SEBASTIAN SHAKESPEARE: SAS hero launches full frontal assault on the Army's diversity drive

Chef

LE
As long as the standards don't change and the recruitment is seeking the best of a more diverse group, it's not a problem. The minute you lower the standard to be inclusive, it's over. "I understand Trooper Schmo doesn't meet SF's standards but he/she/they meet the BAME standard so they're in."
Good luck with that idea in these inclusive times.
 

Nomad1382

War Hero
Good luck with that idea in these inclusive times.
LAPD and Miami-Dade tried it in the 80's, took a lot of short cuts so they could hire more BAME to diversify. Ended up with a bunch of gang bangers, guys with violent/gang/drug related juvie records that they couldn't unseal and check before hiring. The corruption and scandals still echo through those departments.
 

Chef

LE
LAPD and Miami-Dade tried it in the 80's, took a lot of short cuts so they could hire more BAME to diversify. Ended up with a bunch of gang bangers, guys with violent/gang/drug related juvie records that they couldn't unseal and check before hiring. The corruption and scandals still echo through those departments.
I was tempted to give you a 'Funny' for that.

It's so predictable to anyone who isn't part of the 'Equality' industry. I recall reading on these hallowed pages that the big wheeled ladders on the back of fire engines were abandoned for reasons that had nothing to do with fire fighters not all being able to manhandle them.

Possibly due to reduced non gender physical requirements? Who knows?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
It's so predictable to anyone who isn't part of the 'Equality' industry. I recall reading on these hallowed pages that the big wheeled ladders on the back of fire engines were abandoned for reasons that had nothing to do with fire fighters not all being able to manhandle them.

Possibly due to reduced non gender physical requirements? Who knows?
Oh, giveaway !
 

enpointe

Clanker
As long as the standards don't change and the recruitment is seeking the best of a more diverse group, it's not a problem. The minute you lower the standard to be inclusive, it's over. "I understand Trooper Schmo doesn't meet SF's standards but he/she/they meet the BAME standard so they're in."

As long as the current Standard is objectively justifiable then it should stand

what we have seen on civvie st in some of the widening participation stuff is support and coaching being offered to under represented groups to help them reach that standard or where roles are hard to recruit full stop a pathway with pexit points w to address weaknesses ( in a slight more humane way than RowCo)
 

enpointe

Clanker
I was tempted to give you a 'Funny' for that.

It's so predictable to anyone who isn't part of the 'Equality' industry. I recall reading on these hallowed pages that the big wheeled ladders on the back of fire engines were abandoned for reasons that had nothing to do with fire fighters not all being able to manhandle them.

Possibly due to reduced non gender physical requirements? Who knows?
various sources say cost / maintenance overhead and the like compared to the cost and minimal maintenance of a 135 or 9 metre aluminium ladder, and also the greater reach of the genuine TL or HP
 
Last edited:

Chef

LE
Oh, giveaway !
I thought 'manhandle' is acceptable as it implies rough, violent and crude application of force. Nothing sensitive towards Gaia and equally excludes females from criticism.

But I was wrong. I apologise.
 

Choux Bun

Old-Salt
But does it though? In reality all that's required is not to treat anyone like a c***. It's really not that hard unless you're one of those people who has trouble separating attitude from personality.
Consider this... The one size fits all just doesn't cut it. Whilst PC might be observed and tick box exercises such as inclusion (gender/eye or hair colour/religion/age/ethnicity et al) are met, it all leads to a dilution or weakening of standards and output and can make team cohesion difficult.
Perhaps a fair way is to offer opportunity to all but select or build on ability. Even then you will probably get someone who whinges that 'no-one in that team/group looks like me'. Well that's life and life aint always fair and yes it's a form of discrimination... against those that don't measure up. The current education system is open to all, but not everyone makes the grades. Like it or not, in most aspects of life there are winners and losers - perhaps harsh, but true.
 

ches

LE
The current education system is open to all, but not everyone makes the grades. Like it or not, in most aspects of life there are winners and losers - perhaps harsh, but true.

Too bloody true but unfortunately the entitled brigade who scream & cry about the remotest thing that 'offends' them get a ruckload on unwarranted attention thanks to social media. It will continue as there seems to be no sign of society kicking back at this attitude & ultimately we're pretty much fcuked.
 

Sana

Old-Salt
Consider this... The one size fits all just doesn't cut it. Whilst PC might be observed and tick box exercises such as inclusion (gender/eye or hair colour/religion/age/ethnicity et al) are met, it all leads to a dilution or weakening of standards and output and can make team cohesion difficult.
Perhaps a fair way is to offer opportunity to all but select or build on ability. Even then you will probably get someone who whinges that 'no-one in that team/group looks like me'. Well that's life and life aint always fair and yes it's a form of discrimination... against those that don't measure up. The current education system is open to all, but not everyone makes the grades. Like it or not, in most aspects of life there are winners and losers - perhaps harsh, but true.

Perfectly explained. Life isn't fair, and sometimes complaining your head off just doesn't work. Better to work at it or find another way.
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top