YahooNews pointed me to a report originally at National Review titled “Air Force Academy Tells Cadets to Ditch Gendered Terms Like ‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’.” The absurd headline did the trick and got me to click through to investigate.
Cadets at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs have been instructed to adopt gender-inclusive language as part of their diversity and inclusion training at the esteemed military institution.
“Use words that include all genders,” the training material, obtained by Fox News, directs. It reminds readers to ask for a person’s preferred gender pronouns and names rather than referring to them by their observable sex.
While my kids think this sort of thing is perfectly normal, I must confess that I still find the notion that we should assume people might be trans or nonbinary absent outward signs rather silly. I would think most people would find being asked their preferred pronoun annoying, if not offensive.
Otherwise, the suggestions are rather commonsensical.
Recommended substitutes for “you guys,” if a student is addressing a group of people, are gender-neutral terms including “team,” “squaddies,” “folks” and “y’all.”
We were making this shift when I was a cadet, nearly forty years ago. While “guys” is gender-inclusive in some circles, it’s perfectly reasonable to use “team” or other ungendered language to refer to groups of mixed-gender people.
As to the silly headline:
“Some families are headed by single parents, grandparents, foster parents, two moms, two dads, etc.: consider ‘parent or caregiver’ instead of ‘mom and dad,’” the training says. Romantic relationships have to be stripped of gender connotations, too, with the presentation suggesting the word “partner” over “boyfriend or girlfriend.”
My presumption was that this is simply telling people not to make assumptions about other people. It’s surely perfectly fine to refer to one’s own parents as “mom” and “dad” or to refer to one’s own boyfriend or girlfriend. But it’s a good practice not to assume that others are in traditional situations until you know them.
In a statement released to the Denver Gazette, that’s exactly what was happening:
“The Air Force Academy does not prohibit the use of ‘Mom and Dad’ or other gender-specific terms,” according to the academy. “The slide in question was not intended to stand alone.”
The slide on “inclusive language” was meant to “demonstrate how respect for others should be used to build inclusive teams” and ultimately build better offensive and defensive units, said the Air Force Academy. “Until you know a person’s situation,” it counsels, “we should not make assumptions about them.”
Indeed, this is true even aside from LGBTQ issues. While it never seemed to bother them, I always cringed when strangers assumed my girls had a mom. While it’s a perfectly natural assumption to make, it’s rather awkward to have to explain that she’s deceased.
The training suggests that lumping people into a class based on various orientations is offensive and orders students to use “person-centered” language. Instead of “the disabled,” the speaker should say “people with disabilities” and “transgender people” instead of “transgenders.”
These, again, seem rather innocuous. Indeed, “transgenders” has long sense passed into being seen as a slur.
Treating races equally by vowing to be “color blind” is not acceptable or sufficient, according to the training, which says that “color conscious,” on the other hand, is the correct language to use instead. It encourages students to distinguish based on race, to “see Color/Patterns” AND VALUE people for their uniqueness.”
Pretending that we don’t notice people’s outward characteristics is silly, given that it’s a natural tendency.
The training claims that the programming will make the country’s military more competitive, as “our leaders have deemed D&I a warfighting imperative.” It is important to “lift others (motivate our teams)” as part of a strategy to develop “warfighters.” In order to foster a “warfighter mentality” among trainees, the commandant feels instructors should prioritize inclusivity, ownership, harmony, and institutional pride, according to the presentation.
The notion that diverse teams produce more creative problem-solving is pretty well established at this point. And, rather obviously, the team is going to be more effective if all its members feel valued.
I haven’t the slightest idea whether these sort of sessions have much impact on achieving that goal. Indeed, I’m rather skeptical. But DEI is a Secretary of Defense level initiative. It’s hardly shocking that the service academies are embracing it.
