic cases of PC. Please spare us of your emotional allegations.</p>
<p>Tone it down and stick to the point. This is a classic case of PC and as overtly stated, a desire to reflect diversity. Nothing more. Nothing less.</p>
<p>Whistle Pig, I can’t imagine why you think diversity is driven solely by political correctness. Current leadership considers diversity necessary in order to achieve the necessary quality of our 21st century enlisted force. Diversity is ‘the needs of the Navy’. Even down to the level of these forums, everyone agrees that ‘needs of the Navy’ supersede personal goals and personal ambitions. To place a diverse color guard in Yankee stadium was a recruiting opportunity that was too valuable to waste on six white males.</p>
<p>
You do understand the enlisted/warrant/officer force structure, correct?
I also find your assertion to be quite unsupported.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course I do and hopefully someday you will also. Okay, maybe not CNO but MCPON. My slightly tongue-in-cheek remark is only that anyone not concerned about making the next rate or rank is probably not worth retaining. Promotions are the lifeblood of the Navy. And to reiterate for the purpose of this discussion, any organization which cannot actively demonstrate equitable promotion opportunities across the board is doomed to subpar performance.</p>
<p>How enthusiastic would you be, upon graduation, to be assigned to a unit where no AFA grad had ever made O-3?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could you please provide documentation for this claim. I’m not disagreeing with you just asking for evidence to support a claim that may not be common knowledge…</p>
<p>The biggest problem I have with this article is that it comes down to a huge “he said/she said,” and it doesn’t seem like a coherent chain of events can even by determined by the information given</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A case made by others as well, not just WhistlePig.</p>
<p>[Fort</a> Hood massacre shows how political correctness can kill – baltimoresun.com](<a href=“http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.smith13nov13,0,1138689,print.column]Fort”>http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.smith13nov13,0,1138689,print.column)</p>
<p>Luigi - there is not a shortage of nutty ideas…</p>
<p>Again - to equate this female midshipman to allowing Maj Malik-Hassan to continue to serve even when he made traitorous accusations is ridiculous. How insulting to her.</p>
<p>Whistle Pig - would you say that the past practice of choosing mids for color guard to be a certain height or build was PC? No - it was to present a visual image. This was advertising - a photo shoot. Some get picked and some don’t. Get over it and respect this female midshipman who is caught up in this through no fault of her own.</p>
<p>
The Baltimore Sun article was on the opinion page for a reason. I think anyone who would attempt to link the color guard incident to political correctness either is making an attempt at an illogical correlation to support another agenda or has no understanding of the workings of the Navy.<br>
Mostly just educated opinions developed over many years of observing the new recruits and talking to detailers.</p>
<p>The quality of male recruits is more dependent on the state of the economy than that of females. Therefore, at present with new recruits, you may not be seeing much of a variance. However, I think at present a high school male graduate only requires an ASVAB score of 31 while a GED male must have a minimum score of 50. For females, across the board, it is a minimum of 50 and very much fewer waivers for GEDs. Therefore the Cat2-3A ratios of females will be proportionally higher. Due to the promise of nuclear power school, the Navy has been able to keep the male ratio of Cat1s higher. Again, this is all highly economy dependent. And I am also sure that the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is not hurting Navy recruiting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Equating PC in many areas of the US military, Army and Navy, is not a nutty idea. It all stems from the belief that we cannot offend peaceful Muslims by accusing a viloent Muslim of a violent terrorist act, and we cannot offend non-white males by having an all white male honor guard from the USNA. Equate? Maybe not, but it all falls under the umbrella of PC.</p>
<p>You want a nutty idea? How’s this one:</p>
<p>When the Army Chief of Staff, the #1 Guy in charge if the US Army, General George Casey, makes a statement on national television (Meet The Press, Sunday November 8) that he values diversity more than the lives of his soldiers, then something is wrong with the PC goal of diversity in the US military. That is a nutty idea.</p>
<p>His EXACT quote:</p>
<p>"Our diversity, not only in our Army, but in our country, is a strength. And as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that’s worse."</p>
<p>Worse than the death of US Army soldiers at a US Army base? </p>
<p>Diversity is a noble goal, indeed.</p>
<p>But when the Army Chief of Staff, General Casey, says that the tragedy of losing diversity in the country is WORSE than a tragedy that involves the slaughter of 13 US soldiers and wounding of 29 others, then General Casey should be immediately fired for placing the value of diversity above the lives of the soldiers he commands.</p>
<p>
Hey, I’m with you Lou. Lets round up everyone in the country who isn’t a white male Anglo Saxon Protestant and place them in detention camps in Arizona. It worked in WWII so its gotta work now.</p>
<p>Mombee - could you please stop for a moment and listen to yourself?! Many people are expressing very legitimate concerns that the safety of our military, and our country, are becoming compromised because of a policy of “diversity above quality” and “tolerance above logic”. No one here is claiming that we should “round up” ANYONE - we are simply saying that in order to have the best people in whatever position we are discussing, there needs to be a clear set of standards upon which those decisions are made! And if the best person happens to be a white male, so be it! And if the best person happens to be a minority or a female, more power to them…BUT we should NOT promote anyone to a position where they are not qualified simply because it makes someone “FEEL” better or it makes a better photo-op in someone’s mind! And the Ft. Hood massacre takes that to a real world example of what happens when the military is trying so hard to be DIVERSE that they refuse to see the signs right in front of their faces that this man was dangerous and totally unqualified for the position that he was placed in…THAT is the comparison and those of us who have loved ones serving this country are sick and tired of their lives being endangered because of Political Correctness run amok…maybe you’re willing to sacrifice your child on the altar of TOLERANCE but I, and many others, are not!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What are you talking about? </p>
<p>Are you having those flashbacks again? </p>
<p>Who is proposing anything even remotely similar to what you are proposing?</p>
<p>This thread is not about Ft Hood, it is about eight midshipmen who were sent to NYC to participate in the World Series. Eight midshipmen out of a highly qualified pool of twenty eight. One minority male, one female, and six white males. The minority male forgot his cover and shoes so he was unable to participate. In order to maintain symmetry, someone else had to be dropped. The Administration chose a white male instead of the white female. This is all that this hullabaloo is about. If one single little 10 yr old girl out in Kansas looked at her dad that night and said “When I grow up I want to be just like her”, the Administration made a worthwhile choice. To any way, shape, or form attempt to equate this to the actions at Ft Hood last week is ludicrous. </p>
<p>Ask yourself; seven midshipmen, six white males and one female, all with equal qualifications, all with a right to be there. One has to be dropped. They are going to be on national TV to represent all that there is to represent about USNA. Who would you drop? Secondly, how in your wildest imagination can you compare this to Ft Hood?</p>