Making H-air-story

RallyPoint Shared Content — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:45:46 -0500

It’s ironic the U.S. military is the most diverse military force in the world, yet have some policies which reflect the opposite. Specifically, policies that dictate how servicewomen are expected to wear their hair.

Talk is cheap, but policy change, something seemingly as simple as permitting women to wear their hair in braids for better performance, was expensive, time consuming and long-drawn out. This #FreeTheBun hair journey began in 2016 when then Technical Sergeant MSgt Private RallyPoint Member “JB” had a discussion with one of his Airmen. His Airmen soon confessed she was struggling with headaches and hair loss due to Air Force hair policy, which expected female Airman to wear their hair up and within strict bulk requirements. Mind you, servicewomen have their hair up every single duty day, not to mention that buns and helmets aren’t conducive. JB relayed this information to his wife, Staff Sergeant Jocelyn Lind, and was astounded when she told him she was also experiencing similar issues due to the out-of-date hair policy. They decided to pursue a change and created the Warrior Braids Project. This team is dedicated to researching and developing solutions to the problems facing women with regards to the hair standards and has over one thousand members! They are led by the Linds, Captain Hailey “FACTR” Garrett, 1st Lieutenant Natasha Monroe, and Senior Airman Emily Stanley-Cruz

In the 1940s, when it was decided women were allowed to serve, there were extensive arguments in society regarding how this pivotal change would impact the general public. There were two main fears these conversations surrounded: women would become lesbians or steal married men from their wives. The service had to mitigate these anxieties by creating uniform policies, which made women appear conventionally pretty enough to not come across as lesbians, but not pretty enough to steal husbands. And with that airtight logic, the bun was born and has been the standard for 70 years.

The bun is highly problematic for medical, operational and inclusivity reasons. A survey conducted by the Women’s Initiative Team (WIT), garnered over 11,000 responses from female Airman that painted this picture. An overwhelming 93% of respondents expressed they felt there needed to be an update to the hair policy for servicewomen. When asked why openly, without referencing medical implications, 56% of servicewomen said they suffered from migraines and headaches. Furthermore, they experienced: traction alopecia, receding hairlines, bald spots, and scalp sensitivity, to name a few. Operationally, it was discovered female Airmen struggled with mission readiness because the equipment didn’t fit properly, which inevitably compromised their safety. Imagine pulling your scalp back tightly, putting a ball on your head then trying to fit a helmet over it. Additionally, race inclusivity was not at the forefront of the conversation in the 40s because simply allowing women to serve was already considered to be a diversifying motion. However, according to data collected by the Office of Diversity by the DoD, in 2016 women of color made up more than 20% of the Air Force’s female population. Women of color have different hair types requiring different levels of care, and restricts them from wearing certain styles without permanent damage, including a bun.

Regardless of the anecdotal and quantitative evidence JB collected over the years, which proved how multi-problematic the hair regulation was, policy change demonstrated to be a massive obstacle. In fact, it took about five years and relentless tenacity from multiple parties to get this change approved. Despite years of: collecting data, making cold phone calls, going through the chain of command four times and being turned away every time, JB and Jocelyn refused to let up. Jocelyn created and organized a document containing all of the data they had been collecting over the years. Capt Garrett bridged their efforts to the WIT when she sent 1st Lt Private RallyPoint Member that document. In early 2020, Montana expressed her concerns with female hair policy with members of the WIT leadership, Maj Alea Nadeem and Captain Sarah Berheide. In 2018, Montana had been disqualified from being a pilot in the Air Force after she was diagnosed with migraines herself. After recognizing this was a problem across the Air Force and ultimately voicing her concerns with the hair policy, Alea, Sarah, and Montana started their own initiative within the WIT that was aimed at addressing the hair policy for women in the Air Force.

The combination of these two entities, the WIT and the Warrior Braids team, was the surge of force the #FreeTheBun movement needed. They collectively recognized getting a seat at the table was hard enough and asking someone to pass the salt, even if it meant they would be able to do their job better, was going to be difficult. Eventually, these two teams found themselves discussing this proposal in the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force’s office where they finally felt their concerns for the change were being acknowledged and having Lt Gen Mary O’Brien, the senior WIT champion back the teams up as they moved this initiative.

Nevertheless, the dedication and work ethic over five years was prominent during every single step of the way which is how the bun was finally freed. From the grassroots all the way up to senior leadership, the WIT, along with the Warrior Braids team exemplified what senior leaders ask of their Airmen. It truly was the epitome of a team effort; each member spoke incredibly highly of each other and maintained that this policy change would not have happened without one another. The 5 years of collecting data JB and Jocelyn put in, the countless hours of work (even while on leave) Montana undertook to sort through the thousands of survey responses they received, the networking and cold calls/emails Sarah sent to Air Force Generals (eventually collecting 39 letters of support), and the fearlessness Alea demonstrated while leading the team refusing to take no as an answer is just a small look into the mountainous effort it took for this change to come to fruition.

This was a big change and a needed change. It is a testimony that change happens from the bottom up, and it is possible to make a real difference in thousands of lives. Moving forward, they’re not done. Although the new policy is a major step in the right direction, there needs to be more steps to attain full inclusivity as some women can’t participate in this change without cutting their hair. The WIT hopes the hair policy change will inspire other Airmen to challenge problematic standards and action it. Furthermore, they hope this advancement will inspire others to push for changes and challenge policies that limit servicemembers from doing their jobs to the best of their ability. Here’s to, no hairs to, the future!

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Feb 11 at 2021 1:49 PM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:49:12 -0500

Excellent share RallyPoint Shared Content

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Feb 11 at 2021 1:55 PM

SGM Bill Frazer — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:55:46 -0500

Really nice if you are worrying about just hair, How well do the hairstyles that want work with Kevlars, flight helmets, protective masks? Of will they just look pretty when someone has to bag their corpses?

Response by GySgt Gary Cordeiro made Feb 11 at 2021 1:57 PM

GySgt Gary Cordeiro — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:57:56 -0500

Another reason To be glad for being male.

Response by SSG Carlos Madden made Feb 11 at 2021 2:12 PM

SSG Carlos Madden — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:12:27 -0500

Probably long overdue. Nice work making change from within.

Response by SFC Casey O'Mally made Feb 11 at 2021 2:59 PM

SFC Casey O'Mally — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 14:59:52 -0500

Not my service, not my problem. Plus I'm retired. So take this with a grain of salt. Or maybe only half a grain. But....

There is a MUCH simpler solution to avoid all of these problems and still comply with existing regulations. Cut the hair short. Problem solved.

Yeah, yeah, they shouldn't HAVE to cut it short. I get it. But guys have to. And we are all about equality, right? Do you think I had a choice about getting my head shaved completely bald in Basic training? I even showed up with a regulation high and tight - still got cue balled.

I am not saying that this is what SHOULD be done or what HAS to happen. Just that I am not seeing a real NEED for changing the policy.

Response by Capt Brandon Charters made Feb 11 at 2021 3:56 PM

Capt Brandon Charters — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:56:12 -0500

Having learned more about Maj Alea Nadeem and her work supporting women in the military over the last several years, I can say she's a leader in every sense of the word. No one better to think through the unique challenges women face in the DoD and advocate for change. Keep up the incredible work Ma'am!

Response by Cpl James Warren made Feb 11 at 2021 6:18 PM

Cpl James Warren — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:18:54 -0500

Always takes way to long to change even the simplest policies. Good Tom see something is being done for this one.

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Feb 11 at 2021 6:52 PM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 18:52:19 -0500

Diverse seems to be a PR term when it comes to policies and regulations.

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made Feb 11 at 2021 7:05 PM

SSG Robert Perrotto — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 19:05:26 -0500

Gee, how oppressive it must be to have policies that dictate how to wear your hair.

Male haircuts
The hair on top of the head must be neatly groomed. The length and bulk of the hair may not be excessive and must present a neat and conservative appearance.

The hair must present a tapered appearance. A tapered appearance is one where the outline of the Soldier’s hair conforms to the shape of the head (see scalp line in figure 3–1), curving inward to the natural termination point at the base of the neck.

When the hair is combed, it will not fall over the ears or eyebrows, or touch the collar, except for the closely cut hair at the back of the neck. The block-cut fullness in the back is permitted to a moderate degree, as long as the tapered look is maintained.

Males are not authorized to wear braids, cornrows, twists, dreadlocks, or locks while in uniform or in civilian clothes on duty. Haircuts with a single, untapered patch of hair on the top of the head (not consistent with natural hair loss) are considered eccentric and are not authorized. Examples include, but are not limited to, when the head is shaved around a strip of hair down the center of the head (mohawk), around a u-shaped hair area (horseshoe), or around a patch of hair on the front top of the head (tear drop).

Hair that is completely shaved or trimmed closely to the scalp is authorized. (See figs 3–1 and 3–2.)

Sideburns.
Sideburns are hair grown in front of the ear and below the point where the top portion of the ear attaches to the head. Sideburns will not extend below the bottom of the opening of the ear (see line A of fig 3–1). Sideburns will not be styled to taper, flair, or come to a point. The length of the individual hairs of the sideburn will not exceed 1/8 inch when fully extended.

Facial hair.
Males will keep their face clean-shaven when in uniform, or in civilian clothes on duty. Mustaches are permitted. If worn, males will keep mustaches neatly trimmed, tapered, and tidy. Mustaches will not present a chopped off or bushy appearance, and no portion of the mustache will cover the upper lip line, extend sideways beyond a vertical line drawn upward from the corners of the mouth (see lines C and D of fig 3–1), or extend above a parallel line at the lowest portion of the nose (see line B of fig 3–1). Handlebar mustaches, goatees, and beards are not authorized. If appropriate medical authority allows beard growth, the maximum length authorized for medical treatment must be specific. For example, “The length of the beard cannot exceed 1/4 inch” (see Training Bulletin Medical (TB Med) 287). Soldiers will keep the growth trimmed to the level specified by the appropriate medical authority, but are not authorized to shape the hair growth (examples include, but are not limited to goatees, “Fu Manchu,” or handlebar mustaches).

Wigs and hairpieces.
Males are prohibited from wearing wigs or hairpieces while in uniform, or in civilian clothes on duty, except to cover natural baldness or physical disfiguration caused by accident or medical procedure. When worn, wigs or hairpieces will conform to the standard haircut criteria, as stated within this regulation.

Response by SPC Diana D. made Feb 11 at 2021 8:08 PM

SPC Diana D. — Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:08:22 -0500

When I joined the military I knew I would have to cut my hair short and that is exactly what I did.

Response by SFC William Farrell made Feb 12 at 2021 1:24 AM

SFC William Farrell — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 01:24:10 -0500

They've been telling men how to wear their hair for many years RallyPoint Shared Content I feel that men should be able to have beards and longer hair.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Feb 12 at 2021 6:47 AM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 06:47:32 -0500

News Flash! Every individual is different. When I graduated from boot camp at 6'2", 200#, I was eligible to be a member of the USMC drill team; my buddy, at 5'0" was not. No matter what SecNav, or some advocates of women in the military would like, even if you put a women in the ill suited modified male uniform, when I look at a formation, some Marines look like Gen. Puller, others look like Beetle Bailey.
Current policy is we have a military composed of women and men. For years, assignments have determined how successful someone will be in the military and not all males, or females, are physically compatible with all assignments. It's time we abandon the fantasy that clothing or grooming will make a person more, or less, capable.
Set the grooming standards to meet military standards. Just because a woman is allowed to have hair that extends to the top of the collar doesn't mean a male should be able to have long hair. Why? Because the regs say so. Hair style in women will gravitate toward logic or safety. A women in the infantry will most likely gravitate toward a shorter hair style because it is easier to maintain. If an aviator or flight crew needs to wear braids to accommodate their helmet, so be it. When she is in a class A uniform, she must be within the regs.
So far as sexual activity is concerned, we have regulations that cover that. In 1982 I discharged a career SNCO because he impregnated a corporal. It was a consensual relationship, but forbidden by regulations, Just because there is a physical attraction, it doesn't mean as a male or female that we should succumb to that. Some people would prefer or like to use addictive substances, but we handle that through appropriate disciplinary or administrative action.
We had a saying during my time in the Corps: "Don't sweat the small stuff." Set the standards, adopt appropriate uniforms, recognize differences in physical requirements, and, just as we did in the past, enforce those standards according to the circumstances and abandon the petty arguments and jealousy.

Response by MSG Clyde Mills made Feb 12 at 2021 7:07 AM

MSG Clyde Mills — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 07:07:31 -0500

Sorry, but the Military is one of the most biased and discriminatory Occupations. To be in after witnessing what men have to do to perform their jobs vs Females in the military. I served 20 years plus and the exceptions women get vs men is despicable in my opinion. Starting off, men must have their heads cut to basically a shave when entering boot camp. They say it’s for uniformity and fir health and hygienic reasons. But females just had to keep their hair up off their collar. So right off the bat unequal rights, but still same pay. The PT test is another example of discrimination of men vs women. Yeah, Doctors say women are built differently. So they get to have a way lenient standard for passing the PT test. Which I say is again being discriminated against men. So both men and women doing exact same job. Requires lifting of an object, say in a motor pool. Object can’t be picked up due to that the females strength is too weak to get the job done. So another male soldier had to step in order to get the job accomplished. Whereas the female then just stands by as the two males pickup the heavy object. Yet both are paid the same monthly pay for their respective ranks. Now women are allowed to become Infantry soldiers. Male soldier gets wounded, female must carry male soldier to safety, but can’t pickup male soldier, because the female doesn’t have the strength to do it. So male soldier either stays in harms way and dies from injuries. Or another Male soldier comes in and rescues male soldier from danger zone. But in actuality, both male and female soldiers could have both been killed in action. All because female couldn’t carry the male to safety. So they both stay in the danger zone, because no other male soldiers are nearby to help.
It’s not a being pretty contest either, makes don’t wear makeup while in uniform or wear earrings either, so females should not be allowed to wear them either. Equal pay for the exact same job = equal job performance for same rank personnel and uniformity while in uniform.
I’m retired now and glad I am, because the military has turned into a sexist Military where being a male is such a disadvantage now. I served 8 years of my time in the Infantry and in no way shape or form would I have ever wanted a female to be serving with me during a War while serving in the Infantry.

Response by SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL made Feb 12 at 2021 8:43 AM

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 08:43:46 -0500

Thanks for sharing.

Response by MSgt Kurt S. made Feb 12 at 2021 3:24 PM

MSgt Kurt S. — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:24:45 -0500

She needs to put some gorilla glue on that Braid to keep the "whisps" from sticking out...

Response by MSG Mark Million made Feb 15 at 2021 1:49 AM

MSG Mark Million — Mon, 15 Feb 2021 01:49:06 -0500

I find this to be an enlightening discussion, I admit to never really giving the matter any true thought before and find the arguments made here to be not only persuasive but justified.

Response by CW3 Dick McManus made Feb 15 at 2021 3:17 PM

CW3 Dick McManus — Mon, 15 Feb 2021 15:17:03 -0500

I made up the following questionnaire to weed out candidates who seek your endorsement, but who supported political views exemplified by the Trumpster and Qanon believers.
26 incidents of "unwanted sexual contact" by the Trumpster and 43 instances of inappropriate behavior were detailed in the book, All the President's Women: Donald Trump and the Making of a Predator. https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12?fbclid=IwAR1h75H0hHZhlxGb4eDzmCOf4wYDB2svhBJ-PfPkoXoHm3JRiNiDGPjhmNc#jessica-leeds-1

Former White House chief of staff, retired Marine Gen. John Kelly, has told friends that President Donald Trump "is the most flawed person" he's ever known. Trump can't stand to hear the Truth! He lies, steals & cheats! He has 2000+ court cases awaiting him as a defendant! His dishonesty is the transactional nature of every relationship.

Where do you stand on these issues?
And of course, you and candidates should feel free to explain their answer(s). And even refusing to answer some questions may tell us a lot about the candidate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you believe we are will never run out of CHEAP oil and natural gas?

Do you believe scientists are wrong about global warming being a very serious threat and the cause is not man-made?

Do you believe the population growth is nothing to worry about?

Do you believe only three bullets were fired at President Kennedy and Lee Oswald fired all three?

Do you believe people have actually seen an alien being or a space ship (aka UFOs from out-space); notwithstanding that people have seen strange things/lights in the sky that are unexplained?

Do you believe that the US government has recovered parts of an alien out-space craft, that aliens brought technology to earth and that is the reason we humans now have it?

Do you believe human civilizations in the past gained advanced technologically that science has only discovered in the past 100 years?

Do you believe that Nikola Tesla invented unlimited, free energy and the energy producing, companies are keeping it secret?

Do you believe that people can somehow predict the future, communicate with dead people, and/or read other people's thoughts?

Do you believe that there may be real ghosts and demons that make people crazy, aka “demonic possessed”?

Do you believe that the US did not really land a man on the moon and/or 12 Americans did not really walked on the moon?

Do you believe our elections can be faked or hacked even if the exit polls results agree statistically with the election results?

Are you troubled by the fact that Nancy Pelosi did not publically speak up after she learned in about 30 private briefings that Bush and the boys were planning to use torture?

Do you believe the Democratic led Congress was wrong for not prosecuting of Bush et al for war crimes, for allowing Gina Haspel to become CIA Director, and for not prosecuting CIA officer Jose Rodriguez for destroying the video tapes of CIA torture?
Are you troubled about all the past presidents who have made war on other nations without a Congressional declaration for war and Obama doing drone attacks (aka a war on terrorism)?
Do you believe economic sanctions placed on other nations by presidents should require a Congressional declaration of war by sanctions?
Do you believe a President Trump should have gotten a Congressional declaration to sell weapons to nations like Saudi Arabia given their war against Yemen and after they killed a US journalist?
Do you believe on 9/11 that all three of the World Trade Center buildings totally collapsed to ground level only due to airplanes and office fires?

Do you believe it is freedom of speech for corporations to give money to candidates?

Do you believe that the holocaust of the Jews did not happen?

Do you believe that our national income tax is unconstitutional?

Do you believe that low levels of fluoride used to prevent tooth decay in our drinking water, is poisoning people?

Do you believe vaccines cause autism?

Do you believe depleted uranium weapons used by the US military did not harm civilians during the wars and long after the wars end?

Do you agree we are in a war on science?

Do you believe we need a new law called “assessor to a pandemic” to punish sheriffs who violates the order of our Governor for social distancing and etc?

Do you believe we need a new law authorizing the Secretary of Defense and/or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to protect the Congress and US Supreme Court Justices from a rioting mob if the President does not act?

Shouldn't we be asking every candidate these questions, even candidates for judge?

What other questions do suggest we should be asking?

My answers are all NO except for:

Are you troubled by the fact that Nancy Pelosi speak up publicly after she was briefed in about 30 private briefings that Bush and the boys were planning to use torture. YES

Do you believe the Democratic led Congress was wrong for not prosecuting of Bush et al for war crimes, for allowing Gina Haspel to become CIA Director, and for not prosecuting CIA officer Jose Rodriguez for destroying the video tapes of CIA torture? YES

Are you troubled about all the past presidents who have made war on other nations without a declaration for war by Congress or by Obama’s drone attacks, aka war on terrorism? YES
Do you believe economic sanctions placed on another nations by presidents need to require a declaration of war by sanctions by Congress? YES

Do you believe a President Trump should have gotten a Congressional “declaration to sell weapons” to nations like Saudi Arabia due to their war against Yemen and after it killed a US journalist? YES

Do you agree we are in a war on science? YES
Do you believe we need a new law called “assessor to a pandemic” to punish sheriffs who violate the orders of our Governor? YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stay safe,
Richard McManus
Chief Warrant Officer-3/counterintelligence special agent (more like an FBI agent than CIA officer) and combat paramedic/LPN, Vietnam US Army retired, BS psychology and nursing, ,former 911 telephone guy Seattle police department and King County Police officer, Everett, WA

The 26 women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct

Here are all of the allegations of sexual misconduct made against President Donald Trump, nearly all of which he has denied.

Response by CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana made Feb 16 at 2021 8:40 AM

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Tue, 16 Feb 2021 08:40:43 -0500

Interesting; perhaps, a consensus needs to be taken to understand those in favor and those against change in policies on permissible hairstyling for females in uniform, like there is for men. However, why are we differentiating hairstyles of men and women in uniform, especially since men and women are seen as equals in the field, in the air and on the high seas? There should be no difference.

Response by MSgt Ed Larson made Feb 18 at 2021 7:16 PM

MSgt Ed Larson — Thu, 18 Feb 2021 19:16:54 -0500

If the military really wants to even things out equality wise they should let men grow there hair long just like the women. It seems the women get better response to there complaints on this issue then men. Equality standards should be the same otherwise there is the perception of unfairness against men.

Response by PFC Kimberly Staiti made Feb 20 at 2021 4:09 AM

PFC Kimberly Staiti — Sat, 20 Feb 2021 04:09:55 -0500

Finally!
In the Stone Age I had a, no, ~heard of~ a Senior Drill who straight up harassed anyone he wanted to shag who refused him. Constant KP ain't no joke. Unrelenting PT is also humourless.

One of his targets had long, long, wavy chestnut hair that she managed to bun, but the headaches were a torment. She decided on her own to have it French braided by her battle buddy and cut off at least 8 inches. She set it aside to mail to her mother.
Sadist Sarge entered our 30 man (?) open bay and saw her braid next to the large scissors. She had put up a bun and had her headgear on.
Inside.
At night.
She was so proud. We were excited to show him that she took the initiative. We worked together to adapt and overcome, vanity be damned. We were team building!
He snatched her cover off along with some hair.
Each one of us was in so.much.TROUBLE.
She was out of uniform.
She wore headgear in a building.
She had used a hair band.
She had bobby pins in the bun.
It was like we hid Ivan under a bed! That man lost his military bearing in the worst way. Flipped over our wardrobes. Tore the bedding off our bunks. Tossed our footlockers like Nerf balls. He ordered us outside in sleet to do PT in the pit on Tank Hill in December.

The sleet was mixed with freezing rain so that red clay pit was a pool of shivering chaos. Situps & pushups until we were completely soaked and then the fun run!
It was around 02, 03:00 when we were allowed to go back to the barracks to stand at attention (sopping wet & braless) while he screamed at us, threatening UCMJ action for conspiracy, theft, and possession of contraband. We had permission to use the scissors. Bobby pins as contraband? He flushed her braid. Some tears were shed at that low blow. Since she couldn't make a bun and her hair was too long for regs, he made her cut it. Wet and tangled without a comb or mirror. If she didn't cut it short enough to be in regulation with it down, he threatened clippers, like "soldiers" got buzzed. She looked like a scarecrow with mange after that threat.
The next morning an inspection was scheduled. We spent the whole time showering in cold water to get that red clay OFF. I know we were scrubbing it off for days,thanks to the scalding water that lasted 4 to 7 minutes and then went frosty. Laundering in shifts, the red clay had stained our PT clothes permanently. We had to pick up the wardrobes and footlockers and be inspection ready. No one slept. Making our bunks, searching for scattered boots, sneakers, and shower shoes in the dark was a blast with only flashlights. Polishing like that was even better.
I knew we were in for a roasting by the CO for all the gigs, so I cut my hair scarecrow style along with two others. (Women don't play like that when it comes to hair, so I wasn't mad when it wasn't unanimous.)

One squad leader was a stunningly gorgeous woman who stayed a step ahead of that sadistic, cruel creep. She had been to law school and she enlisted in order to have her school loans paid and keep the GI Bill to finish her terminal degree. Somehow she was ~bald~ for morning inspection. Not a high and tight. Not a buzz cut.
Bald.
BALD bald.

She never confessed to him how she did it, but the CO had some questions since shaving to the scalp is against regulations for men and unheard of for women.

It was a delight to see how mad that CPT was when she explained why she had a head smooth as a bowling ball. She was leading by example since the Drill Sergeant suggested it to the poor scarecrow troop. The Captain had her remove her cover and he looked like he was ready to clutch his pearls at the sight of that disaster, especially when she admitted that the Drill had "suggested" it the previous night. The few of us who followed suit made sure to back her claim. We removed our headgear and vowed to be all we could be. The squad leader; a bodybuilder from Brooklyn; and a former gang member from the Bronx began belting out,

Response by Wayne Soares made Feb 21 at 2021 8:55 PM

Wayne Soares — Sun, 21 Feb 2021 20:55:52 -0500

Thanks for the share

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2021 8:58 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 23 Feb 2021 08:58:32 -0500

In my humble opinion, there are two things that immediately pop out:
1. True equality should make this an easy fix. Everyone cuts their hair short. No more issues, not to mention better when it comes to the use of gear. (Mask, helmets, etc.) Screaming for equality on the things you want while creating different standards based on sex is counterintuitive.
2. This is a slippery slope. We know for an absolute fact that people have "give a mouse a cookie" syndrome. Looser regs on one thing will eventually trickle down into looser regs on other things, IE facial hair, male hair length, etc.

Response by SFC Randy Hellenbrand made Feb 26 at 2021 8:31 AM

SFC Randy Hellenbrand — Fri, 26 Feb 2021 08:31:42 -0500

Times change real life doesn't. Lice and the ability to wear your pro-mask don't change. While there is a definite need for comfort, especially if it can alleviate any medical problems current policies are causing, when a buzz cut is the best and safest option--deal with it.

Response by CWO3 Jim Grindstaff made Mar 2 at 2021 9:02 AM

CWO3 Jim Grindstaff — Tue, 02 Mar 2021 09:02:30 -0500

Easy solution: cut your hair. There should be no double standard. Men must abide by grooming Standards which require short hair for many more reasons than are given in the post above. The military is not just a job and short hair is only one (reasonable) sacrifice that ALL must make; including females. The military is primarily a fighting force (lest the public forget that) and long hair--even in braids--can put the military member in an unsafe and even unsanitary disadvantage. Living in the field with scarce supplies of water, for instance, means that nice things such as showers and being able to wash one's hair are not possible. I, for one, give little credence to those who want to be able to serve in any unit a male can serve in because, according to them, they can "do" the job just as well, while simultaneously demanding different Standards because of vanity.

Response by TSgt James Warfield made Mar 21 at 2021 9:25 PM

TSgt James Warfield — Sun, 21 Mar 2021 21:25:48 -0400

This was very informing. I am retired now for many years. I always thought it was wrong that women couldn't wear their hair down or any pony tails or other ways. I can understand why they would need their hair pinned up for safety reason if necessary.
Gland this is being reviewed and changes are being made.

Response by Sgt Kerry Thurlow made Mar 24 at 2021 7:32 PM

Sgt Kerry Thurlow — Wed, 24 Mar 2021 19:32:58 -0400

As a woman, who suffered years of headaches and hair loss, because my hair was tightly worn up, in the required style. I support the modification.

Likewise, I would support modification to the policy requiring male hair to be so tightly cropped/styled that one is able to see the nicks from over clipping.

Those who bemoan women the opportunity to modify their hairstyles probably take issue with many other gender unique modifications...like weight standards, BMI, PT Tests and additional time to deal with expressing breast milk for non-issued dependent children.

Biologically, physically, anatomically women are built different from men. Those who wish that they could be a woman to wear their hair differently or have a different PT standard...please remember that being a woman comes with the joys of menstruation, MST, IPV, harassment and the risk of losing your children because of your career in the military

Response by LTJG Sandra Smith made Mar 30 at 2021 9:30 AM

LTJG Sandra Smith — Tue, 30 Mar 2021 09:30:31 -0400

Sad that American military women were so uninventive, really. While on active duty, my hair was nearly waist length, but I never wore a bun once. I braided it and pinned the braid up, doubled under, fit nicely under my "bucket", and cap alike. Butthen, we nurses, back in the '60s, were accustomed to keeping our hair up, on duty anyway, so it came "natural" for me. A bun wouldn't work with my school cap at all, but the braid did.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2021 1:22 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 31 Mar 2021 01:22:07 -0400

I personally do not care how the hair is worn, as long as it's worn within the regulations. You want a bun? Put it in a bun. You want a ponytail? Put it in a ponytail. Just be within the regs. But, if that ponytail or bun, even while in regulations, becomes a safety issue for you when operating equipment or what not, then I would highly recommend cutting the hair much shorter. As for us guys...well, it sucks for us. Perhaps some day PVT Johnny will be allowed to have a ponytail and SGT Jimmy will be allowed to have a beard that isn't religiously or medically ETP granted. Until then, the regs is the regs.

Response by CWO3 Robert Fong made Apr 11 at 2021 1:12 PM

CWO3 Robert Fong — Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:12:53 -0400

I hear the medical and other arguments. However; let's see if we can satisfy both sides of the argument. Men have grooming standards that are vastly different than the first day at Boot Camp or Basic. Ask any barber at the PX. Usually, after Basic one can then let one's, hair grow out. Medium sideburns tapered or cut neck, hair off the ears and you've pretty much got it. Now the hardcore in Recon, SF, SEALS, etc. love it high and tight. My point is one may have come into the service looking like Def Leopard or Credence, but those days ended a long time ago. Women may have entered the service looking like Dorothy LaMour or some other siren or vamp, but those days are long gone. So what then is the compromise. I'm not a member of the Uniform Board (I value my life more than being on the Board) and I would suggest either a Page Boy or Reverse Page no longer than the bottom of the ear lobes. OK you can shoot now.

Response by 1SG James Kelly made May 23 at 2021 3:35 PM

1SG James Kelly — Sun, 23 May 2021 15:35:35 -0400

I just had my hair cut to 1/8 inch; no problem.

Have I been enough of a smart ass; or do I have to work harder?

Braids OK.

In combat you may want it shorter.

:)