Posted on Mar 24, 2014
1SG Company First Sergeant
12.8K
3
3
2
2
0
Since I see and hear so many complaints about the new changes to 670-1, I am interested in the reccomendations you all would have and the reason? It seems as though many are complaining about the tattoo policy a lot! Many are releived by the sideburn portion. I see and hear a lot of complaining but would be interested in constructive recommendations from the group! Keep in mind profession of arms more so than your personal feelings.
Avatar feed
Responses: 2
SFC Electronic Warfare Specialist
1
1
0
Edited 10 y ago
As this force changes and becomes younger, stronger and faster and more lethal I think some of the changes make sense. However, as the most ethnically diverse fighting force on the planet next to say the British military we pride ourselves on having volunteers from every walk of life amongst our ranks. That said, some changes seem to unknowingly discriminate against some of these ethnic groups. Some island races wear tattoos as symbology of their race and are ancient in nature. Some wear dreadlocks for similar reasons. If the tattoos are not offensive or derogatory in nature, why are they disqualified from reaching for higher levels of responsibility if they are the best person for the job? Why can a woman not wear dreadlocks if they do not degrade the proper wear and functionality of the headgear or other head based equipment (so long as the dreads are not like 2 Chainz). We teach and preach equality and turn around and say that we are not equal with some of the policies and regulations that are drafted. 600-9; this is no longer the 1940's were the military was almost entirely composed of white males in their late teens and early 20's. Again, many ethnic groups are "thicker" people but does that automatically mean that they are fat or out of shape? What is the message being sent here? Women too are no longer of the slim, short skinny variety from back in the day. Many women are curvy and more shapely than they were even 10 years ago. With things like crossfit, and as many are now jumping into bodybuilding more so than even the early 2000's their bodies tend to become more curvy as a result especially ethnic women! Does this mean they are fat or out of shape? I think some of these policies, regs, and articles need to be revamped to more accurately reflect the composition of the Army as it is today. Just my opinions here.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CW4 Mark Brubeck
0
0
0
I think it would be great if they would just not keeping changing it.  Tattoos, no tattoos  Senior leaders state that it is time to go back to the basics.  My question would have to be why did we ever leave the basics. 
(0)
Comment
(0)
1SG Company First Sergeant
1SG (Join to see)
10 y
Chief I agree with you for the most part. I am glad that some of the changes were made though. Sometimes we need a little change and improvement to guidelines. As far as what you say about the phrase "we need to get back to the basics" I too am tired of hearing that. Ask 10 different people that say that to elaborate and you will get 10 totally different responses. Ask those same 10 people to see their ID tags and likely will have at least 6 excuses of why they don't have them (this is a very basic standard in my opinion). Hopefully with the new changes/clarification to the AR some people will actually read it and actually enforce what has been there all along.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close