Posted on Mar 21, 2018
Air Force secretary: Let’s change how we talk about women troops
3.19K
34
13
9
9
0
Getting more women into military specialties may require focusing more on the protector role of troops than the macho stereotype emphasized in the past, the Air Force secretary told lawmakers Tuesday.
Air Force secretary: Let’s change how we talk about women troops
Posted from militarytimes.comPosted in these groups: 
Women in the Military
Law
Women in the Military Law
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
6
6
0
The Air Force has been very open and receptive to women serving. Someone will have to explain to me what a "mid-career break" is to start a family. I got the day off when my wife had our boys. I guess we need to change Airmen to Airperson? I'm all in favor of their service but some of this is just PC run amuck.
(6)
(0)
SSgt Boyd Herrst
One of my Airmen was going to be a dad and his wife’s obstrician thought it be better if he was at work..and busy.. Nah . He’d be a nervous stud.. I got some other Airmen to switch so he could have time with her.. Her mom was going to be there in time for her to arrive home.. and he’d be better off at work.. We worked it and everything clicked like a well-oiled machine.. I had one Airman that had reservations.. I knew he was a Military brat. I asked him if his dad had followed that “If the AF would of wanted his dad to have a family, they’d of issued him one”. Where would he be now ? .. he changed his tune..
(1)
(0)
4
4
0
This is my concern.
We spend so much time talking about "equality". The primary argument up to now has been for an "equal opportunity" to prove that females can/should compete on a level playing field with males.
So, is it not counter-intuitive to begin altering protocols to be "better suited" to females than males?
Not trying to start a "flame war" here, but if the mission is the same, and the gender of a person doesn't matter in how they fulfill it...where's the "fire"?
We spend so much time talking about "equality". The primary argument up to now has been for an "equal opportunity" to prove that females can/should compete on a level playing field with males.
So, is it not counter-intuitive to begin altering protocols to be "better suited" to females than males?
Not trying to start a "flame war" here, but if the mission is the same, and the gender of a person doesn't matter in how they fulfill it...where's the "fire"?
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
It's a fair argument. Note when we started to replace Servicemen with Service Member; as politically correct that looked, the mindset was the same, to highlight the military isn't a male oriented organization anymore. The real takeaway from the USAF Secretary is her desire to encourage more women that they can successfully serve and start a family without fearing career opportunities are in jeopardy.
(4)
(0)
SSgt Boyd Herrst
Could there be a way to move the female member about to be “with child” into A inactive Reserve sitrep and have lined up that a Reservist could fill the slot (able-bodies Airman). It would not have to be a female.. or one that there’d Be no concern the force would lose her able-bodiness.
(0)
(0)
MAJ James Woods
SSgt Boyd Herrst Are you suggesting a pregnant woman can’t fulfill her military duties just cause she’s “with child”? That is the kind of rhetoric that the Secretary is talking about needing to go away. Much like civilian employment, a woman should not fear her career is in jeopardy cuz they need special considerations while pregnant and time off after giving birth. Being military is the only advantage they have knowing they can’t lose their job like they can in civilian workforce.
(1)
(0)
SSgt Boyd Herrst
What I’m getting at is they get so far along it gets risky for the child in AFSCs like Aircraft Mechanics and other heavy lifting and stress-related jobs.. so time it at that point they can move into a Reserve position where the stress is not present.MAJ James Woods
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google