Reported Pause in RAF White Recruiting To Meet Diversity Targets

[Airbanda]

So the normal practice is to appoint first those who passed selection tests with the highest marks.

In order to increase diversity they're appointing people who passed selection with, perhaps only slightly, lower marks but who are female or from an ethnic minority.

Is that what it boils down to?

[muppetofthenorth]

So the normal practice is to appoint first those who passed selection tests with the highest marks.

In order to increase diversity they're appointing people who passed selection with, perhaps only slightly, lower marks but who are female or from an ethnic minority.

Is that what it boils down to?
No.

The normal practice is "first past the post" - those who meet the selection criteria first, get in.
What they wanted to do was make sure that the first in were those who also happened to be female or an ethnic minority, juggling around the timetable and bypassing others on the list.

[nonsense]

A selection test is inherently a predictive process which tries to predict which candidates will perform best at or after some point in the future.
It does not measure future performance, it predicts it. If you are able to rank the performance of the candidates you accept at some future point, you get the feedback you need to improve your selection process.

Let's say your selection process starts out taking, for example, university graduates with either history degrees or engineering degrees, and ranks them on their academic records.
Now lets say your feedback process 2 or 5 or 10 years down the line tells you that actually history graduates are consistently slightly outperforming engineering graduates as officers.
At this point, you'd go back and weight their academic results slightly higher. You'd say to yourself "my old judgement about who will do best is consistently slightly off, so despite what I think, I need to tweak it.

There is no shame in accepting that when you try your best to use what you hope is an objective selection process to get the best candidates, you consistently discount (bias against, consciously or otherwise) certain classes of candidate, and choosing to identify membership of one of those classes as an unrecognised factor to be added to your selection process.

If your feedback process says that race or gender seems to result in bias, you'd do well to insert race into your selection process.

But you sure as hell don't decide that because a balanced selection process accepts approximately the same proportion of Scottish ancestry as of Irish ancestry (insert other examples if you like) as you see in qualified potential applicants, that when the proportion of Scots has been a bit low for a while, it is time to accept ONLY Scots. Past selection errors don't justify swinging too far the opposite direction today.

Meeting a particular proportion of different races in the entire organisation as a whole by pumping in lots of minorities today should not be the objective; recruiting a particular proportion (with inevitable scatter due to small sample sizes) in each intake should be the objective.

Recruiting Video 2019: all D&I and of limited appeal with almost no front-line element
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X98EyRzQak8

Remember in WWII, the things that were rarely ever damaged on returning bombers were in fact the weak points (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias)?
Similarly, the people you don't succeeded in recruiting despite them appearing to be good candidates are the people your advertising needs to appeal to.

So you go out and find smart cookies outside the RAF who are a year or two older than your usual candidates and you survey them to find out why they didn't consider (or rejected) the RAF as a career, and then your address those issues in your advertising.

Getting people interested in planes is easy, getting them to see past their own misconceptions about joining the military is much more important.

Advertising is the first step of your recruiting selection process, you don't need to inspire every Tom, Dick and Harry to apply, you need to persuade as many of the very best as you can that the RAF offers them a better future than their high performing mates will get elsewhere.

[finestkind]

One of the biggest problems of this (as has been discussed before) is that recruiting applicants on a quota system of positive discrimination result in one of two things. Either a higher failure rate or a changing of standards. Neither of these is beneficial. A higher failure rate just confirms that this job is not for this area of the population thereby further reducing the applicant numbers from this demographic area. A changing of standards, in as much as a lower of standards, is not something that is desirous in any area, whether military or commercial.

[Haraka]

Comment by a Senior (white) SAAF officer as the quota system became apparent.
" Aeroplanes are not Racist. They kill idiots regardless of their colour."

[Champagne Anyone?]

Has anyone seen the RAF Air Cadets web page??

What the hell were they thinking??


https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/

[MPN11]

Yes, that's Diverse. But then so was 144 (Richmond) Squadron in the 1960s. And we all just got on with being Cadets!

[muppetofthenorth]

Has anyone seen the RAF Air Cadets web page??

What the hell were they thinking??

https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/

Yes, the page is extremely misleading...

...it actually shows cadets in a glider.

[langleybaston]

Only we Brits do irony.

Ironical, is it not?

[Melchett01]

Recruiting Films 1970s: Phantoms roaring off, Jaguars struggling to get airborne, fire trucks, police dogs, ATC, proper meals in messes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE8d9l4JyJI

Recruiting Video 2019: all D&I and of limited appeal with almost no front-line element

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X98EyRzQak8

The 70s videos are still exciting - and nostalgic. I’m not actually sure what the 2019 video was all about, playing pool and computer games and some chap saying oh it’s not 24/7 … erm I hate to break it to you. I got half way through and still had no idea what it was all about. Utterly useless. So glad my career has branched out and I’m now largely employed in the Joint space. I see precious little reason to go back to an Air focused role - it’s become a social experiment rather than a premier war fighting organisation.

[Champagne Anyone?]

Has anyone seen the RAF Air Cadets web page??

What the hell were they thinking??


https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/


Sorry, I just noticed the rest of my post after the link didn't get posted...



How this can be diverse, I do not know...



Where are the Oriental and far East representatives? Where are the Indians, the Pakastani and other Ethnic Asian nationalities? The South Americans? Hispanics? Latinos? Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders? etc. etc.


How can the page be diverse if you only concentrate your 'diversity' on only one non white 'racial' group and exclude all others? It's just the same in 98% of all adverts on TV and Cinema...



If you want to preach diversity, for 'Oompa Loompas' sake*, at least include all the other racial and ethnic groups instead of concentrating on just one!!







* Oompa Loompas are fictional character from Roald Dahls C in the CF, not an alternative name for a religious or racial group!

[Dan Gerous]

Has anyone seen the RAF Air Cadets web page??

What the hell were they thinking??


https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircadets/
After reading the link I looked up my old "Space Cadet" Sqn on the internet. Lots of pics of cadets and there were hardly any "diverse" faces among them. I don't mean that to sound racist, just a comment on the reality of things. Glad to see they're still going strong and providing great experience for youngsters.

[langleybaston]

Re. the Air Cadets:

You are not supposed to notice, let alone comment.

We are entering the era when the token straight unhandicapped white male will be deemed essential in all media and adverts.

[stevef]

Recruiting Films 1970s: Phantoms roaring off, Jaguars struggling to get airborne, fire trucks, police dogs, ATC, proper meals in messes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE8d9l4JyJI

Recruiting Video 2019: all D&I and of limited appeal with almost no front-line element

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X98EyRzQak8

Second video... is that really the best the recruitment department can come up with? Would anyone be inspired to join up after watching that insipid effort. :rolleyes:
Signed,
A No2 Hairy Mary Dinosaur.

[downsizer]

The thing is that the videos are made for you anymore. They are made for 16-25ish..... What appealed to us, won't read directly across to the modern youth.

For instance I thought the "Their county needs you" adverts from the mid-late 90s were great, but I'm told that was not a very successful advert at all. Apparently one of the most effective ones was where the guy was in a supermarket and got a small cut but the employer made a massive fuss, the implication being the RAF would look after you....

[Melchett01]

The thing is that the videos are made for you anymore. They are made for 16-25ish..... What appealed to us, won't read directly across to the modern youth.

For instance I thought the "Their county needs you" adverts from the mid-late 90s were great, but I'm told that was not a very successful advert at all. Apparently one of the most effective ones was where the guy was in a supermarket and got a small cut but the employer made a massive fuss, the implication being the RAF would look after you....

But that second video isn’t even obvious what its recruiting to - you can pool with your mates down the pub.

[downsizer]

But that second video isn’t even obvious what its recruiting to - you can pool with your mates down the pub.

I'm not defending it at all, I'm not an expert in marketing, but I think it's saying you can have a life in and out of the RAF.

When I was in recruiting one of the most common misconceptions was that we run your life 24/7 and control you. Also that you were locked in for 20 or so years.

[albatross]

[QUOTE=downsizer;
When I was in recruiting one of the most common misconceptions was that we run your life 24/7 and control you. Also that you were locked in for 20 or so years.[/QUOTE]

Isn’t that the wife’s job description?

[Flugzeug A]

Along similar lines , tho’ it ain’t recruitment , the BBC blurb about NASA’s Artemis mission yesterday evening, ended by emphasising NASA’s aim to put the 1st female ( they didn’t say ‘Woman’ ) and 1st person of colour on the moon.
No mention of the science.
A quick Google puts each launch - without landings , occupation etc- at a cool $4.1 billion , the overall cost at over $40 billion.
That’s an awful lot of wonga but they’ll feel good about the 1sts.
As for the situation in Blighty , you only need to count the massive OVERemphasis on diversity in the media , as someone’s already mentioned.
The current RAF television advert’s potential recruit is ‘A female of colour’ & that’s by design.
A good 80% of tv adverts don’t have non mixed race people in them.
However , in even mentioning it , I am now presumed to be a racist / sexist et al.
Things really would have ground to a halt if the forces were trying to achieve the UK diversity mix that TV advertising has already done!

[oldmansquipper]

That reminds me!

We see virtually no TV except sport, and that only when we visit family. We completely broke the TV habit early in Covid: too depressing.

Recently we have seen a lot of cricket, and have been amazed by the advertisements. Leaving aside that we don't understand half of them, we are struck by the large proportion of BAME actors, far far more than the percentages quoted upstream. I had not focussed on this piece of trivia until SWMBO shouted "an all-white cast!" last night.

It is probably politically incorrect to draw attention to the observation, but, if our armed forces are trying to be representative, why not the meejah?

Have a look and see for yourselves.

LB.

Been saying this for years…..it’s dreadful and skews the public perception.

it seems the meejah agenda benders have been to the goebellian school of propaganda. The adverts are no longer even subliminal. It is clear from them that the UK population is made up of around 60-80% BAME in their 30s. The rest is made up of LGBGTQ+woteva with a small - a very very small - proportion of middle aged WASPs. We are clearly a minority grouping now..but we will not have any rights ourselves…OL(especially wasp OL) Don’t Matter.

Not long before we shuffle off though….

[muppetofthenorth]

I'd say some of the takes here are out of touch, but I'm not sure they've ever been in touch in the first place.

[langleybaston]

I'd say some of the takes here are out of touch, but I'm not sure they've ever been in touch in the first place.

Not understood. What is a take please?

[downsizer]

Not understood. What is a take please?


Here (https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=what+is+someone%27s+take%3F)

There you go. :rolleyes:

[langleybaston]

A very clever piece of magic as an answer, thank you.

I expect, therefore, that my take is wrong.

Probably due to old age, ingrained white colonial entitlement, social isolation, not watching TV, not reading the correct newspapers, daring to think for myself. Add in taking off my hat in church and other buildings, walking on the outside of the pavement, opening doors for people and not using the F word much.

Seems about accurate.

[snapper41]

A very clever piece of magic as an answer, thank you.

I expect, therefore, that my take is wrong.

Probably due to old age, ingrained white colonial entitlement, social isolation, not watching TV, not reading the correct newspapers, daring to think for myself. Add in taking off my hat in church and other buildings, walking on the outside of the pavement, opening doors for people and not using the F word much.

Seems about accurate.


It seems your ‘take’ - and mine - is indeed wrong. One simply cannot hold an opinion contrary to the zeitgeist. That makes us ‘gammons’, apparently.

While I’m on the subject, how is it that the phrase ‘male, pale and stale’ has entered mainstream language, despite being sexist, racist and ageist?

[muppetofthenorth]

Well done both, you're playing the victim fantastically.

Your views aren't "wrong". They're simply not of this era. The world changes, endlessly moaning about that on the internet is actually the only thing you have in common with the generation you seem to dislike so much...

[langleybaston]

Well done both, you're playing the victim fantastically.

Your views aren't "wrong". They're simply not of this era. The world changes, endlessly moaning about that on the internet is actually the only thing you have in common with the generation you seem to dislike so much...

Your third sentence is counter-productive to your take. Please redraft to say what you really mean.

[Confusious]

Well done both, you're playing the victim fantastically.

Your views aren't "wrong". They're simply not of this era. The world changes, endlessly moaning about that on the internet is actually the only thing you have in common with the generation you seem to dislike so much...
Is "this era" your era and the only era that agrees with you by any chance?

[cheekychimp]

Well done both, you're playing the victim fantastically.

Your views aren't "wrong". They're simply not of this era. The world changes, endlessly moaning about that on the internet is actually the only thing you have in common with the generation you seem to dislike so much...
As they both live in this era, their views are of this era. They just happen to be different to some other views, plenty of young people have views similar to theirs.

[albatross]

Geeze guys: NO Fighting in the War Room!
https://youtu.be/WI5B7jLWZUc

[Timelord]

There was a report into the police in the last few days (Policy Exchange I think) that said that forces had lost their focus on combatting crime and:

”According to Spencer, UK police forces are too distracted by being politically correct and are neglecting their duty in combatting serious threats to the public such as public disorder, knife crime, sexual assault and online harassment.
“

There may be similar lessons for the RAF to learn. Crucially the report states that the Home Secretary should be able to sack Chief Constables who preside over failing forces.

[BEagle]

Distinctly non-PC, but SO good:

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/843x1287/302130109_10160449295465452_3314910192306981529_n_2c568cb1dd 8c11db042ba90dc1afbb613434e5b0.jpg

[cynicalint]

Is that a self-portrait Beagle?

[BEagle]

Is that a self-portrait Beagle?

Nope - probably about 3-5 years before I joined.

[BEagle]

The original version of that Ladybird book was published in 1967 and can be viewed at https://archive.org/details/the-airman/mode/2up .

Someone should send Wiggy the Woke a copy!

[teeteringhead]

Only 2 pictures of helicopters - and SaRbuoys at that - one of those was a prop for a Marine Craft ......... some things don't change..

[MPN11]

The original version of that Ladybird book was published in 1967 and can be viewed at https://archive.org/details/the-airman/mode/2up .

Someone should send Wiggy the Woke a copy!

Yes, it only refers to MEN ... no airwomen mentioned anywhere. And they're all WHITE. I'm shocked and appalled.

[Haraka]

That JP and JP shot was discussed at length on PPrune some years ago. IIRC the individual was identified, plus the fact from knowledge of the fuselsge that he had to be facing the tail of the JP when imaged.

[Haraka]

Note the Mk1 Bonedome!

[snapper41]

This sort of discriminatory recruitment isn’t solely the preserve of the RAF, it seems:

https://www.hr-inform.co.uk/news-article/organisation-under-fire-for-white-male-discrimination

[Bob Viking]

There have been race wars, riots and civil wars over things like this. When the largest racial group of one gender is being actively discriminated against it may not end well.

I hope I’m just being overly dramatic but this whole issue seems to be gaining traction in the popular press right now. And even white males know how to read.

Beware the (hitherto) silent majority.

BV

[MPN11]

I'm not sure whether I'm a 'minority' or not.

Ex-RAF White OAP ... there seem to be a lot of us here! :confused:

[7p3i7lot]

When I joined the military it was:
1. Against regs and incompatible with service to be gay
then
2. They went to "Don't ask don't tell" if you are gay
now
3. ok to be openly gay
so now
4. I am getting out before it becomes a requirement for service!

[langleybaston]

When I joined the military it was:
1. Against regs and incompatible with service to be gay
then
2. They went to "Don't ask don't tell" if you are gay
now
3. ok to be openly gay
so now
4. I am getting out before it becomes a requirement for service!

It is, as they say, a bugger.

[oldmansquipper]

I'm not sure whether I'm a 'minority' or not.

Ex-RAF White OAP ... there seem to be a lot of us here! :confused:

Indeed. However….Us ‘aged WASPs’ are considered merely oxygen thieves these days. OL no longer M.

[tartare]

Innocent questions - has the imposition of said quotas actually seen a decline in suitable candidates for RAF positions?
Do we know if the overall level of competency, suitability, merit has actually fallen while this policy has been in place?
Is the RAF now desperately short of suitable candidates for all types of roles?
I deplore woke-ism and political correctness as much as any of you.
But to use a crude analogy - surely as long as your wing-person is watching your six like a hawk - who gives a sh1te what they look like when they take their helmet and mask off?

[Easy Street]

Innocent questions - has the imposition of said quotas actually seen a decline in suitable candidates for RAF positions?
Do we know if the overall level of competency, suitability, merit has actually fallen while this policy has been in place?
Is the RAF now desperately short of suitable candidates for all types of roles?
I deplore woke-ism and political correctness as much as any of you.
But to use a crude analogy - surely as long as your wing-person is watching your six like a hawk - who gives a sh1te what they look like when they take their helmet and mask off?

There are not strictly any 'quotas' in force, but 'targets' - subtly different. The process revealed to have been in use is that candidates were treated as being of equal merit if they reached the minimum threshold standard for acceptance in the assessment process. Candidates above that threshold were preferentially loaded onto training courses - or 'selected', since there is only a set number of training places each year - if they were ethnic minority or female, with no regard for performance above the minimum threshold. It does not take the analytical skills of a genius to realise that such an approach reduces the average assessment performance of people accepted into service, when compared to the alternative (ahem, legally mandated) approach of selecting the candidates with the highest assessments. There's no argument here - it's a simple statistical fact.

The official line that "standards were not lowered" can only possibly be true in so far as the minimum threshold was not lowered. And I don't know that for sure; unless any more leaked correspondence emerges to the contrary, I have to take it on trust that CAS has not plumbed the depths of uttering outright lies. If it does emerge that the minimum threshold was lowered then that will be a very serious matter indeed.

Some will argue that performance in the selection process does not read across perfectly to competency and suitability for candidates' eventual professional employment. That's undoubtedly true, but it is also beyond argument that it bears some relation. Otherwise why measure any of the attributes involved?

I'm led to believe that the RAF is short of recruits in some roles, so the above process will not have made any difference to selection in those fields. Unsurprisingly, however, it has never been short of recruits to the flying branch, so some of those who in future will be responsible for "watching your six like a hawk" and were recruited during the period in question could well be so-called "diversity hires". The question now will be whether the training system has the integrity to apply the requisite standards to them. Of course, every individual who's reached the acceptance standard should be capable of passing within the allotted flying hours, and go on to perform to the required standard at the front line, but you would expect the overall proportion doing so to move in line with the standard of input. (I know there are certain incentives around course graduation in the MFTS contract, but am no expert so will limit myself to saying I hope they can't be met by compromising on student performance!)

None of the correspondence leaked thus far has indicated how the white males who did succeed were selected. If they received the same "equal merit" treatment as the minorities and females, then presumably they were allocated training places in the order they applied, or the order they attended OASC, or alphabetical order, or some other system like that. If, on the other hand, they were selected based on their merit scores - with the highest scores being offered places - then stand by for the law of unintended consequences to take hold, as white males perform better *on average* through training and in their early careers, with consequences for numbers succeeding at promotion boards... you saw it predicted here first.

[ASRAAMTOO]

None of the correspondence leaked thus far has indicated how the white males who did succeed were selected. If they received the same "equal merit" treatment as the minorities and females, then presumably they were allocated training places in the order they applied, or the order they attended OASC, or alphabetical order, or some other system like that. If, on the other hand, they were selected based on their merit scores - with the highest scores being offered places - then stand by for the law of unintended consequences to take hold, as white males perform better *on average* through training and in their early careers, with consequences for numbers succeeding at promotion boards... you saw it predicted here first.

You pre-suppose that all will be treated equally throughout the training system. Historically this has not actually happened. A number of years ago the RAF made a MAJOR change to the entry requirements for pilot. The first batch through that met this new requirement were treated very differently indeed!

[Ewan Whosearmy]

.... as white males perform better *on average* through training and in their early careers, with consequences for numbers succeeding at promotion boards... you saw it predicted here first.

A sensible prediction, but isn't it somewhat undermined by the fact that merit already appears to be a secondary consideration in promotion up the greasy pole? Rather, woke service leaders (and a woke civil service) will continue instead to promote based on other criteria?

[alfred_the_great]

RAF ORs were/are allocated space for training in the order they applied.

[downsizer]

Also need to remember that P2 and P3 are recruited differently.

P2 was always (and still is a selection). OASC, and CBAT if reqd, then the top scorers selected. P3 was a race to "jump through the necessary hoops". Applicants were loaded onto courses on completion of the "hoops" then the trade would shut. There never really has been selection for P3, more a minimum standard. If you pass the minimum standard (AST, SI) then it is a race. No selection takes place after the AST and SI.

Edit: Beaten to this point by ATG by 3 minutes.

[RAFEngO74to09]

Now there is a 1-star Race & Ethnicity Advocate

https://twitter.com/RoyalAirForce/status/1576119734268882944

[The Helpful Stacker]

When I joined the military it was:
1. Against regs and incompatible with service to be gay
then
2. They went to "Don't ask don't tell" if you are gay
now
3. ok to be openly gay
so now
4. I am getting out before it becomes a requirement for service!

What a bunch of bigoted BS.

[Thud105]

Is it just me, or does anyone else ever think that the more 'woke' and sensitive a person is, their sense of humour is inversely proportioned?

[downsizer]

Now there is a 1-star Race & Ethnicity Advocate

https://twitter.com/RoyalAirForce/status/1576119734268882944

I get your point, but You do realise it is a secondary duty?

[langleybaston]

I get your point, but You do realise it is a secondary duty?

Preparing the RAF to defeat the King's enemies is becoming a secondary duty.

[The Helpful Stacker]

Is it just me, or does anyone else ever think that the more 'woke' and sensitive a person is, their sense of humour is inversely proportioned?

If you can just point out the humour?

[Confusious]

If you can just point out the humour?
Nail has been hit on the head right there!

[Thud105]

Comedy is a form of art, and art is subjective. No point explaining jokes, you either found it funny, or you didn't. My point was that the overly woke don't seem to have much of a sense of humour, and often seem to delight in saying "that's not funny" as if only their opinion counts, when what they should say (if they feel they must comment) is "I don't think that's funny."

[Barksdale Boy]

Comedy is a form of art, and art is subjective. No point explaining jokes, you either found it funny, or you didn't. My point was that the overly woke don't seem to have much of a sense of humour, and often seem to delight in saying "that's not funny" as if only their opinion counts, when what they should say (if they feel they must comment) is "I don't think that's funny."
Spot on, Thud105. Who'd have thought that would come from Fresno - perhaps the perihelion of Woke?

[Big Pistons Forever]

None of the correspondence leaked thus far has indicated how the white males who did succeed were selected. If they received the same "equal merit" treatment as the minorities and females, then presumably they were allocated training places in the order they applied, or the order they attended OASC, or alphabetical order, or some other system like that. If, on the other hand, they were selected based on their merit scores - with the highest scores being offered places - then stand by for the law of unintended consequences to take hold, as white males perform better *on average* through training and in their early careers, with consequences for numbers succeeding at promotion boards... you saw it predicted here first.

I have been out of active service for 12 years but my personal experience with personnel that were not white males was “on average” they were better than the average white male. I would surmise that having to deal with a lot of unconscious bias not to mention some outright discrimination, made the ones who stayed work harder and better.

[radar101]

I would surmise that having to deal with a lot of unconscious bias not to mention some outright discrimination, made the ones who stayed work harder and better.

In the 80s and 90s when training Engineer Officers I tended to find the same with female engineers - probably because the ones who succeeded thought that they had to work harder to show that they were as good as the males.

[langleybaston]

In the 80s and 90s when training Engineer Officers I tended to find the same with female engineers - probably because the ones who succeeded thought that they had to work harder to show that they were as good as the males.

My experience was similar. Any women that got anywhere in the system were high average or higher.
Mind you, I might have been brainwashed, with one wife, three daughters, five granddaughters and a bitch for a dog.

[oldmansquipper]

I found, as a gliding instructor, that wimmin generally made better pilots than blokes. For example. If I asked a lady to fly at, say 45kts, she would fly at…..45kts.

Most blokes would fly ‘somewhere between 40 and 47…ish.’

I had the privilege of flying some of the first ladies selected for RAF Pilot training to give the some air experience prior to the FTS. Impressed I was.

[Bob Viking]

In conversations such as this it always seems to be a race to appear the most enlightened by recounting various tales of how females are better than males. Personally I find it condescending and probably prone to significant bias or poor recollection.

In my experience from 23 years in the RAF, 15 of which were spent as a Hawk QFI (teaching students from 14 different nations in three different air forces), I can honestly say from the hundreds of students I have taught (only 7 of whom were female) that the females did not stand out in any way at either end of the spectrum. No more so than a cross section of their male peers. Some were good, some were not, some worked hard, some did not, some passed and some were chopped. I do not feel that I need to justify my feminist credentials by artificially lauding their abilities or conversely by diminishing their achievements. They were all trainee fast jet pilots with a job to do. End of story.

I would be genuinely fascinated to hear from a female pilot at this point to know how they feel about the issue. Would they rather just get on with the job? Do they love the extra attention? Do they hate being held up as poster children?

BV

[MPN11]

Not just Aircrew, but also ATC which had/has a high percentage of female controllers (we had no artificial quotas). Some were good, some very good and some cr*p. Just like the blokes, really.

The only female difference I noticed as a Local Examiner was that they seemed to be more aware of the consequences of their actions, which could manifest as nervousness. But some I supervised were really rather good.

[Timelord]

One of the great sadnesses about the recent “quota” furore is that prior to it, having female aircrew had simply ceased to be a “thing” . As BV says they were just more students / crews. Now, as a result of the targets every non white / non male will have to deal with suspicion that they are just filling a quota.
Unintended consequences!

[bugged on the right]

Just to carry on about unintended consequences, why would you wish to join an organisation knowing that your career would be limited, even subtly by your race or sex? I see the white males doing their flying tours and leaving as soon as possible. Why stay.?

[langleybaston]

In conversations such as this it always seems to be a race to appear the most enlightened by recounting various tales of how females are better than males. Personally I find it condescending and probably prone to significant bias or poor recollection.

In my experience from 23 years in the RAF, 15 of which were spent as a Hawk QFI (teaching students from 14 different nations in three different air forces), I can honestly say from the hundreds of students I have taught (only 7 of whom were female) that the females did not stand out in any way at either end of the spectrum. No more so than a cross section of their male peers. Some were good, some were not, some worked hard, some did not, some passed and some were chopped. I do not feel that I need to justify my feminist credentials by artificially lauding their abilities or conversely by diminishing their achievements. They were all trainee fast jet pilots with a job to do. End of story.

I would be genuinely fascinated to hear from a female pilot at this point to know how they feel about the issue. Would they rather just get on with the job? Do they love the extra attention? Do they hate being held up as poster children?

BV

BV.
I respect your report on your findings re. females who you trained and managed during your career.
However, you seem not to respect the reported experiences of others.
Not your usual style.

[ShyTorque]

Do they hate being held up as poster children?

Some of the female UAS cadets at the place I taught in the late 80s/early 90s took great umbrage at being paraded in front of the press (special press day held at RAF Northolt, IIRC). After they were obliged to take part, they decided they no longer wanted an RAF career at all and voted with their feet.

[tartare]

Comedy is a form of art, and art is subjective. No point explaining jokes, you either found it funny, or you didn't. My point was that the overly woke don't seem to have much of a sense of humour, and often seem to delight in saying "that's not funny" as if only their opinion counts, when what they should say (if they feel they must comment) is "I don't think that's funny."
Indeed.
Perilously politically correct Policy Wonk at the place I work just did not smile.
In photos, discussions, any workplace interaction.
Was a blocker in all senses of productive output.
Thankfully she has now left... and taken her pronouns and the rest of her woke bollocks with her.

[Bob Viking]

I take your point. However, the posts to which I referred felt like virtue signalling to me which is a practice I find to be as tiresome as the discrimination it purports to address.

BV

[vascodegama]

I am with Bob on this one -the range of abilities across the sexes was just as varied.

[langleybaston]

I take your point. However, the posts to which I referred felt like virtue signalling to me which is a practice I find to be as tiresome as the discrimination it purports to address.

BV

Fair enough. I suspect that my sample was smaller than yours. All I do know is that, when I joined, all S Met Os were male, and many were stale.
Fast forward to the 17 years when I was line manager of about a dozen [other numbers are available] S Met Os, the few female S Met Os and senior forecasters were all up among the star performers.
We speak as we find I hope. We can certainly agree about virtue signalling, an abomination.

[oldmansquipper]

Fair enough. I suspect that my sample was smaller than yours. All I do know is that, when I joined, all S Met Os were male, and many were stale.
Fast forward to the 17 years when I was line manager of about a dozen [other numbers are available] S Met Os, the few female S Met Os and senior forecasters were all up among the star performers.
We speak as we find I hope. We can certainly agree about virtue signalling, an abomination.

I do indeed (speak as I find). whist I am still allowed to have opinions of my own.

Virtue signalling? - Is that one of the newer phrases, like ‘extended reality’ and ‘embracing presentism?’ Whatever…I don’t like it either..😉

[ORAC]

Thought this thread was worth linking here. By a US Army colonel, field artillery.

https://twitter.com/uncleredleg/status/1577810470412640256?s=61&t=H-KhHEL28FLFn3w08Nv0Dg


Had some family in town this weekend. As some may know, I have a son at West Point. Because some of my family tune into various news sources, one of them asked me. “So what does your boy think of all that woke crap being taught at our service academies?” My answer in a 🧵1/.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The Russian army, I would suggest, is the very opposite of woke. It is also demonstrably ineffective and incompetent.
Both are a result of an organization that doesn’t value its soldiers, sailors and, airmen and women. The behaviours that fosters unit cohesion and therefore battlefield effectiveness, that are so eloquently described in the twitter message string above, are why the US military is such a powerful force.

I think the whole “ the military is in danger from woke-ness” has more to do with right wing blow hards like Tucker Carlson chasing TV ratings, rather than an actual problem.

Tucker as I recall made a big point about how the Russian army was so great because it wasn’t woke. Funny how that line didn’t wear well.

[Asturias56]

"The Russian army, I would suggest, is the very opposite of woke. "

Understatement of the year. Trouble is they treat so many of the recruits like dirt and they treat civilians and the opposition even worse

And then wonder why they are "The Boys in Zinc"