2
2
0
A soldier made comments on social media joking about how obesity in the army is an epidemic (it is in the MI branch), and then doubled down when someone complained to him about body shaming.
Weight / physical ability is not a protected category, where is the line between "unprotected" category and a topic that is still relevant to EO's mission set.
An informal complaint has already been lodged. Is this grounds for a formal EO complaint? If a formal complaint is lodged, is there a way to fight it?
Weight / physical ability is not a protected category, where is the line between "unprotected" category and a topic that is still relevant to EO's mission set.
An informal complaint has already been lodged. Is this grounds for a formal EO complaint? If a formal complaint is lodged, is there a way to fight it?
Posted in these groups: 
EO
Equal Opportunity (EO)
EO Equal Opportunity (EO)
Posted 4 y ago
Responses: 9
7
7
0
We have an entire regulation dedicated to discriminating against body fat and those with it. What I would say is that there is tact and treating people with dignity and respect. This is a great conversation between his first line and him. There is also the Army Social Media Policy, as his comments represent the Army even if he doesn't intend to.
It is not an EO issue. It's a Command discipline action. For soldiers, obesity is not a protected class. It is a basis to separate soldiers, it can even be used as a basis to enroll people in weight control program just because they LOOK fat. But that is at the discretion of the Commander (AR600-9), not random people in the unit.
Read AR600-9 Para 6-2. Being judged on "fitness" is acceptable, but it is not by rank and file, it is at the discretion of the commander between AR600-9 and AR350-1. The Commander may delegate the Maintenance of fitness, good order and discipline to other officers and NCOs in the Chain Of Command.
It is not an EO issue. It's a Command discipline action. For soldiers, obesity is not a protected class. It is a basis to separate soldiers, it can even be used as a basis to enroll people in weight control program just because they LOOK fat. But that is at the discretion of the Commander (AR600-9), not random people in the unit.
Read AR600-9 Para 6-2. Being judged on "fitness" is acceptable, but it is not by rank and file, it is at the discretion of the commander between AR600-9 and AR350-1. The Commander may delegate the Maintenance of fitness, good order and discipline to other officers and NCOs in the Chain Of Command.
(7)
(0)
5
5
0
bottom line up front - if a Soldier is fat, then they are fat - Being offended by the truth is bovine fecal matter, your supposed to feel ashamed, self conscious, and bummed out. I never sugar coated a god damned thing in order to spare someones feelings - this is the military, the business of killing people, you cannot get more offensive then that, if someone calling you tubby, fatty, or pointing out that Omar the Tent maker needs to sew your uniforms, then get the fuck in regulation, or suffer the ridicule.
(5)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Said like a true toxic leader. Thank for the dignity and respect. People who complain are those who always meet the standard of AR 600-9, never been flagged, but still being treated like they are lesser humans because someone does not like the way they look.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
CPT (Join to see) - Having a belly bulge does not meet "military" appearance. AR670-1
(0)
(0)
I am very curious to see what was said. I don't think it would be an EO issue but it would be a professionalism issue. Saying a Soldier does not appear to be in shape isn't something you can report. If a Soldier is failing to maintain his weight and is overweight due to his lack of physical training or by overeating you can tell me that he is not presenting a Soldierly appearance. Then you validate that they are in compliance with their height weight or body fat percentage.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google