31
30
1
From: Army Times
If you want to go out in public on Fort Leonard Wood you better ditch the tank top, pull up your saggy drawers and shave that scruff.
Maj. Gen. Leslie Smith, the Missouri post's commanding general, issued new appearance standards in a Nov. 10 policy update.
The rules not only crack down on sloppy dress, but skimpy outfits as well: No short skirts, exposed midriffs and revealing undergarments.
The rules fall under the post's Command Policy 18, which used to be called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms." Now it's called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms and Civilian Attire," which really brings into focus the expansion of the policy to include not only soldiers in civilian clothes, but also spouses, kids, guests – anyone who comes on post.
"The entire concept is good order and discipline. The Army is talking about the Army profession, how we look, how we dress," Smith told Army Times in a Nov. 21 interview.
While the policy change has garnered plenty of buzz online, Smith downplayed the changes. He has been the posts' commanding general since June 2013, and said the base simply updated the regs after waiting for recent updates to AR 670-1, the Armywide regulation on appearance standards.
But Smith's policy does go further in some cases than AR 670-1. For example, the shaving rule. AR 670-1 requires soldiers to be "clean shaven" whenever they are in uniform or on duty. Fort Leonard Wood has called for soldiers to be clean-shaven, whether they are on duty or off. This is one of the few rules in the policy that do not extend to civilians on post.
"We've followed the lead on other bases and establishments," said Smith.
In recent years, bases such as Fort Irwin, California, and Fort Stewart, Georgia, have issued similar crackdowns.
Policy highlights for everyone on post at Fort Leonard Wood:
• No bare mid-drifts, shirts with cut-out armpits or sleeveless shirts, tank tops, swimsuits, or shorts/skirts/tops that "are too revealing."
• No sagging pants, pajamas or house shoes.
• No clothing depicting obscenity, slander, drug paraphernalia, or vulgarity.
More policy highlights for soldiers only:
• No headphones while wearing any Army uniform, including official PT uniforms, except for a hands-free device while driving. Soldiers can wear headphones, however, while walking or running on sidewalks, troop trails, running tracks or inside the gym in civilian clothing.
• Though not new, a draft poster depicting the changes reinforces that PT uniforms cannot be worn outside of unit personal training, transit to PT, and a few select locations such as the daycare center.
Officers bear responsibility for passing down the changes to soldiers under their command, and soldiers for informing families and guests, base spokeswoman Shatara Seymour said. Access control officers at the post's gates will have authority to prevent entrance to those not in compliance, and management of various facilities will also wield authority to ask people to leave.
Smith said certain facilities such as the PX and commissary could ask inappropriately dressed civilians or soldiers to leave, but said the gate guards would focus more on military personnel rather than denying non-compliant civilians access.
He said they will be looking hard at the off-duty shaving requirement, leaving open the possibility that there could be an adjustment to that rule.
As for enforcement, he said, "self-policing is the goal." The policy states, as it did before the changes, that soldiers all "have the general military authority to make corrections on service members improperly wearing the uniform, regardless of the rank or duty" of the non-compliant soldier.
After a draft of a poster spelling out Smith's policy leaked online, soldiers and vets responded with mixed reviews via social media.
"As a former NCO I agree with this 100%. When I was in this was not an issue, we looked squared away 24/7. It's sad that today soldiers have to be told how to look both on and off duty," Jack Hutchinson said via Facebook.
Others reserved their blunt remarks for civilian appearance.
"It's Leonard Wood which means it is constantly full of disgusting civilian family members watching their spawn graduate Basic Training. Good luck to the post CSM on actually enforcing this," said John Atkinson.
But comments also included pushback against rules viewed by some as superfluous.
"God forbid soldiers utilize music devices while improving their physical fitness," Scott Welch said.
"I am a retired NCO, and I think the shaving point is total BS," said Steve Buero. "I NEVER shaved on weekends or on leave. That is my time and if I was on duty in civilian clothes I shaved, but you call me in for some BS on my leave you got what you got."
Some complained that family members and friends visiting the base not employed by the Army should not be subjected to Army rules. But others say coming on the post comes with tacit agreement to abide by rules designed to promote the atmosphere desired by leadership.
"Hate to be the spoiler. But soldiers are and have always been responsible for the actions of the family members. It is the soldier's responsibility to ensure family members know what they can and cannot do," John DeSmith said.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2014/11/21/leonard-wood-dress-code/70017120/
If you want to go out in public on Fort Leonard Wood you better ditch the tank top, pull up your saggy drawers and shave that scruff.
Maj. Gen. Leslie Smith, the Missouri post's commanding general, issued new appearance standards in a Nov. 10 policy update.
The rules not only crack down on sloppy dress, but skimpy outfits as well: No short skirts, exposed midriffs and revealing undergarments.
The rules fall under the post's Command Policy 18, which used to be called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms." Now it's called "Wear and Appearance of Uniforms and Civilian Attire," which really brings into focus the expansion of the policy to include not only soldiers in civilian clothes, but also spouses, kids, guests – anyone who comes on post.
"The entire concept is good order and discipline. The Army is talking about the Army profession, how we look, how we dress," Smith told Army Times in a Nov. 21 interview.
While the policy change has garnered plenty of buzz online, Smith downplayed the changes. He has been the posts' commanding general since June 2013, and said the base simply updated the regs after waiting for recent updates to AR 670-1, the Armywide regulation on appearance standards.
But Smith's policy does go further in some cases than AR 670-1. For example, the shaving rule. AR 670-1 requires soldiers to be "clean shaven" whenever they are in uniform or on duty. Fort Leonard Wood has called for soldiers to be clean-shaven, whether they are on duty or off. This is one of the few rules in the policy that do not extend to civilians on post.
"We've followed the lead on other bases and establishments," said Smith.
In recent years, bases such as Fort Irwin, California, and Fort Stewart, Georgia, have issued similar crackdowns.
Policy highlights for everyone on post at Fort Leonard Wood:
• No bare mid-drifts, shirts with cut-out armpits or sleeveless shirts, tank tops, swimsuits, or shorts/skirts/tops that "are too revealing."
• No sagging pants, pajamas or house shoes.
• No clothing depicting obscenity, slander, drug paraphernalia, or vulgarity.
More policy highlights for soldiers only:
• No headphones while wearing any Army uniform, including official PT uniforms, except for a hands-free device while driving. Soldiers can wear headphones, however, while walking or running on sidewalks, troop trails, running tracks or inside the gym in civilian clothing.
• Though not new, a draft poster depicting the changes reinforces that PT uniforms cannot be worn outside of unit personal training, transit to PT, and a few select locations such as the daycare center.
Officers bear responsibility for passing down the changes to soldiers under their command, and soldiers for informing families and guests, base spokeswoman Shatara Seymour said. Access control officers at the post's gates will have authority to prevent entrance to those not in compliance, and management of various facilities will also wield authority to ask people to leave.
Smith said certain facilities such as the PX and commissary could ask inappropriately dressed civilians or soldiers to leave, but said the gate guards would focus more on military personnel rather than denying non-compliant civilians access.
He said they will be looking hard at the off-duty shaving requirement, leaving open the possibility that there could be an adjustment to that rule.
As for enforcement, he said, "self-policing is the goal." The policy states, as it did before the changes, that soldiers all "have the general military authority to make corrections on service members improperly wearing the uniform, regardless of the rank or duty" of the non-compliant soldier.
After a draft of a poster spelling out Smith's policy leaked online, soldiers and vets responded with mixed reviews via social media.
"As a former NCO I agree with this 100%. When I was in this was not an issue, we looked squared away 24/7. It's sad that today soldiers have to be told how to look both on and off duty," Jack Hutchinson said via Facebook.
Others reserved their blunt remarks for civilian appearance.
"It's Leonard Wood which means it is constantly full of disgusting civilian family members watching their spawn graduate Basic Training. Good luck to the post CSM on actually enforcing this," said John Atkinson.
But comments also included pushback against rules viewed by some as superfluous.
"God forbid soldiers utilize music devices while improving their physical fitness," Scott Welch said.
"I am a retired NCO, and I think the shaving point is total BS," said Steve Buero. "I NEVER shaved on weekends or on leave. That is my time and if I was on duty in civilian clothes I shaved, but you call me in for some BS on my leave you got what you got."
Some complained that family members and friends visiting the base not employed by the Army should not be subjected to Army rules. But others say coming on the post comes with tacit agreement to abide by rules designed to promote the atmosphere desired by leadership.
"Hate to be the spoiler. But soldiers are and have always been responsible for the actions of the family members. It is the soldier's responsibility to ensure family members know what they can and cannot do," John DeSmith said.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2014/11/21/leonard-wood-dress-code/70017120/
Army
Fort Leonard Wood
Army Regulations
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 112
8
8
0
New is old and old is new. What the Army evolved into is a direct result of the lenient standards in the ranks and for enlistees at the height of OIF. Even NCO's adorned earrings while wearing civilian attire. What the Army simply needs to do is empower NCOs to clean up the enlisted ranks and let officers worry about officer, not NCO business. I wore a well-groomed mustache throughout my career, enlisted and officer. All you need is for the CSMs to dust off the junior NCO's who can't or won't lead their soldiers. Stop the political correctness and let the Backbone be the Backbone. Non-compliant soldiers can be sent back to the city streets to dress any way they want to.
(8)
(0)
SFC James Wilson
You are dead-on CW4 Goldsmith! I retired in 2002 and I was feeling frustrated about the lax in military discipline among the ranks which apparently got worse since. I've been retired for twelve years now, and whenever I would go into the PX, I was amazed at the number of soldiers and dependents who had no regard for the post dress standards, (yes, there is a dress standard for dependents while on a military installation. If soldiers do not want to adhere to military dress standards, then send them back to wherever they came from and force mom and dad to enforce the dress standards for junior. I visit the Schofield Barracks PX monthly and was both delighted and saddened that they had to put an officer and NCO at the PX entrance to enforce dress standards.
(1)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
It just sad that civilian dependents don't understand they also have to follow the same rules. It not that hard of concept to follow.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
I don't have heartburn with seeing two days of stubble on a guys face. What chokes me up is;
1) seeing spouses in a pt shirt, fleece jacket, pajama pants and flip flops strutting around the PX like they own the place. Come on, you represent your spouse. If nothing else, have a little bit of self respect. Remember, you're not the only one that shops at the PX. I'd be so embarrassed for anyone in my unit regardless of rank to see my spouse dressed like that in public.
2) guys wearing their pants sagging down to their knees. Again, it goes back to self respect.
These are a couple things that irk me.
1) seeing spouses in a pt shirt, fleece jacket, pajama pants and flip flops strutting around the PX like they own the place. Come on, you represent your spouse. If nothing else, have a little bit of self respect. Remember, you're not the only one that shops at the PX. I'd be so embarrassed for anyone in my unit regardless of rank to see my spouse dressed like that in public.
2) guys wearing their pants sagging down to their knees. Again, it goes back to self respect.
These are a couple things that irk me.
(8)
(0)
(1)
(1)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
Do we really want an agency of the federal government enforcing dress codes on civilians though. What some civilians wear may be irksome, but I don't like this poist's solution.
(1)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
No not really, there have always been rules on how dependents were suppose to dress and conduct themselves on base. They may not have signed a contract per se, but due to their relationship with their spouse they have to abide by the same rules, and regulation while on base as guess, or living on base regardless. There was time when you didn't have many civilian clothes in your kit, and wore an uniform more than not. I don't know why everyone has such a hard time with the concept that we are talking about military discipline, this isn't civilian job where you can come and go as you please.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
along with that retired NCO, I don't shave on the weekends or on leave most times, but if I have to go on base I'm going to look right, always have, because before this was an enforced rule there were still E-9s everywhere in the common areas, and the second I start walking around with facial hair on base one of them will say "I feel a disturbance in the force..." and find me. That's the last thing anyone needs on a weekend.
That doesn't really paint me in the best light, but it's the truth. Bottom line, however, because this rule is now in writing, doesn't change the fact that it was always an unwritten rule before now. A lot of units put something to this effect in their SOPs anyway.
That doesn't really paint me in the best light, but it's the truth. Bottom line, however, because this rule is now in writing, doesn't change the fact that it was always an unwritten rule before now. A lot of units put something to this effect in their SOPs anyway.
(8)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see) that Star Wars line had me rolling! LOL! And it fits so perfectly, it seems like CSM/SGM anywhere can just "sense" when something isn't right. I'm starting to get some of that same "sense", I think it has more to do with years in service than it does rank.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I use it whenever I do something that violates general Army order and discipline social mores, like putting sunglasses on head for a minute, putting hands in pockets, or writing up a periodic counseling statement for a subordinate that tells them they did a good job.
(0)
(0)
PV2 Abbott Shaull
Yep have to agree there are plenty unwritten rules out there, that would fill reams if the were written down. It different from base to base, and change from Commander to Commander, and from Top to Top. All depends how they want to set the example, and what is documented, and what little extra they want.
(0)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
I feel something - somewhere out there something isn't right - deep down inside me there is this rumbling that won't go away and is getting stronger. Then again it may be my stomach telling me I'm hungry so I'll go get something to eat.
Don't get me wrong - we know when things aren't right and will find you. If we can't get to you , then we will use our E9 Mafia connections to reach you, lol.
Don't get me wrong - we know when things aren't right and will find you. If we can't get to you , then we will use our E9 Mafia connections to reach you, lol.
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
I like this policy and I think it should be enforced equally across all military bases
(8)
(0)
8
8
0
I personally don't see the problem. I'm tired of seeing a lot more of service members and their spouses than I need to while trying to eat lunch with my family. I'm also glad we're going back to a more professional look for day to day activities. I don't like the shaving part but it is what it is.
(8)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Not sure what it is about being near a military base and the lack of clothing that people wear. It sickens me when families come here for family day and I feel like I just walked into a people of wall mart website. Its terrible. As far as the new regulations on facial hair, Soldiers not on duty, not in uniform on the weekend may go without shaving. I am sure most people did it anyways but now you are covered by the regulation.
(6)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Completely agree with the people of walmart comment. As for the facial hair, according to Policy Letter 18 here at Ft. Leonard Wood, you have to shave whether you're on duty or off.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
I am all for it. While there may be some people who say "what about Freedom? I thought I was in America?" First and foremost, you decided to be amongst a group that gave up a lot of that freedom to defend it for the majority. To those family members/friends visiting, you are a direct representation of the Service Member, so endure not wearing tube tops or sagging your pants for the time so your Service Member doesn't look like a bag of ... fill in the blanks with whatever you like.
I really hope people are not complaining about this. These are not hard rules to follow or even endorse.
I really hope people are not complaining about this. These are not hard rules to follow or even endorse.
(7)
(0)
SPC Rory J. Mattheisen
I 100% agree with you, and I would like to remind everybody that as a troop we no longer have "rights," we have orders! As a soldier in the United States Army it is your job to represent every soldier in the Army. It is time for some proper perspective when discussing military affairs.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
I agree with the Dress Policy and the headphones is a safety issue. As a Soldier, Airman, Marine, Seaman or Coast Guardsman, Officer, or enlisted you represent the U.S. as a nation and people you have to se the example when on and off post.
If you are on leave and off a military installation then you should be able to dress and shave or unshaven as you deem necessary, but step foot on or near an installation you should set the example and fall in line with the policy.
When out of the U.S. being a Soldier, Airman, Marine, Seaman or Coast Guardsman is like being an ambassador of the U.S. on foreign soil. Set the example, stop being the bad Americans.
As for retirees, family members and guests the same should apply.
If you are on leave and off a military installation then you should be able to dress and shave or unshaven as you deem necessary, but step foot on or near an installation you should set the example and fall in line with the policy.
When out of the U.S. being a Soldier, Airman, Marine, Seaman or Coast Guardsman is like being an ambassador of the U.S. on foreign soil. Set the example, stop being the bad Americans.
As for retirees, family members and guests the same should apply.
(7)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
PFC Wade, you immediately draw a lot of attention to the fact that you are a PFC. And before you get on a "disgruntled Officer kick" about my comment, I have been a PFC, and a senior NCO. Like you, many others make comments on this site and forget who they are and the profession they belong to. You will always be remembered for any ridiculous comments made and you and others will garner the respect that earns, none.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
Enforcing an Army base's civilian clothes instructions on non-military civilians at the direction of a CO strikes me as a CO not supporting or defending the constitution.
The CO here represents the government, and whether we approve or disapprove of the sentiments behind the civilian clothes standard at this base being applied to civilians, this is an real world action by a CO to curtail constitutionally protected free expression because he doesn't like how some civilians express themselves with their clothing.
Because a government official doesn't like the free expression (a form of free speech) by some insnt a good reason to suppress that free expression. Suppressing free expression is actually 180° out of what a government official should be doing.
Supporting and defending constitutional freedoms, especially for and by those who haven't been appointed to, or enlisted in, the military services...Well, supporting and defending constitutional freedoms is what the military's job function really is.
If I were this CO's boss, I'd be telling this CO to withdraw a portion of these rules immediately -- the potion of these rules where he's applying military member's civilian clothes standards on non-military, true civilians.
The CO here represents the government, and whether we approve or disapprove of the sentiments behind the civilian clothes standard at this base being applied to civilians, this is an real world action by a CO to curtail constitutionally protected free expression because he doesn't like how some civilians express themselves with their clothing.
Because a government official doesn't like the free expression (a form of free speech) by some insnt a good reason to suppress that free expression. Suppressing free expression is actually 180° out of what a government official should be doing.
Supporting and defending constitutional freedoms, especially for and by those who haven't been appointed to, or enlisted in, the military services...Well, supporting and defending constitutional freedoms is what the military's job function really is.
If I were this CO's boss, I'd be telling this CO to withdraw a portion of these rules immediately -- the potion of these rules where he's applying military member's civilian clothes standards on non-military, true civilians.
(7)
(0)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen
I'm in total agreement with you, SSgt Joshua Brown. It's applying the rules to civilians who haven't signed on the dotted line that I believe is totally wrongheaded.
(1)
(0)
SSG David Kaelin
Then you are not in total agreement with him.
The Military meddles in areas wherein they should just shut up...all too often. It gets them in trouble constantly.
Some of the worst offenders are almost always the families of Officers.
General Sullivan, when he was Chief of Staff of the Army, had a daughter who broke every rule that was possible for a young girl to break. Eventually, he had to ban her from all posts in MDW.
I grew up on military bases, the worst of the worst were always Officer children and especially Base Commanders. They were, of course, protected by Daddy and/or Mommy.
This is just another rule that will create another double standard for Officers vs Enlisted.
The Military only uses the word professional. It rarely lives up to the word as an organization.
Stick to preparing for wars, fighting wars and start winning wars.
Then and only then should the military begin to dictate to everyone how to dress, live and breathe air.
The Military meddles in areas wherein they should just shut up...all too often. It gets them in trouble constantly.
Some of the worst offenders are almost always the families of Officers.
General Sullivan, when he was Chief of Staff of the Army, had a daughter who broke every rule that was possible for a young girl to break. Eventually, he had to ban her from all posts in MDW.
I grew up on military bases, the worst of the worst were always Officer children and especially Base Commanders. They were, of course, protected by Daddy and/or Mommy.
This is just another rule that will create another double standard for Officers vs Enlisted.
The Military only uses the word professional. It rarely lives up to the word as an organization.
Stick to preparing for wars, fighting wars and start winning wars.
Then and only then should the military begin to dictate to everyone how to dress, live and breathe air.
(1)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
The military is a multi teired organization and larger than any corporation in the US. Therefore if you don't like the rules and regulations....then one should choose to not remain a part of it. If you support it, you're not faithfully carrying out your duties and responsibilites that you've sworn to do as a NCO, Officer, SSG or PO1. Apparently this is not the right business or career for you.
As a civilian, when one enters an establishment, be it a bar resturant, the zoo, the mall, etc. They all have rules and when they are not followed the cops, the bouncer, etc are there to either ensure you follow the rules or you are escorted away from the establishment...or arrested. Same applies when civilians enter a military installation. There are rules...follow them.
If you think this is so different from everyday America...wake up, you're surrounded! Why is it because it's a military installation that you choose to complain, but no where else.
Kudos to Gen Sullivan for toeing the line when it came to his own daughter instead of making an exception for her. A fine example of the rule apply even to General's daughters.
Everyone can dress how they want to...in the public arena....however, depending on what you, your wife, your teenage kids decide to wear...it may not be the right day to visit the post. What's the problem ...other than one's own personal desires and sensibilities....aaah yes a personal problem! But not an issue!
As a civilian, when one enters an establishment, be it a bar resturant, the zoo, the mall, etc. They all have rules and when they are not followed the cops, the bouncer, etc are there to either ensure you follow the rules or you are escorted away from the establishment...or arrested. Same applies when civilians enter a military installation. There are rules...follow them.
If you think this is so different from everyday America...wake up, you're surrounded! Why is it because it's a military installation that you choose to complain, but no where else.
Kudos to Gen Sullivan for toeing the line when it came to his own daughter instead of making an exception for her. A fine example of the rule apply even to General's daughters.
Everyone can dress how they want to...in the public arena....however, depending on what you, your wife, your teenage kids decide to wear...it may not be the right day to visit the post. What's the problem ...other than one's own personal desires and sensibilities....aaah yes a personal problem! But not an issue!
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
PO1 Autumn Sandeen No civilian is subjected to these rules involuntarily. They can choose to not be on the base/fort/post.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
I agree in principle with most of this policy and the intent behind it (to have people demonstrate some respect for themselves and others). As a Soldier and a senior NCO, I am obligated to enforce all of it, not just the parts I like. But since RP is a place where we can also express our personal opinions, I don't really agree with forcing male Soldiers to shave when on leave or off duty in civilians clothes. Will the post CG also force female Soldiers to not wear dangling earrings or different color nail polish when on leave or off duty in civilians clothes? The answer is no, so why the double standard? I feel if you are going to establish a rule, policy or standard for Soldiers to follow to encourage a professional appearance, make sure that it applies to ALL Soldiers fairly and equally. Just saying.
(7)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
I agree with you 100%. If we are going to make a standard, let's make one that is equal across the board as well as enforcable. The facial hair while on leave is not right in my opinion, and not enforcable.
(4)
(0)
SSG David Kaelin
I've met a few women in the Military who would be shaving if the standards were applied equally.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
I am all for freedom of choice and personal responsibility. I think we should have the choice to wear what we want but we should have the self respect and good taste not to offend others with our choices. We all know or have seen someone who could not do that. When my children were young I had to engage in conversation with a young Soldier in the post Burger King about his shirt that included both the F word and the N word. Why would people wear something like that? That is why we have to make these rules, because there is someone out there that just can't make sound decisions.
(7)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google