What would be your gender-neutral alternative to referring to all Air Force members as "airmen"?

Lt Col Jim Coe — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 17:57:51 -0400

Navy's top enlisted leader is wrapping up job title review. Intent is to remove "man" from job titles, such as corpsman, to make them gender neutral. All Air Force members are referred to as "airmen" and three enlisted ranks include "man" in their title. What would you suggest as an alternative to "airman"? (You can have fun with this, but serious alternatives also are appreciated.)

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 6:00 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:00:52 -0400

'man' is also found in woman....so airman is just fine....

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 31 at 2016 6:14 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:14:50 -0400

Aviator.

E1 - Aviator Recruit, E2 - Aviator, E3 - Aviator 1C, E4 - Senior Aviator,
E5 - Sergeant (Realigned to be like EVERYONE ELSE), E6 - Staff Sergeant (Realigned to be like EVERYONE ELSE), E7 - Technical Sergeant (prior to the restructuring GySgt was a "TechSgt" so I think this would be apt),
E8 - Master Sergeant (Realigned to be like EVERYONE ELSE) - Have you ever tried to say Senior Master Sergeant on the phone?!?... screw that.
E9 - Chief Master Sergeant

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Mar 31 at 2016 6:50 PM

CPT Mark Gonzalez — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:50:23 -0400

Women have complimented men and vice versa our entire existence. If it was any other way we would be extinct. Often, the best way to improve something is to change nothing.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 7:00 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:00:57 -0400

"Zoomie". Can we be called "Zoomie"? Obviously as it fits into the rank structure currently we should drop the single word for "all of us" as well as an E-2 that is "Airman". I suggest the following:
Newbie Zoomie
Zoomie Steerage
Zoomie First Class
Senior Zoomie

Some folks might not like these suggestions very much but I think we should at least consider them. This is about brainstorming.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Mar 31 at 2016 7:13 PM

Capt Mark Strobl — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:13:53 -0400

How 'bout "Airdale" --seems neutral enough...(?)
I was going to coincidentally suggest "Brownshoe" --but it's sort of already taken by the Navy.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 7:30 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 19:30:43 -0400

Perhaps aircrew or air support

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 8:25 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 20:25:34 -0400

I can not believe that as a service we have come to this level of mediocracy. How about still calling us airman?

Response by Capt Gregory Prickett made Mar 31 at 2016 10:03 PM

Capt Gregory Prickett — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:03:58 -0400

Airman. Duh. Our women airmen know who they are, and we know how well they perform.

Response by TSgt Dawn Premock made Mar 31 at 2016 10:17 PM

TSgt Dawn Premock — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:17:47 -0400

I never had a problem being an Airman.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2016 10:21 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:21:55 -0400

No, we don't have identity issues as a force.

Response by Capt Brandy (Thompson) McDermed made Mar 31 at 2016 11:33 PM

Capt Brandy (Thompson) McDermed — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:33:33 -0400

Man is also found in the term Human. That is something that we All are. As a woman, I disagree with this topic and line of thinking. There are many other much more important issues to focus on. Not this.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Mar 31 at 2016 11:41 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 31 Mar 2016 23:41:20 -0400

I would suggest that we first get rid of the PC fools that waste time and resources on this kind of silliness.

Response by PO2 Mark Saffell made Apr 1 at 2016 8:01 AM

PO2 Mark Saffell — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 08:01:55 -0400

Good thing I'm not president. I'd fire ediots that wasted money to look at changing ranks and titles to make gender neutral. What a stupid waste of money and time. I understand changes made when women started serving on ships. Cant say I like all of the changes but I do understand. The Shellback ceremony was rough if you was a guy. I cant imagine how bad it would be for a woman with sailors that carried things too far. We wore our uniform inside out and backwards and what you didn't eat for breakfast you wore down your shirt and I could see that as a problem for women.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 9:41 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 09:41:47 -0400

Hi, LTC Coe.

I heard "airpeople" over the basewide PA system this month. It caught me off guard.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Apr 1 at 2016 12:03 PM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 12:03:39 -0400

Thanks for all the responses so far. As a retired AF member I thought this would be a "just for fun" question. I'm proud of the active duty service members who believe this kind of politically correct exercise is a waste of time and money, because it is. However, the Navy apparently thinks it's worthy of their most senior enlisted person's time.

So far the closest answer to what I might propose is Sgt Aaron Kennedy's. He recommends "aviator" and restructuring the E grade titles. Not a bad idea. I could also get with PO1 Thomas Jenkins' input adopting the Army Air Corps ranks.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 1 at 2016 1:58 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 13:58:08 -0400

I vote "Airman". It rolls off the tongue nicely and has for many decades, Sir. :)

If one is so thin-skinned as to have strife with this as ones titling, perhaps that individual is in the wrong industry. Just my $0.02.

Response by SFC William Adamek made Apr 1 at 2016 2:25 PM

SFC William Adamek — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 14:25:21 -0400

Are we also going to have to change officer to officer and officmam or find some generic title? Yes I do know the actual root of the word officer but had go there anyway. Sorry!

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Apr 1 at 2016 5:01 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 17:01:21 -0400

Wing nuts, problem solved. Your welcome.

Response by SSG Trevor S. made Apr 1 at 2016 7:10 PM

SSG Trevor S. — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 19:10:38 -0400

I wouldn't change a thing. In terms of words, man is within woman and human as a word. Word contractions IMO are acceptable as a neutral title reference. Its the military, not a college safe zone.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Apr 1 at 2016 10:00 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 22:00:43 -0400

Airman

Response by SPC Mark McClenny made Apr 1 at 2016 10:23 PM

SPC Mark McClenny — Fri, 01 Apr 2016 22:23:34 -0400

Wing wiper! :)

Do you use "flygal" along with "flyboy" as well?

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Apr 2 at 2016 2:24 AM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 02:24:39 -0400

Screw being PC and gender neutral.

Response by SPC Frederick Kithcart made Apr 2 at 2016 2:24 AM

SPC Frederick Kithcart — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 02:24:54 -0400

Personally believe the political correctness BS has gotten way out of control. Anyone in uniform has an issue being called airman, corpsman needs a ticket back to the block where their PC BS isn't counter productive to the chain of command and a waste of resourses.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2016 3:09 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 03:09:58 -0400

Should we not ask if this RENAMING nonsense increased the transgender confusion that seems to be increasing? Lord knows, I am confused about others! Is a transgender 'man', a former woman? or a former man? Who knows? Are they, we, it in agreement. Are these fine people [soldiers] handsome or pretty? You are confusing old school here and do you hear? And to WHOM, "does it really matter? I hate being confused, but love starting 'guerilla war's. May the best "woman" win. Pretty Woman with an EIB, it is expanding my mind. RESPECT the PERSON. Jellybellies come in many flavors (my son & granddaughters favorite candy).

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 2 at 2016 3:17 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 03:17:10 -0400

Is the Navy running in circles, again? The should be careful, the firemen in the boiler room are getting seasick (no wait, that was 19th century lore. Storms ahead [remember the Monitor!]. I am just asking a question.

Response by CSM David Hopkins made Apr 2 at 2016 9:56 AM

CSM David Hopkins — Sat, 02 Apr 2016 09:56:11 -0400

So have fun with this? Seems like the only logical way to approach a topic that is truly a waste of time and resources. So with that being said lets take a look at this subjectively. They were with airplanes so let's just call them pilots, ground crew, baggage handlers, or flight attendants (because stewardess is not gender neutral).

Response by PO1 Jack Howell made Apr 3 at 2016 6:13 PM

PO1 Jack Howell — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 18:13:27 -0400

I would say that the answer to the question is I refuse to give in to the political correctness. There is no alternative name. If anyone says otherwise, tell them to GFY.

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 3 at 2016 8:15 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 20:15:23 -0400

Airpeoples

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 3 at 2016 10:20 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Sun, 03 Apr 2016 22:20:01 -0400

Why does the girl on the right have dark legs?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 1:43 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:43:43 -0400

When dealing with the Secretaries of Defense, Navy, Army and Air Force, I think we should remove the term "Honorable". Replace it with Mr or Mrs...

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 1:58 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 13:58:58 -0400

This is getting ridiculous. This new age PC crap makes me sick. And it's infecting the military far beyond to point of IG complaints being the new norm.

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 4 at 2016 2:21 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 14:21:09 -0400

Whomever said AirTrans wins. I choked on my coffee lol

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 6:33 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 18:33:44 -0400

Airrors.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 6:35 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 18:35:15 -0400

POGs?

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 6:58 PM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 18:58:19 -0400

This is a stupid question and I really hope it is a joke.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 4 at 2016 7:44 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 19:44:30 -0400

Skywarrior, Skywarrior First Class, Skywar Specialist

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Apr 4 at 2016 10:18 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 22:18:33 -0400

Airperson, plural Airpeople

Response by Cpl Christopher Bishop made Apr 4 at 2016 11:15 PM

Cpl Christopher Bishop — Mon, 04 Apr 2016 23:15:24 -0400

Both Man and Woman come from Human. This is stupid. I'm sure there must be far more useful things those in uniform can be doing with their time.

Response by SGT Cathi Johnson made Apr 5 at 2016 6:59 AM

SGT Cathi Johnson — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 06:59:13 -0400

If you don't want to be referred to as airman, don't join the airforce. Why should the airforce change to accommodate your little hurt feelings?

Response by Cpl John Stewart made Apr 5 at 2016 7:25 AM

Cpl John Stewart — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 07:25:43 -0400

One small step for shit heads, one giant stubble for PERSONKIND! Do you--really--believe the shit that comes out of your mouth?

Response by TSgt Marco McDowell made Apr 5 at 2016 7:53 AM

TSgt Marco McDowell — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 07:53:43 -0400

If it ever comes to it, eliminate AB-SrA , go back to the Air Corps days and reinstate Pvt-Spc/Cpl. Airperson sounds ridiculous so I'd rather be called soldier. I can't even imagine having a formation and being addressed as "air people", it's malarkey. I'm still stewing over the squids wanting to call a Corpsman "Corpsperson". I can hear it now, some Devil Dog yells "Corpsman up!" and no one shows up. Later we find Doc being offended because she's not a "man" but a person. Same for someone mistakenly called Airman and running to MEO to file a complaint

Response by PO1 RIchard Petty made Apr 5 at 2016 8:35 AM

PO1 RIchard Petty — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 08:35:03 -0400

I like being called Aviation Ordnanceman, I.Y.A.O.Y.A.S., that is all.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 5 at 2016 12:46 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 12:46:44 -0400

One of the Best Supply SGT I had was a Female in the 729'th FSB 29 DIV (Light) .... !

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 5 at 2016 6:03 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 18:03:45 -0400

We are in a state of over politically correctness. People wasting valuable time and resources.

Response by PO2 Randall Knight made Apr 5 at 2016 6:40 PM

PO2 Randall Knight — Tue, 05 Apr 2016 18:40:17 -0400

could always adopt Private...... it works in at least 2 other services.... but that begs the question is Seaman next on the chopping block?

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 6 at 2016 4:54 AM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Wed, 06 Apr 2016 04:54:06 -0400

Air Service Personnel

Response by COL Charles Williams made Apr 6 at 2016 9:25 PM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 06 Apr 2016 21:25:41 -0400

Airman is the answer...

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 7 at 2016 9:46 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:46:41 -0400

Here's what I've always thought of when hearing the term "Airman" - this quote from No Time For Sergeants (1958):

Ben: You know what they call men in the Air Force?
Air man! Like somethin' out of a dang funny book! Air man! How you gonna like it when somebody calls you "Air man"?
Will: By dog, I just don't think I'll stand for it.

*****
I can't think of much more calculated to create division than making a big deal of of "gender neutrality".

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 7 at 2016 3:47 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 07 Apr 2016 15:47:56 -0400

As others have pointed out, many are fine with Airman, but if that is not a choice, I think aviator is next best. Yes it has issues since some say aviatrix is the female counterpart and therefore still sex based, but why then is there no sex based counterpart to sailor, we don't call her a sailrix. Aviatrix sounds contorted to me anyway. As is also pointed out, these names assign a description that doesn't really fit everyone in a service, not everyone in the Navy sails, not every in the Air Force flies. Making no differntiation of service, calling them all servicemembers is the easiest thing to do. If they all wore the same combat uniform, something I support, there would be no hurt feelings by calling a soldier a sailor when he or she has his or her back turned to one, instead calling out "Hey, servicemember." A bit long winded, in short there will never be an answer that pleases all. Maybe something more catchy like 'defender' or 'brave' the later coming from our national anthem, not a reference to the Native American term.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 5:45 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 05:45:21 -0400

I would just keep it the same since it's been like this forever.

Response by Sgt Christopher Harrison made Apr 12 at 2016 6:02 AM

Sgt Christopher Harrison — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:02:42 -0400

Well, "zoomie" is pretty neutral. But then again, "gender neutral" is PC, which is BS, or as a female tech sergeant once put it, tango uniform.

Response by MAJ G Patrick M. made Apr 12 at 2016 6:08 AM

MAJ G Patrick M. — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:08:43 -0400

Civilian

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 6:29 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:29:48 -0400

Political correctness is destroying our nation piece by piece. Senior leaders should be focused on winning wars and protecting our nation rather than coddling the few thin-skinned individuals that actually care about this nonsense.

Response by SGT Brent Cann made Apr 12 at 2016 6:35 AM

SGT Brent Cann — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:35:20 -0400

My Dad is retired AF and I am retired Army as well as many other members in my family who have served on multiple continents and in multiple conflict zones throughout the last century and I find these kinds of "questions" offensive and humiliating. Please respect my feelings...........Fricken Ridiculous and completely irrelevant to the mission of the US Military and our Mission at home as well as Globally. What a disgrace, and the world is asking us for help and we can't even help ourselves.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 6:42 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:42:19 -0400

I would not change a thing I am so sick of this political correctness crap that now we gave to change the military because of peoples feelings. This is the US military protecting our rights not protecting political correctness. Plus political correctness is a type of censorship and censorship is violating our free speech rights.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 6:43 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:43:34 -0400

Honestly I would reabsorb the Air force back into the Army and make it part of aviation branch and call everyone Soldiers again. Too much redundancy and poor stewardship of taxpayer money demands reconsolidation and overhaul of acquisition process and all did contracting. How about that? No more "air persons".

Response by SrA Daniel Nield made Apr 12 at 2016 6:46 AM

SrA Daniel Nield — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:46:52 -0400

Jordans. They should all be "Airjordans".

Response by SPC Don Holcombe made Apr 12 at 2016 6:50 AM

SPC Don Holcombe — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:50:09 -0400

The title should remain airman. There is no room for politcle correctness in the military. It gets good people killed.

Response by CPL Robert Fischer made Apr 12 at 2016 7:05 AM

CPL Robert Fischer — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:05:21 -0400

Airbuds
Airheads
Airdudes
Airkids
Airbitches in the derogatory way... Not sexist way
Airbears
Airtroops bwuahhahahaha just kidding
Airlames

One of those should work...

Go army hooah

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 7:07 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:07:54 -0400

This is ridiculous someone really wants a com or something stupid. Whats that medal for. Oh i Changed every rating to "Special NEC" cause everyone is a winner and no child is left behind.

Response by TSgt Eric Lewis made Apr 12 at 2016 7:20 AM

TSgt Eric Lewis — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:20:03 -0400

I know many female airmen that would be upset if they changed it. Why don't they change the term woman since it had man in it?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 7:24 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:24:05 -0400

Man in these titles can be seen to referring to mankind. As far as my opinion goes this is the military and we shouldn't be bowing down to society. We are all trained to kill and to do it efficiently regardless of how people feel on this this matter. It shouldn't change it refers to both genders. Like she said before this comment woman has man in it to. Big military should stop bending their knee to politics. This isn't a buisness.

Response by SSG Dale London made Apr 12 at 2016 7:24 AM

SSG Dale London — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:24:56 -0400

I've never been particularly "PC." I think it is a nonsense.

Response by Sgt Fred Brown made Apr 12 at 2016 7:27 AM

Sgt Fred Brown — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:27:46 -0400

Does the Air Force really have this problem? How about concentrating on more important things like national security? I bet they have a safe place to go to also and stress cards in basic. Give me a break.

Response by SrA Ryan Anderson made Apr 12 at 2016 7:30 AM

SrA Ryan Anderson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:30:09 -0400

Stop with the political correctness. It has no place in the military. For thousands of years all "mankind" etc. has been a generic term for both genders.

Response by 1stSgt John Rayome made Apr 12 at 2016 7:31 AM

1stSgt John Rayome — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:31:33 -0400

Let's just change the title from "Air Force" to "Aviation Coercion"
"Force" is just too aggressive a word to use

Response by SFC Benjamin Harrison made Apr 12 at 2016 7:32 AM

SFC Benjamin Harrison — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:32:45 -0400

I'm not sure what the issue is besides ignorance. Man is a general term in referring to the genus of homosapian. The further we drive the Armed Forces down this path of political correctness the further our focus shifts from killing the enemy and securing our Nations freedoms and independence. Society sure urn to be like us, instead we are adjusting to be more like society yet still demanding discipline, loyalty, selfless service, integrity, honor, and respect to just name a few things our current society is lacking.

Response by PO2 Tom Andrews made Apr 12 at 2016 7:35 AM

PO2 Tom Andrews — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:35:15 -0400

Ever read "Gone for Soldiers"? It is a fine historical novel by Jeff Shaara. It tells the story of the Mexican American war. Now you might think I have gone off the rails, but wait. Back in that war, there was a military maneuver called "A Demonstration". It is what we would call today a faint or a fake. That's how I view this "man" silliness. It is just a way to distract us and the military from the problem at hand. The crumbling military. Why has there not been an open revolt among the flag ranks? Or are the flag officers not "man" enough (including the women) to say enough is enough?

Response by SSG Daniel Deiler made Apr 12 at 2016 7:36 AM

SSG Daniel Deiler — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:36:12 -0400

Do the same thing as the morons at Ace Hardware and change it to AirFolk! But My real answer is keep it the Same. There's absolutely zero wrong with it as several members have already stated.

Response by CSM Alton Eckert made Apr 12 at 2016 7:44 AM

CSM Alton Eckert — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:44:47 -0400

There is no alternative. Our military has a strong sense of tradition. Those civilians in charge currently have no idea about military tradition and ceremony. Those officers that go along with this political correctness need too retire immediately!

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 7:47 AM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:47:21 -0400

I'd recommend that such PC measures are rejected and to leave it alone.

Response by SPC Steven Depuy made Apr 12 at 2016 7:48 AM

SPC Steven Depuy — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:48:30 -0400

As the cartoon I saw this morning said; "I am worried about our country collapsing under the weight of our debt, and WWIII starting, and we are arguing over gender descriptions, and wedding cakes :-)

Response by SMSgt Richard French made Apr 12 at 2016 7:56 AM

SMSgt Richard French — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:56:24 -0400

leave it alone!

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:05 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:05:26 -0400

airpeeps

Response by Sgt Christopher Wenzel made Apr 12 at 2016 8:06 AM

Sgt Christopher Wenzel — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:06:47 -0400

What about 'chairmen'...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:14 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:14:17 -0400

That is like taking man out of woman when God said he would make man a companion and called her Eve a woman.

Response by MAJ Michel Dinesman made Apr 12 at 2016 8:19 AM

MAJ Michel Dinesman — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:19:04 -0400

After reading this question in reminded of a joke. A freshman from Texas was touring Haaarvard and was trying to get geographically oriented to the campus. So he asked an upper classman, "Excuse me, can you tell me where the library is at?" To which the upper classman responded, "You are attending Haarvard now not some podunk high school. You should not complete a sentence with a dangling participle. Now ask again properly and I shall answer you." And the freshman's reply was, "You are correct. I apologize. Can you please tell me where the library is at, asshole?"

It is irrelevant what word is chosen. The people asking consider themselves the upper classmen of some kind of prestigious organization and have lost sight of what the objective is. They are more concerned with inclusion than they are with fighting and winning.

Response by PO3 Steve Mac made Apr 12 at 2016 8:20 AM

PO3 Steve Mac — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:20:26 -0400

Have you considered "airman"?

In the Navy males and females alike are called "seamen," which I would think could be a bigger political hot-potato than "airmen."

Alternatively, might I suggest dropping political correctness altogether and go back to the mission of the Air Force?

Response by SMSgt Eldo Hill made Apr 12 at 2016 8:22 AM

SMSgt Eldo Hill — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:22:02 -0400

Who's idea was this? Next thing we will have gender bias oaths.

Response by CDR John Tate made Apr 12 at 2016 8:27 AM

CDR John Tate — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:27:23 -0400

Our job is to be so militarily capable that no fool will attempt to engage us; and if that deterrence fails, to win our nation's wars. When that mission is no longer of substance, then we may have time for silliness.

May I give a parallel consistent with my attitude? In the 60s and early, pre-Z-gram 70s, the Navy had grooming standards that did not coincide with the street. Sailors went so far as to get long-hair wigs to wear off-duty. During those years, I was a junior to mid-grade enlisted man. My attitude then as now was: Surely you have more important things to attend to! And the "you" applied both to sailors AND the Navy. Let me translate: poor leadership should not be copied. On the one hand, there is great merit to the Confucian doctrine, rectification of names; but on the other, "man" is and has been for centuries a generic term meaning human being.

If the leadership of the Navy (or Air Force or Army ... or heaven forbid the Marine Corps), has nothing more on their plate than changing a rank title from "airman" to "airperson," then that leadership is at once foolish and unworthy of being copied. Our time and effort toward mission accomplishment are too important, too precious to be wasted on such superficial distractions.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:27 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:27:24 -0400

Well, first combine all branches and special forces (USMC) into one Department of Defense Forces. Then use the term Soldier for all, whether Naval Forces, Air Forces, Marine Forces or Ground Forces. By that, you can eliminate 4 ridiculous redundant acquisition programs, the UCMJ will truly be uniform and the officer ranks, which are the most expensive will take the biggest hit, when redundant staffs and senior officials are eliminated, but enlisted forces would be mostly untouched, thus you could achieve a "PC" goal, by actually accomplishing something of merit by slimming a bloated military leadership and forcing the self-perpetuating military bureaucracy to deal with real reform, instead of fighting over what color our uniforms and boots should be and deal with matters of real importance. SOLDIERS - it's PC......

Response by Cpl Robert Clark made Apr 12 at 2016 8:34 AM

Cpl Robert Clark — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:34:01 -0400

We could call 'em the Air Folks.

Response by TSgt Scott Day made Apr 12 at 2016 8:35 AM

TSgt Scott Day — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:35:43 -0400

As a retired USAF NCO, we must weigh the idea that does this kind of topic warrant, this kind of lime-light? Once must also consider, the organizations we speak of are the military, not an afternoon and/or after school program, where "PC" is more important than accomplishing what the afternoon and/or after school program was established for in the first place.

Have we as a super power military succumbed to the PC Police and litigation to the point that our initial mission is lost with-in the hustle and bustle to appease certain ideological viewpoints.

I DO believe in equality across the board for any member of the military, however there has to be a line drawn of what causes and/or justified concerns are really important, verses a few mindsets/ideologies (that, from my perspective, seem are too sensitive to be in the military in the first place).

It is my belief that those who chose to continue to champion these kinds of unilateral ideologies, because they feel that a simple title might cause them psychological distress, need to lean towards separation to the civilian sector.

Again I reiterate that I believe in proper customs, courtesies, and the professionalism that embodies those characteristics in support of equality across the board, with-in the military, however does such the idea of changing a title really warrant this kind attention, verses perhaps, actual constraints that ACTUALLY impact the mission on a day-to-day basis...food for thought.

Thanks for all of your time...

v/r

Response by SPC Jesse Lowe made Apr 12 at 2016 8:36 AM

SPC Jesse Lowe — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:36:49 -0400

Instead of "airman", call everyone "birdperson".

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:37 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:37:23 -0400

It shouldn't change. The military does not conform to the individual.

Response by Cpl James Horres made Apr 12 at 2016 8:40 AM

Cpl James Horres — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:40:42 -0400

Keep your heritage A bullet doesn't know such things as race rank or gender...... This is what keeps the corps for now as prideful as it is we lean on traditions as the markings of who we are ,so have pride in your ranks and stop losing your spine to the PC police

Response by SSgt Clinton Crackel made Apr 12 at 2016 8:42 AM

SSgt Clinton Crackel — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:42:19 -0400

We have morale problems with our missle ops crews and you're worried about gender-neutral rank titles? Keep it AIRMAN/AIRMEN, and let's resolve the real issues that plague the military.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:43 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:43:39 -0400

Shitty idea here admittedly but simply, "Tech"? Abbreviation for Technician. The AF expects us to be a technician in whatever skill level we are at. Whether it be a; 3 level, 7 level, 9 level or, whatever the officer core equivalent is, we are expected to be a technician at that job. So... AirTech Basic (I like simply "trainee"), AirTech, AirTech First Class (keep the term "A One C"), Senior Tech. Keep the rest from that point. Ssgt 'last name' so on and so forth. Just an idea. I'm not fanatical about the idea. Just thought I'd throw it out there. As far as the Navy, I guess the job title going before the word "person" instead of the word "man" could work. I dunno. I'm not in the Navy. I don't know how your crazy shit works. Enlisted term of address is........ Seaman? Nope, it's not that. It's like Fire/Air/ect........man......good luck associating a persons rank (term of address) to their MOS/AFSC. Maybe Seaperson? SeaTech? Just throwing it out there I guess. Don't blame me if the Navy makes a shitty policy decision.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:45 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:45:17 -0400

How about airhumans. Perhaps that won't offend those posturing liberal D-bags that are ruining this great country.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:45 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:45:24 -0400

Well personally I find this a ridiculous gesture. Just like in all military documents the noun he is used in a gender neutral sense. People need too put on their adult undergarments and quit whining about stupid stuff.

Response by MSgt Christopher Schoen made Apr 12 at 2016 8:46 AM

MSgt Christopher Schoen — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:46:17 -0400

Dun retired four years ago...the political correctness back then was getting stupid. Now, folks are screwing with rank names? People's brains have turned to lumpy oatmeal.

Response by SPC Donald Moore made Apr 12 at 2016 8:46 AM

SPC Donald Moore — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:46:47 -0400

I would say, since the Air Farce is not Constitutionally authorized to exist anyhow, just disband it and reallocate all those personnel and equipment to either the Army or the Navy. Then they can be Soldiers and Sailors and not have to worry about the question any more.

Response by CW3 Ed Heick made Apr 12 at 2016 8:46 AM

CW3 Ed Heick — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:46:56 -0400

This whole pc bs has no place in the military. Because of a few groups who think that they want to be trendsetters history needs to be changed. I disagree with all of it and it should stay as it is in all services. Screw pc just get the job done.

Response by MAJ Stephen Barnard made Apr 12 at 2016 8:47 AM

MAJ Stephen Barnard — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:47:03 -0400

Gender neutral does a disservice to all hu-persons.

Response by MAJ Stephen Barnard made Apr 12 at 2016 8:48 AM

MAJ Stephen Barnard — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:48:47 -0400

Navy's top enlisted leader needs to get Job.

Response by SSgt Clinton Crackel made Apr 12 at 2016 8:49 AM

SSgt Clinton Crackel — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:49:38 -0400

I'm more concerned with the morale of the missile operations crews than I am with trying to come up with gender-neutral rank titles. Keep the titles Airman and Airmen. Then again, I wasn't a field grade officer, I was a Staff Sergeant.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:51 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:51:11 -0400

I can't believe this is even a topic. The military needs to stay out of political correctness. PC is messing up our country and it will do the same to the military

Response by Maj John Maier made Apr 12 at 2016 8:51 AM

Maj John Maier — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:51:27 -0400

I've always felt that the gender-washing efforts serve little purpose beyond pandering to media-driven social frenzies. If we are going to make everything "equal", let's start with physical fitness and job performance equality. I know many women veterans who can lift as much, run as fast, and perform to the same standards that any male can. And yet, we have core expectations that are " less than". How much time will senior leadership spend on something that is all about not hurting feelings? I'd rather see them spend time on issues that ARE hurting the mission. Let's go guys/gals in the leadership posts, set REAL priorities, don't get tempted by this kind of low-hanging fruit.

Response by 1stLt Michael Stickel made Apr 12 at 2016 8:52 AM

1stLt Michael Stickel — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:52:49 -0400

In addition, 'man' is also found in 'hu-man', so all the PC combinations you can think of fit.

Response by SrA Lauren Kresse made Apr 12 at 2016 8:53 AM

SrA Lauren Kresse — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:53:35 -0400

I was an airman and I'm a woman, it did not offend me, nor did I waste time thinking about it. It should stay the same. I'm now a policeman in South Florida, I'm called a policeman and I would not expect anything different. Like the comment below, man and men are also in the word woman and women! Keep it as is!

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 8:56 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 08:56:50 -0400

Corpsman to medic, and I think the responses so far speaks to the rest.

Response by MSG Douglas Tolliver made Apr 12 at 2016 9:02 AM

MSG Douglas Tolliver — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:02:43 -0400

I wouldn't do anything. Because I think political correctness is driving this and it's a crock. The only way to do it is start calling them "Private" again. SrA is going to have to be a Corporal. Just don't replace it with "person". Senior Air Person (SAP) would sound a little funny, don't you think? Look at SrA Stacey's comment. Keep the heritage and ditch the politics.

Response by CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar made Apr 12 at 2016 9:04 AM

CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:04:22 -0400

The word "man" by definition means both male and female but females have their own individual term "women" so for us to be politically correct we have to invent a word that means males only! These linguistic contortions are useless and ridiculous for obtaining equality between the genders. Did you know that in Farsi, the language of Iran, there is one word for both "he" and "she" and yet that has to be one of the most "macho" societies on the planet?

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:04 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:04:42 -0400

I have a solution for all rank PC problems that our senior civilian officials think is broken. We create the rank of YOU
YOU
YOU2
YOU3
YOU1st class

That way when a senior person get mad at you your rank is involved not You personally

You piece do cr*p
You dirty rotten low down ;($)(://-

you get the point

Response by SPC Joseph Maciejewski made Apr 12 at 2016 9:05 AM

SPC Joseph Maciejewski — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:05:39 -0400

I do not believe it is necessary to change, the military should not used as an social experiment.

Response by A1C Michael Richards made Apr 12 at 2016 9:06 AM

A1C Michael Richards — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:06:37 -0400

I think our country has gone way to far. Any more social engineering and we will have to change our name to Euroamerica.

Response by LTC Keith Bakken made Apr 12 at 2016 9:06 AM

LTC Keith Bakken — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:06:40 -0400

Airman is already gender neutral. It is a noun.

Response by PO1 Glenn Roesener made Apr 12 at 2016 9:08 AM

PO1 Glenn Roesener — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:08:17 -0400

First, I think it's the stupidest thing in the world. No...wait, I take that back. Seems every time I say that about something the military does they do their best to outdo themselves. But not just painful, but pandering. Those being "helped" should feel condescended and patronized. If I were in their shoes I'd feel embarrassed that the military would stoop so low as to put my wishes before the mission, to let issues like this take even a few minutes from actually working on mission preparedness would make me feel mistrustful of command's judgment.

But back to the question. I think it would be fun to append with the term "folk". Air-folk. Fire-folk. Sea-folk. Marines. You get the picture.

Actually, note what the Marines have done there. They don't need a conversion because they didn't apply gendered terms to begin with. Simply converting is, to be honest, painfully un-imaginative. Why not come up with terms that don't even require gender awareness at all?

Response by CW2 Matthew Purdy made Apr 12 at 2016 9:09 AM

CW2 Matthew Purdy — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:09:16 -0400

I'm with Sgt Kennedy. Aviator would be consistent with other service occupational title (I.e. soldier, sailor, aviator, marine).
E1 - Avt (junior grade)
E2 - Avt (basic)
E3 - AFC
E4 - ASG (senior grade)

Response by MSgt Michael Howarth made Apr 12 at 2016 9:09 AM

MSgt Michael Howarth — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:09:38 -0400

What a stupid question... Flaps, Wings, Zoomies or what the people who think of this a serious question,. Mindless Zombies...

Response by PO1 Glenn Roesener made Apr 12 at 2016 9:10 AM

PO1 Glenn Roesener — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:10:40 -0400

One starts to think maybe there are too many people at the top trying to think up something to do to account for their billet and pay.

Response by SSgt Edward LaPrath made Apr 12 at 2016 9:10 AM

SSgt Edward LaPrath — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:10:46 -0400

Hi Col.
How about just leave it as it is?

Response by SSgt Brad Becker made Apr 12 at 2016 9:12 AM

SSgt Brad Becker — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:12:30 -0400

Well since I am a retired Marine, Here are some NEW Ideas, Freaks, Homo's, fags, looser bitches, Air Jockey, Flight Attendants, “ Its”, THINGS, Air buggers, Slimy blue snott. Most worth less branch, The ladies branch, Civilians in uniform. My little birdy, Rifle challenged, We kill our own, Only send our officers out to fight, Enlisted in the rear with the gear, Desk Jockey, What's exercise, Where's my bed, I got a BUBU, I WAS GOING TO JOIN THE MARINES , BUT I WAS AFRAID, Aren’t I special, I love my Queer blue uniform. I once had a muscle. I am a pussy but my wife is hot, GOONEY BIRDS, SORRY SACK OF SHIT, Really the choices are endless, of great new things to call them.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:15 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:15:48 -0400

Why are we worried about junk like this when people are trying to kill us?

Response by SrA Gerald Burt made Apr 12 at 2016 9:15 AM

SrA Gerald Burt — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:15:56 -0400

Yeah definitely a non-issue. Focus less on trivialities and more on defense of nation, and the best bang for our military $.

Response by Sgt Terry W Drake made Apr 12 at 2016 9:17 AM

Sgt Terry W Drake — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:17:20 -0400

Private

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:17 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:17:32 -0400

Air Troop Basic, Air Troop, Air Troop 1st Class, Senior Air Troop

Response by SSgt Brad Becker made Apr 12 at 2016 9:18 AM

SSgt Brad Becker — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:18:22 -0400

The picture shows a woman with big pecks, I see the color Guard is checking her out or is that supposed to be an eyes right. Who taught them to march anyways. Air force does have the best looking Women, some times just hard to tell the men from the women.

Response by MSgt Bruce Cooper made Apr 12 at 2016 9:18 AM

MSgt Bruce Cooper — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:18:53 -0400

Man does not refer to gender in this sense. Anyone with a public education who took English should know this. Man refers to human, not male or female. This nonsense was started by the women's rights movement years ago.

Response by CPT Mike Sims made Apr 12 at 2016 9:18 AM

CPT Mike Sims — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:18:55 -0400

Air Defenders.

Response by Sgt Steven Beal made Apr 12 at 2016 9:20 AM

Sgt Steven Beal — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:20:40 -0400

"Man" can be the as general as man- meaning human (also ending in "man") vs animal. It describes a kind of being. Gender equality is certainly an issue in these times but we, as the human race, are all man's. As for Corpman... MEDIC!! WORKS FOR ME ;)

Response by MAJ Rob Hankey made Apr 12 at 2016 9:21 AM

MAJ Rob Hankey — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:21:07 -0400

Has anyone checked with the women in the services to see if they object to the term 'Airmen'? Mankind refers to all living persons regardless of gender or age and I would doubt that many object to that term. I would think that there are many other more important things to focus on than titles in military.

Response by MSG Ronnie Snider made Apr 12 at 2016 9:24 AM

MSG Ronnie Snider — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:24:16 -0400

Are you freaking kidding me? What the xell is going on here. When did the term: "men, he, she, they, those" or whatever you are calling yourself maters. When I came in the things they called me cannot even be repeated. We say “what’s up man”, it referrers to everyone duh!
The term Solider, Sailor, Marine and Airman is what it should remain. If you cannot figure what you need to be called please stay out of our services. This is the United States Armed Services not the what can we call you today squad.
If man in the title offends you find a job the word is not used in. We need to stop wasting tax dollars on pointless matters and get with the real job- “NATIONAL SECURITY”
We have best armed services in the world it is time to start acting like it. No bother sending me back emails they will not be looked at and will be blocked.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:27 AM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:27:29 -0400

Might as well call them "Air Person", the Air Force has always been ridiculous with some of their decisions anyway, one more God Awful one won't matter. I think it's because people making these decisions . policies and regulations spent too much time in low oxygen environments or maybe too much air between the synapse when the neurons fire they miss.

Response by SFC Joe Haralson made Apr 12 at 2016 9:29 AM

SFC Joe Haralson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:29:19 -0400

If women are so offended by the term man or men in identifying with a group then why doesn't any females complain about being called a woMAN or woMEN? What about MANkind? Really? When is this going to stop?

Response by 1LT A. Uribe made Apr 12 at 2016 9:29 AM

1LT A. Uribe — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:29:26 -0400

This is stupid, so are we also going to remove "man" from woman? This PC environment is getting out of hand, some people just need to stop receiving awards for participation.

Response by LCpl Jim Pleace made Apr 12 at 2016 9:29 AM

LCpl Jim Pleace — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:29:51 -0400

I wouldn't suggest an alternative because I don't subscribe to the BS politically correct brainwashing. Marines are big on tradition and they have always been called "Airman" in the Air Force and that's good enough for me. If the Air Force wants to change it then that's on them.

Response by PO1 Dave Porter made Apr 12 at 2016 9:31 AM

PO1 Dave Porter — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:31:32 -0400

Keep as is. This gender stuff is going too far. What is next, taking "man" out of Woman? Can you really see people say "airperson"?

Response by MSgt Stephanie McCalister made Apr 12 at 2016 9:36 AM

MSgt Stephanie McCalister — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:36:38 -0400

I concur with those who already pointed out that 'man' is found both in 'woman' & 'human' ... so do the Hu'man'e thing, and put this to rest. Leave things the heck alone! Don't let those not numbered amongst us, have the say on what we should be called!
Proud to be known as an Airman for over 20 years, as was my Father before me for 12 years, don't change a thing!

Response by Col Paul Schubert made Apr 12 at 2016 9:36 AM

Col Paul Schubert — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:36:51 -0400

Right on, Airman Nadine. Maybe we could spend our time making our Air Force a better service and more mission oriented.

Response by Amn Kim Bloodgood made Apr 12 at 2016 9:36 AM

Amn Kim Bloodgood — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:36:58 -0400

I am female and I AM an Airmen or Airman... This term is what I would prefer to be called. During WWII all members of the Air Corp were called Airmen regardless of their rank... I prefer it all to stay the same way...

Response by MAJ Jim Henderson made Apr 12 at 2016 9:37 AM

MAJ Jim Henderson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:37:26 -0400

This is another of those issues that the military see's fit to expend money and resources on with no reasonable solution. Do any of you remember how much time, money and hours went into deciding rather the white or black socks would be worn with the Army PT uniform?

Response by SSgt Gerry Martin made Apr 12 at 2016 9:39 AM

SSgt Gerry Martin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:39:02 -0400

I have always been an airman and will always be an airman. We are becoming way too PC. Man and men are found in a lot of words. We aren't going to change them (hopefully). I know you are looking for better alternatives, but I think the idea is ridiculous.

Response by CAPT Thomas Vaughn made Apr 12 at 2016 9:39 AM

CAPT Thomas Vaughn — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:39:23 -0400

Are there not more important things to worry about in our Armed Forces than all of this PC and social experimentation.
Worry about this AFTER serious issues are addressed. But consider what rabbit holes this will take us down.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:39 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:39:39 -0400

I would respectfully abide by the decisions of our leaders (military and civilian) but I would hold fast to the understanding that these terms are titles earned. ( like Ssgt, or commander, or 1sgt) irrespective of gender. We (collectively) choose to shed our civilian attire to earn the rank of Airman, and as such abide to internalize the Air Forces culture and values.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:40 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:40:45 -0400

Air cadet

Response by Cpl Dave Null made Apr 12 at 2016 9:42 AM

Cpl Dave Null — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:42:15 -0400

My gender-neutral alternative would be to get rid of Ash Carter. That would benefit servicemembers of both genders.

Response by Capt Renee Ullrich made Apr 12 at 2016 9:42 AM

Capt Renee Ullrich — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:42:21 -0400

I would agree with the comments that Airmen works just fine. I am proud to be an Airmen as well as a soldier USA. The PC stuff is not helpful and distracts from the mission.

Response by SGM Thomas Adderley made Apr 12 at 2016 9:44 AM

SGM Thomas Adderley — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:44:12 -0400

This is an effort in Political Correctness; a touchy-feely concept to not ruffle any feathers, a feel good operation and a waste of time and resources.
Leadership would require that this question be put to buried and leave the current term as they are. Come out to all that all terms are gender neutral. Period.

Response by Sgt John Steinmeier made Apr 12 at 2016 9:44 AM

Sgt John Steinmeier — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:44:35 -0400

There isn't an alternative in my world.
The half dozen persons that get butt hurt over being called an "Airman" should consider an alternative career choice outside of the military.

Response by PO1 Steve Marshall made Apr 12 at 2016 9:46 AM

PO1 Steve Marshall — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:46:01 -0400

Leave them as they are,political correctness is whats ruining this country now.

Response by SFC Ronald Hebert made Apr 12 at 2016 9:47 AM

SFC Ronald Hebert — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:47:09 -0400

Say it like the POTUS intended it to mean "Air Gender Neutral Person 1st Class", etc. In the Navy, my job description was known as Yeoman. Let it now be known as "Yeo Gender Neutral Person 1st Class', etc. In the Army my MOS was 11B30 referred to as Light Weapons Infantryman. Let it now be known as "Infantry Neutral Gender Person".

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:47 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:47:13 -0400

I still remember when the Navy decided to do away with Shipmate. They say it was a derogatory term. I was with some prior service buddy's and we came to a consensus. The military has become soft. This all inclusive, participation awards military is becoming ridiculous to say the least.

Response by FN George Woodruff made Apr 12 at 2016 9:52 AM

FN George Woodruff — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:52:02 -0400

When I was in the service (WW 2 and Korean War) we had females (WAC's and WAVES) serving and there were no complaints about titles. Political correctness has turned our country into a world I don't recognize. I guess some would want to designate lower ranking sailors as "Sea persons" or "Fire persons" and some Petty Officers as "Yeo persons" but personally I think it is nuts. If the titles are going to be changed it must be something that doesn't sound too wimpy. For the life of me I cannot think what that might be.

Response by MSgt John McGowan made Apr 12 at 2016 9:52 AM

MSgt John McGowan — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:52:28 -0400

In my opinion this is a non issue. Something to make PC when there is no need. Airman has worked since 1947 and nothing is wrong with it. Change it and it will cost millions for all the paper work. Would that be the best use of money.

Response by MSgt Phillip Freeman made Apr 12 at 2016 9:52 AM

MSgt Phillip Freeman — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:52:28 -0400

PC = Pussy Clan. This question should'nt even need to be entertained but since we have made it a habit of peeing down our leg, we'll get this and others like it. The pussification of America started a while back but like a snowball it is out of control. May as well take the labels off the latrines. Glad I'm retired!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:54 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:54:04 -0400

Air-soldier, crewman . . . Or a much better idea; is just be grown up and professional and understand that it is a gender inclusive term like is explained in all the regs and FMs . . .

As a citizen soldier I prefer no change because it won't waste my tax money.

Response by 1LT Jim Thompson made Apr 12 at 2016 9:56 AM

1LT Jim Thompson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:56:09 -0400

can we refer to those that want to change this as "AIRHEADS"

Response by CMSgt Jay Pine made Apr 12 at 2016 9:59 AM

CMSgt Jay Pine — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:59:11 -0400

Really?! Is it really coming to this? "Man" is in "woman" so, what's the big deal? Stay with "Airman" and "Airmen".

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Apr 12 at 2016 9:59 AM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 09:59:14 -0400

How about airheads! I used to be in the Illinois Air National Guard when our unit was part of the old TAC and they flew F-4 Phantoms one of which had two Mig kill markings from Vietnam.

Response by SPC Anna Larson made Apr 12 at 2016 10:00 AM

SPC Anna Larson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:00:30 -0400

It already is gender neutral unless you also remove man from huMAN and woMAN.
Airman, fireman, nothing specifies gender there. I suggest they leave it be.

Response by PO1 Elverton Chin made Apr 12 at 2016 10:03 AM

PO1 Elverton Chin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:03:34 -0400

I see no reason why airmen should be changed, as it is accepted as gender neutral to begin with. If the majority of the female military members have no objections in changing it, then let it remain airmen. Sometimes, we take things to the extreme for no good reasons at all.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:05 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:05:41 -0400

I agree with the majority of what's being said... Leave it as it is. I think there are much more important things to be worried about. If we're going to do anything to the ranks it should be aligning the titles to more closely match the other services. (Sgt, SSG, etc.)

Response by Cpl Bruce Raftery made Apr 12 at 2016 10:05 AM

Cpl Bruce Raftery — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:05:52 -0400

Why we just say"hey you". God forbid we be called a female sheep! Let's worry about something more important! Gender equality within the officer ranks.

Response by LCDR Bruce Sheppard made Apr 12 at 2016 10:09 AM

LCDR Bruce Sheppard — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:09:31 -0400

here's a real alternative, let's demonize the person who came up with this. it probably came from beyond sycophant ash carter, i believe. this is Not a serious way to lead the defense of our country

Response by Sgt Oswaldo Garcia made Apr 12 at 2016 10:11 AM

Sgt Oswaldo Garcia — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:11:46 -0400

I'm a Jarhead and all I have to say is,"I'm impressed by the messages on the question. Don't give into the PC mentality. This movement is ridiculous and compromises centuries of tradition and spirit de corps. It diminishes our pride and cohesiveness as a military organization. Semper Fi

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:11 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:11:47 -0400

I would not change it, neither should it be changed. If CorpsMAN and AirMAN need to be changed because it says MAN in it then we have to re-evolve our language. Because we now have to change HuMAN and WoMAN, which both contain MAN and both encompass and refer to the FeMALE gender.

You cannot get away from Man, Men or Male when referring to Women, so the job titles are still all encompassing to both genders.

Response by PO2 Deborah Burr made Apr 12 at 2016 10:13 AM

PO2 Deborah Burr — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:13:01 -0400

Leave it be.

Response by Cpl Alex Willess made Apr 12 at 2016 10:13 AM

Cpl Alex Willess — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:13:21 -0400

Sky Warrior has a nice ring to it.

Response by CPO Matt Jordan made Apr 12 at 2016 10:13 AM

CPO Matt Jordan — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:13:49 -0400

I have no suggestions. It is a stupid exercise in navel gazing. The Navy is doing this with the traditional ratings and it sounds so stupid to hear. Concentrate on more important things.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:13 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:13:53 -0400

Leave it all alone. Period

Response by MSgt Tommy Flores made Apr 12 at 2016 10:14 AM

MSgt Tommy Flores — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:14:27 -0400

Airhead should do it!

Response by CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar made Apr 12 at 2016 10:14 AM

CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:14:35 -0400

I attended university in the French speaking part of Switzerland in the mid 60`s before I joined the army. I had a French literature professor who was a Frenchman. He had seen action in the French Parachute Regiment in both Indochina and Algeria and was tough as nails. He was also married to a beautiful German professor. In one of his classes the subject of female liberation was broached and he had this to say on the subject, “A woman can be inferior to a man or she can be superior to a man but she can never be his equal.”

Response by SSgt James Cottrell made Apr 12 at 2016 10:15 AM

SSgt James Cottrell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:15:25 -0400

Well we are all considered "Mankind". Use that as a base.

Response by SSgt James Cottrell made Apr 12 at 2016 10:16 AM

SSgt James Cottrell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:16:37 -0400

We are all considered "mankind", just use that as a base.

Response by CPL Mark Mitchell made Apr 12 at 2016 10:18 AM

CPL Mark Mitchell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:18:14 -0400

I agree with SrA Nadine woman and female both have the words man and /or male.
I would leave it alone in this case.

Response by LCDR Ron Urrutia made Apr 12 at 2016 10:21 AM

LCDR Ron Urrutia — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:21:55 -0400

Another validation of the lack of leadership starting somewhere around the E-Ring and being manifested by the Chiefs - Good order and discipline are tenants of a responsive force. Those who challenge on the basis of "feelings or personal concerns" need to leave for the convenience of the government. Lawyers, ACLU and the like have no place in our chain of command and their interest is unwarranted and should be placed in the appropriate burn bag. I am sure an enemy we defend would take the time to honor a political correctness and/or gender specific issue. Gosh we can't even get solid appreciation for the Geneva Convention - The services are NOT A SOCIAL EXPERIMENT. they are the guarantors of other segments of life to live their silliness. Ron Urrutia, USN RET, LDO-LCDR.

Response by MSgt Tommy Flores made Apr 12 at 2016 10:22 AM

MSgt Tommy Flores — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:22:07 -0400

Seriously I agree with the previous commenters and leave it as is. Since time immemorial man has been used generically as well as to specify males. When the Good Book says God made 'man' in His own image, it continues with ; male and female He created them.

Response by SFC Michael Peterson made Apr 12 at 2016 10:24 AM

SFC Michael Peterson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:24:57 -0400

If "Airman" is too offensive, might I suggest "Wing-nut", "Flap", or better yet "Civilian".

Response by SSgt Art Arvizu made Apr 12 at 2016 10:27 AM

SSgt Art Arvizu — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:27:42 -0400

Airhead

Response by LCDR Ron Urrutia made Apr 12 at 2016 10:27 AM

LCDR Ron Urrutia — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:27:46 -0400

Back the question - two choices : first choice is the first identifier in the "oath" "I" the second choice would be "warrior" if you don't fit, don't attempt to fit.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:30 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:30:19 -0400

Space Cadet

Response by CPL Deborah Shellard made Apr 12 at 2016 10:30 AM

CPL Deborah Shellard — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:30:43 -0400

I think people being sensitive to this is ridiculous! I think my job title has nothing to do with me as a woman. What is wrong with these people! I agree with SrA Nadine Stacey! Man is found in woMAN, leave it alone. We need to worry about REAL problems in the military. Seriously, these people need to get a life and stop being so butt hurt! I'm guessing its the generation that thinks everyone deserves a trophy for participation and there are no winners or losers! What BS. Grow the hell up! This is the Military not the damn Girl Scouts!!

Response by PO1 Steve Greely made Apr 12 at 2016 10:37 AM

PO1 Steve Greely — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:37:10 -0400

Are you seriously considering this? One would need to change the dictionary and change every gender based word. That's ridiculous! May I remind you all that the word woman also has "man" in it. Gonna change the Bible too?

Response by SSgt Art Arvizu made Apr 12 at 2016 10:37 AM

SSgt Art Arvizu — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:37:18 -0400

Airhead...hee hee

Response by MSgt Rena Schmidt made Apr 12 at 2016 10:40 AM

MSgt Rena Schmidt — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:40:44 -0400

I was asked by a female maj early in my AF career if I was offended by being called an "Airman" I stated no ma'am it's my rank nothing more nothing less. We are all part of "mankind" they need to worry about more important things this is stupid question.

Response by MSgt Rena Schmidt made Apr 12 at 2016 10:42 AM

MSgt Rena Schmidt — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:42:14 -0400

Sorry ladies we joined an all boys club years ago it is what it is period.... we need to do our jobs to the best of our abilities and stop with all the unnecessary side so called issues

Response by RDML Bob Frick made Apr 12 at 2016 10:42 AM

RDML Bob Frick — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:42:35 -0400

Since the word MAN and woMAN both have the word Man what is wrong with Airmen and AirMan.
Being stupid does not make being totall politically perfect

Response by CMSgt Lloyd French made Apr 12 at 2016 10:43 AM

CMSgt Lloyd French — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:43:08 -0400

Private, Corporal, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Major, Colonel, General ... no mention of "man" anywhere. Can anyone say to me why we have say "male" nurse instead of just "nurse" ... ?

Response by MSgt Rena Schmidt made Apr 12 at 2016 10:43 AM

MSgt Rena Schmidt — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:43:50 -0400

As I have stated many times I am sick of being a social experiment do that junk in the outside world if is even a problem we are not your toys to manipulate

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:46 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:46:06 -0400

Airmen wear blouses. Chew on that.

Response by Cpl Gary Alexander made Apr 12 at 2016 10:47 AM

Cpl Gary Alexander — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:47:52 -0400

Doesn't much matter.... once you open Pandora's Box it will never be closed and that's just the early stage of the silliness.... the camel's nose under the tent flap, if you will. Now that the left wing politicians have control of the military, our once great fighting force will list somewhere between "The Caine Mutiny" and "Mr. Roberts", that is until the barbarians slit our collective throats.

A. Jarhead

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:49 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:49:25 -0400

We could replace Airman with something like Lancer, and then also use as it a prefix for all rank titles. That way we can have Lancer First Class, Lancer Sergeants, Lancer Lieutenants, Lancer Majors.

Response by SGT Robert Jensik made Apr 12 at 2016 10:50 AM

SGT Robert Jensik — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:50:32 -0400

Private, PFC, Lance Corporal?

Response by Capt Bud Adams made Apr 12 at 2016 10:50 AM

Capt Bud Adams — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:50:34 -0400

I say in the words of the Paul McCartney, "Let it Be." Tradition is good. I have never seen a woman in the Air Force not do her job because she is call a Airman.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:51 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:51:51 -0400

replace all "man" with crews :P also wo-crew (woman) too lol

Response by 1stSgt Edward Jackson made Apr 12 at 2016 10:52 AM

1stSgt Edward Jackson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 10:52:58 -0400

Are we getting to stupid with today's "politically correct" terms? Just because a word has the letters m-e-n in it does not mean it is sexist.
Forrest Gump said "stupid is as stupid does". We have gone way beyond that point.
The sole job of the US Military Forces is to "kill people and break things". There is no way to do that in a PC environment. Women in our forces contribute just as much to that sole mission as any man does. Just because they are not PJs, SEALs, or Rangers does not mean anything. Women are gunners, boom operators, load masters, combat infantry, artillery, and many other combat arms. They are even on the crews of some SSBNs and CVNs. Our women Soldiers are already on the front line, along with all of our queers and dykes.
The Marines found out recently that most women are not as physically strong as most men....well DUH... But the SecNavy chose to overrule them because our weak kneed POTUS says this is the way it will be. The SecNavy showed just how much guts he has for Sailors recently when he refused to stand up for them to the SecDef, SecState, and POTUS when Iran hijacked two of our gun patrol boats in international waters while practicing "freedom of navigation". Those gun boats had more firepower to defend themselves than the Iranians did to attack them. But, no, we surrendered, by orders from the very top of our government. What ever happened to that great US Navy traditions first said by Capt. James Lawrence of the USS Chesapeake in a Naval battle outside of Boston with the HMS Shannon in 1812.
Of course our POTUS, SecDef, SecState, or any of the service secretaries don't give a damn about individual Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, or Coasties getting killed. We are there to only fight the wars they get us into.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 11:01 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:01:03 -0400

Nothing should be gender neutral. Life is not gender neutral.

Response by MSgt Neil Greenfield made Apr 12 at 2016 11:03 AM

MSgt Neil Greenfield — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:03:51 -0400

Okay, for fun, here are a few:
airbuddy
airchum
aircohort
aircompatriot
aircomrade
airconfederate
airconsort
aircooperator
aircrony
airfellow
airjoiner
airmate
airpal
airpeer

Response by COL Robert Rosser made Apr 12 at 2016 11:05 AM

COL Robert Rosser — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:05:13 -0400

Airperson

Response by SGT Ken Wheeler made Apr 12 at 2016 11:08 AM

SGT Ken Wheeler — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:08:06 -0400

Airtrooper or just keep it as is because you can't be political correct every time some one crys, not to be disrespectful to anyone ranks, we change something every time a person says it not right to be call men or what ever they signed to fight for are nation and to get a education that it not to be a political ion or change wording, so let them fellow order and do there if it out there feelings then there in the wrong business

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 11:10 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:10:23 -0400

In my opinion it's already gender neutral because the definition of an Airman is a person who serves in the Air Force. The word is Airman, not Air Man which it was I'd at least they have a point.

Response by CPT Steve Wolszczak made Apr 12 at 2016 11:11 AM

CPT Steve Wolszczak — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:11:26 -0400

seriously?

if that's your biggest issue, then "zoomies"

Response by SFC Terry Logsdon made Apr 12 at 2016 11:13 AM

SFC Terry Logsdon — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:13:24 -0400

we can put this to bed right now with this solution to gender- neutral military with the following rank for all services if we use these. boy 1-4, girl 1-4---- little boy 5 and 6--- little girl 5-6------- big boy 7-9----- big girl 7-9 now to the officer corps big brother 1-6---- big sister 1-6---- father 7-10 and mother 7-10 there we fixed the rank structure in the entire military. now lets work on the uniforms, hair style,better yet let just scrap all the tradition the military has and start from scratch. as you see I think this is total horse pucky why try to fix something that's not broke.

Response by CPT Steve Wolszczak made Apr 12 at 2016 11:13 AM

CPT Steve Wolszczak — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:13:35 -0400

what gender neutral term are we gonna use in place of "Mission" since it has the word "miss" in it???

Response by MSgt Robert Shampine made Apr 12 at 2016 11:16 AM

MSgt Robert Shampine — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:16:31 -0400

Air fucking people!

Response by MSgt Gene B. made Apr 12 at 2016 11:16 AM

MSgt Gene B. — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:16:59 -0400

As a generic term that describes all Air Force personnel, airman or airmen has stood the test of time. We certainly don't need the silliness of the RAF with Airman and Airwoman. As it stands, Airman is gender neutral as it applies to all personnel regardless of gender.

Response by PO3 Curtis Wollam made Apr 12 at 2016 11:17 AM

PO3 Curtis Wollam — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:17:41 -0400

I was a Ships Service"man" in the Navy. The women in my A school class had no problem. It's a job title, not an identity. It's high time people in this country to worry more about the country itself than feelings

Response by SSgt Jerry DeLaney made Apr 12 at 2016 11:23 AM

SSgt Jerry DeLaney — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:23:03 -0400

When did it become a RIGHT not to be offended? Service to our country is voluntary. Should we give up hundreds of years of tradition to appease a small minority who have never served and will never serve anything but their own self interests? And to those of you who do serve, you knew the names and traditions before you joined and chose to join anyway. Does one join the "Knights of Columbus" club and then insist they change the name because "Knights" were Nobel-MEN solders, or that the name "Columbus" is associated with a man that some consider to have been a slaver and a cruel dictator in the Caribbean? And what's next? Do we tell people that have the word "man" or "men" in their name that they have to change their family name to be gender neutral? I've read all seven articles of our Constitution, all 27 amendments to our Constitution, and I've read the 85 articles of The Federalist Papers. Nowhere in any of my research have I found even one mention of a persons right not to be offended.

Response by LCpl Bradley Otto made Apr 12 at 2016 11:25 AM

LCpl Bradley Otto — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:25:12 -0400

I wouldn't change a thing. All these PC wanna be political officers think they have to change every thing because someone feels a title or name is insulting them personally. Fricken grow a pair and stand your ground! Not every institution has to change because we have opened the doors to both genders. The title is "Airman", either earn it and be proud or get out of the way. Suck it up "princess"!

Response by MSgt Norman Chaney made Apr 12 at 2016 11:34 AM

MSgt Norman Chaney — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:34:52 -0400

We shall call officers "AirHeads" and enlisted "AirFolk" and civilians "AirCargo" !

Response by SSG Jeremy Kohlwes made Apr 12 at 2016 11:37 AM

SSG Jeremy Kohlwes — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:37:52 -0400

I don't think any alternative is going to sound quite right. Airmember, Airperson, Airsoldier (sounds cartoonish), Airwarrior. Everything sounds forced or outlandish.

Response by PO2 Joan Feledy made Apr 12 at 2016 11:38 AM

PO2 Joan Feledy — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:38:46 -0400

If this is bothering any of the women in the military, in my opinion, they probably don't belong in the military. So what if "man" is in the title. If you are doing the job the to the best of your ability an they don't care whether you are male or female, there is not a problem. It's just a title and usually those titles are only used in conjunction with large groups, very rarely one gets called out that individually, but still. It is just a title or a name. We are not individuals in the military but a team. If you stick out for outstanding performance and what not, then and at that time, is it good to be individualized. I am getting off track here. If one is worried about their title not being gender specific, they are probably also bitching about other things that seem unfair as well. I mean they started allowing women to let their hair grow and not get cut in boot camp, I also don't think that was a good idea. Yes, there are differences in women and men, but a title does not remove those differences. If the military starts being so politically correct, are they going to start writing people up for swearing as well.

Response by LTC Robin P. made Apr 12 at 2016 11:39 AM

LTC Robin P. — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:39:43 -0400

I'm in the "leave it alone" camp. Sometimes we can get too wrapped around long-established English language, when the important thing is seeing to the reality on the ground (or in the air, or on the water...). I am also not a fan of printing or saying "he or she" "his or her" etc. when it is patently obvious that both genders are intended.

Response by CPO Stanley Dowling made Apr 12 at 2016 11:49 AM

CPO Stanley Dowling — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:49:46 -0400

More political correct policy. When I took english in school, I was taught that the male term was dominate "he, she, it" Perhaps our teaching of english should be changed so as to be political correct. Actress for woman is now actor, which is mail dominate. Just leave it the was it was or simply call males "airman" and females "airwoman"

Response by Cpl Kent Mitchell made Apr 12 at 2016 11:50 AM

Cpl Kent Mitchell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:50:51 -0400

Airpeople, Airperson . . . lol

Response by SPC Jason Sharp made Apr 12 at 2016 11:55 AM

SPC Jason Sharp — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:55:09 -0400

I guess the first thing I would do is tell people upset with the title to pull their heads out of their asses. Airman, Seaman, and all their progressives have not one single thing to do with gender. Are the people butt hurt over the gender woman? I do believe there is a man in that one as well. These are not just titles, they are ranks and identifiers of your position in the armed forces, period. They were never meant as a gender identifier. No one walks up to someone and says "Hello, I'm a man", this question is nothing more than pandering to political correctness which has no place anywhere in the uniformed services. We deal with life and death situations almost on a daily basis. This has no place on our docket and should not be wasting our time.

Response by Sgt Jamie Whitehead made Apr 12 at 2016 11:59 AM

Sgt Jamie Whitehead — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 11:59:49 -0400

In most languages around the world spanish ,being a great example, if they're speaking about a group they are referred by the male dominant form as this is proper. Just because they're referred to airmen doesn't make it gender specific we all served with pride. I say cut the political correctness bs out of the military it makes us weaker as a whole. We always say across every branch that we are the greatest military in the world I say let's act like it and stop worrying about this petty nonsense of trying to be politically correct.

Response by CDR Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:00 PM

CDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:00:47 -0400

You don't need an alternative; those titles are already gender neutral. Woman and women both contain 'man' or 'men'. I don't think the Navy's study intended to remove the word man from all titles; only those where man or men was separated from the base word. Midshipman for example would not change; if I read the intent of that study correctly.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:06 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:06:29 -0400

Skytrooper, Sky Soldier, Air Trooper.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:08 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:08:37 -0400

If your truly needed to change I would say Flighter.

Response by Capt Michael Brown made Apr 12 at 2016 12:08 PM

Capt Michael Brown — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:08:52 -0400

Let's keep shifting with the political correctness and watch our country and it's military waste away. 'Man'kind is doomed if we continue with this crap.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:09 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:09:17 -0400

Not a big fan of gender neutral but if I was to keep it simple I would merely call them "Airmember!" Or, Air Force Member Smith, etc.

Response by PO1 James Trombley made Apr 12 at 2016 12:11 PM

PO1 James Trombley — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:11:10 -0400

Air Tech would be an alternative if it must be changed

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:14 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:14:07 -0400

Airman and Airmen. That's it.

Response by MSG Mark Million made Apr 12 at 2016 12:15 PM

MSG Mark Million — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:15:24 -0400

Well while we're at it why don't we eliminate the term man, By doing so you could use female or male when gender use is necessary, at least until someone is offe ded by that also. Refer to everyone as soldier? We as a society are becoming to sensitive, if we go to war I certainly hope this insane need to be offended by everything goes away or it will not go well for us. I think that people who use words with obvious intent to offend should be held accountable, but to restructure society and the military for this kind of thing is every bit as bad for morale as the the terminology we are trying to change. Historically man can and has been used in a gender neutral sense. Would female care to be called WOs just to get rid of the MAN?

Response by Sgt Chris English made Apr 12 at 2016 12:15 PM

Sgt Chris English — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:15:58 -0400

There is an appropriate term in Spanish that is perfect for this scenario and those in the Air Force who entertain this type of PC BS: "Cabron"

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:18 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:18:20 -0400

Wouldn't change it all and if the AF is actually wasting resources to study this, it is a total waste of taxpayer money.

Response by LCpl Timothy McCain made Apr 12 at 2016 12:18 PM

LCpl Timothy McCain — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:18:29 -0400

I don't know. However I would like to talk about something else that has the ability to positively affect all veterans. That is the "American Heroes COLA Act of 2015" this bill will make the Cost of living adjustment automatic based upon the consumer price index increase. However it has been hard to get it passed because not enough veterans are paying attention and voicing their support for the bill. So you may be wondering how can you make a difference in passing the bill? Veterans are the most powerful voting block and when they come together in support of an issue the house and Senate listens. So what is the disposition of the bill? At the moment it sitting in the Veterans oversight committee in the Senate awaiting for them to take it up. So can you do? We every veteran to call, write, and email the members of the oversight committee. I've done it and have had great discussionofficeSenator Tillis about it. However it seems that more pressure is needed to get the committee chairs to bring the bill up for a vote that's why we need you to make your voices heard. Once we get it out of committee then what? While you contact the committee members we want you to contact your Senator office by calling, writing, and email to ask that they support the bill and they offer three amendments to the bill once it's brought to the floor. The first would give veterans a 25% pay increase unrelated to Cost of living. The second one would allow the VA to pay Quality Of life payments to veterans who are 60% or more disabled by using the secondary disability scale making awards proportional to the veterans disability rating. The final amendment would allow the VA to make maximum pension payments to any veteran that a service connected disability rating of 100% or permanent and total disabled that not receiving any military retirement. Back dated to the original award date of 100% for maximum of three years. After the bill passes the Senate is it over? No, it will go to the house for final approval. So what then? Each veteran would need to contact their Congressman ask them to support the bill and all its amendments. How long will it take to get to the President's desk? If we work together on this we can get their before the month end. Can any of the amendments take immediate effect after the President signs the bill into law? Yes, but you have to request they be written that way.

Response by SrA Kristin Stewart made Apr 12 at 2016 12:18 PM

SrA Kristin Stewart — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:18:59 -0400

come on now, this nonsense has to stop, since when did everyone become so damn sensitive, there is nothing wrong with airman or corpsman. fireman or policeman, etc. if you are going to do a job then do the job, why does gender have to come into it. if you are qualified, whether man or woman, then be proud, we dont have to point out if you are a woman, whats that suppose to prove, that you should get special treatment because you are female, or be treated like you are special because you as a female qualified as well as a man did. man has always been used as a neutral term in just about everything for as long as i can remember and i personally have never been offended by it.

Response by SFC Olivero Rodriguez made Apr 12 at 2016 12:19 PM

SFC Olivero Rodriguez — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:19:25 -0400

I though that WOMAN, stand for with out man, LOL, well Sir, I am sorry it is funny. But let it stay the same, as in the Army, those woman that wants to go into the infantry, they will be call Infantry Man, or soldiers.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:22 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:22:28 -0400

I love it the only people really getting their shorts all in a bundle over this is people who arent in "civilians" yes we work for them but tradition history culture has a part to play and since they arent in they dont get it they are trying to champion a cause that really doesnt need championing at the moment.

Response by LT John Stevens made Apr 12 at 2016 12:25 PM

LT John Stevens — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:25:28 -0400

Personally, I find such politically motivated political correctness to be a complete waste of time and resources at a time when our military capability is being deeply eroded and our standing in the world has been severely diminished.

Response by SSgt Stephen Lindsey made Apr 12 at 2016 12:27 PM

SSgt Stephen Lindsey — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:27:24 -0400

Political correctness is alive and well in the military. When and where does this stop? Traditional titles and positions are becoming history because they "may" offend "some" people. Ok, so will women no longer wear skirts, nylons, etc., but eventually be required to "only" wear mens uniform combinations? Will it become mandatory to have their heads shaved at Boot? I just don't get it. The military is what the military is, period, and it will "never" be able to please everyone 100% of the time. I've talked to "Full Birds" who have expressed serious concerns about the gender neutral approach and the adverse affect on morale. I'm all for opening doors for females and creating more opportunities in the military, but the never ending pursuit of PC is out of control. The military is suppose to build character, discipline, and esprit de corps, not cater to personal whims or thin skinned whiners. I can't help but wonder who is really in charge?

Response by SrA Colleen Johnson made Apr 12 at 2016 12:29 PM

SrA Colleen Johnson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:29:37 -0400

Please keep it as airman. I thought nothing of it when I was in being called an airman. It flows well.

Response by PO3 Cris Smyth made Apr 12 at 2016 12:31 PM

PO3 Cris Smyth — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:31:43 -0400

I am so tired of this PC BS! I agree with SrA. I'm a Navy veteran. We have some rating with "man" in them. Today's military leaders have no spine! Sorry Col.... Military has a deep tradition, in every branch. WoMAN(did that on purpose) want to be in combat if they can pass muster and standards without modification then let them at it. Leave titles alone. They are just titles referring to rank. This new PC world is killing me. Glad I served when it was ok to tell someone to "pull their fucken heads out of their ass", or being called a fucktard when you messed up. Please you officers in leadership roles at the highest level quit trying to please everyone. We join the military and somethings are just expected .

Response by PO2 Patrick Dwyer made Apr 12 at 2016 12:35 PM

PO2 Patrick Dwyer — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:35:46 -0400

I'd say " Wing Nuts". Having worked on AF Bases, active duty Squid it seemed to me it is not what is said but how it is said. "The AF...Our AF,etc." included both. Other times I could say AF Members. There is also times when addressing individuals or specifying a member I would use rank. Airman or Air Woman also came in to use.

Response by Maj Gary Gault made Apr 12 at 2016 12:39 PM

Maj Gary Gault — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:39:40 -0400

For those who still remember their English lessons the term "man" refers to "mankind" so leave the terms alone.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:39 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:39:44 -0400

I think we should call them Skywalkers.

Response by MSgt J D McKee made Apr 12 at 2016 12:43 PM

MSgt J D McKee — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:43:30 -0400

"Man" went to the moon. "Man" invented fire. "Man" is another term for the human race. You know, it says something for the strength of our military that we are able to waste time on crap like this and still trade out about 12 to one on the ground against our recent adversaries. Probably if the truth were known that figure is much higher in our favor, just hard to get a body count with some of the weapons...Not saying the question is crap, but the Navy's senior enlisted has time to do this, instead of actual military-related duties?

Having said that, since 4 out of 9 enlisted ranks in the USAF are called Sergeant in some way, I think maybe we could go to Sergeant for everyone.

Response by SGT Dave Matteson made Apr 12 at 2016 12:46 PM

SGT Dave Matteson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:46:02 -0400

As a former USAF SSG I say "Airfolk".

Response by SSgt John Berry made Apr 12 at 2016 12:47 PM

SSgt John Berry — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:47:06 -0400

Is this really the kind of thing our "leadership" is spending their time and energy worrying about??? I would think pay, benefits, education, housing, upgrading equipment, things like that would be bigger issues to spend their resources on, instead of this PC crap trying to please all the people all the time. That's just me!

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 12:49 PM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:49:39 -0400

Airdale

Response by Cpl Tim Daudelin made Apr 12 at 2016 12:50 PM

Cpl Tim Daudelin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:50:27 -0400

It's a title just like seaman in the navy
Tradition leave it alone

Response by SGT Dave Matteson made Apr 12 at 2016 12:56 PM

SGT Dave Matteson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 12:56:08 -0400

The trend in the 501 comments is not to change the title. Most of those are from women.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 1:04 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:04:58 -0400

I'm fine with the term airMAN. You'll find the word man in huMAN as well. I'm glad the services are spending resources and time fretting about gender neutrality when we have bigger issues we're facing.

Response by COL David Turk made Apr 12 at 2016 1:13 PM

COL David Turk — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:13:45 -0400

All time classic; "Hey you!".

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 1:14 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:14:10 -0400

If we HAVE to change it;
Go back to our AAC heritage. I don't have a good replacement for airman, but for the ranks: E1 Private. E2 PV2. E3 PFC. E4 corporal. Just my $0.02.

Response by CPL Gregory Ellis made Apr 12 at 2016 1:20 PM

CPL Gregory Ellis — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:20:00 -0400

How about not over thinking it and just boil it down to the branch of service one is referring too. Such as Air Force might be Air Corp, Marine Corp-Marine, Army, Navy or Marines (could also be differentiated by job title- i.e. Armor, Intel, Mechanic, Infantry), similar in approach to how all actors moved toward just being called actors rather than actress and male actor.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 1:20 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:20:06 -0400

I am of the opinion it is civilians who most likely NEVER wore a military uniform who are telling people how we think. I personally wish they would quit attempting to use the military as their Petri dish and concentrate on the rest of society.

Response by CPL Terry Whalen made Apr 12 at 2016 1:24 PM

CPL Terry Whalen — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:24:23 -0400

Has it really gone this far in P.C. BS? Once everyone knew that with "man" in the name referred to human. Why not just explain that to the left. I know it won't help, but still I needed to say it.
I am so sorry for you Lt. Col. Cole

Response by PO1 Kent Talmadge made Apr 12 at 2016 1:32 PM

PO1 Kent Talmadge — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:32:31 -0400

No change is necessary. This is another waste of time and resources due to "political correctness." Sounds like an instance of someone trying to pad their fitreps by fixing something that isn't broken.

Response by AN Donald Miller made Apr 12 at 2016 1:33 PM

AN Donald Miller — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:33:32 -0400

And God saw there perversion, referring to Sodom and Gomorrah, so he told lot to leave, then rain of fire poured from the heavens and Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed. Has this homosexuality movement gone this far? Personally I think it is ridiculous. But if it needs to be done to conform to the wishes of the perverse the Air person or corps-person would suffice. In my history class this past week we have studied the Red Scare, back then homos and transgenders were rounded up because it was considered that they were a threat to our nations security In Muslim dominated countries they were put to death even still today.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 1:35 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:35:58 -0400

ALCON,

This is simply ridiculous, apparently there's nothing important to do in the Navy that they are deciding to loose their time with this nonsense. This "politically correct" problem is the reason why so many people and service members are so irritated with the leadership in the country, and let's make something clear here, "I'm not a Donald Trump fan", all the opposite I can't stand him! but this problem (yes the "politically correct" syndrome is a problem) is what's making hundred of thousands of Americans irritated with the way of thinking (and it's giving Mr. Trump fuel to be the demagogue he is) that is forcing the Armed Forces become a social club instead of simply focusing on being the line of defense of our nation and the guardian of our national interest on the globe. Let's leave as a military community things that has no impact on our performance on the battlefield and focus on better training, accountability, better equipment (by the way good luck with that F-35 because you Navy, AF, and Marine guys will need it, as a matter of fact if you only gave the attention to selecting a good aircraft instead of loosing time changing any title that has a "man" in it...), selection of candidates that enter the armed forces, and results instead of this waste of time. Last, let's leave policy to the politicians and resume on being warriors. Thanks.

V/R

SGT Rivera

Response by PO1 Aaron Baltosser made Apr 12 at 2016 1:37 PM

PO1 Aaron Baltosser — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:37:37 -0400

As a retired FMF Corpsman...the powers that be can change it, but we will still be known as aCorpsman, especially by our beloved Marines.

Response by Sgt Wayne Harper made Apr 12 at 2016 1:38 PM

Sgt Wayne Harper — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:38:51 -0400

Why are idiots always trying to fix something that isn't broke?

Response by MSgt Melvin Smith made Apr 12 at 2016 1:57 PM

MSgt Melvin Smith — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:57:02 -0400

I personally feel that "Airman" or "Airmen" is perfectly suitable. Bigger Fish to Fry such as other practices that are clearly "Discriminative"

Response by 1stSgt Al Herter made Apr 12 at 2016 2:07 PM

1stSgt Al Herter — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:07:34 -0400

Let me think about that for awhile; how about Airman!

Response by SGT James Hunsinger made Apr 12 at 2016 2:08 PM

SGT James Hunsinger — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:08:05 -0400

As an old school Army NCO...I wouldn't. The military is no place for this PC crapfest. Women are Wo-MEN and they are Hu-MAN so the term man or men in job or rank titles does not refer to a sex but a person. Lets go ahead and take the "man" out of woman for the PC whiners too! We'll just call females Wo's from now on, how is that? Give me a freaking break! The military, the country has better things to put effort forth on than this mamby pamby waste of time to pander to a PC minority that has no clue or grasp on reality. I can't even believe this is an issue. It's actually embarrassing to me that our military is even entertaining such efforts.

Response by LTC Andrae Evans made Apr 12 at 2016 2:08 PM

LTC Andrae Evans — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:08:51 -0400

Actually MAN used collectively for humans is biologically correct. Hear me out. genetically only men carry the Female X chromosome and the Male Y chromosome. It is the absence or presence of Testosterone that determines sex, Estrogen feminizes males but it does not determine sex. That alone is Testosterone. Women are pure XX. Thus a women cannot be genetically male since the Y is never present. Even in extreme cases of Klinefelter syndrome (XXY) men are feminized but pretty much male. therefore the collective MEN, MAN or MANKIND, SEAMEN, AIRMEN is genetically more accurate when referring to a gathering of Males and Females.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 2:14 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:14:50 -0400

I agree with everyone on leaving it alone. Use resources wisely and fix REAL problems. I can't imagine how much money it will cost to create a separate labels or even fathom how many require change. I never even thought of this issue my entire time on active duty, perhaps someone with too much free time should find better ways to use their skills and time. Just my .02.

Response by SSG Jerry Pitkin made Apr 12 at 2016 2:19 PM

SSG Jerry Pitkin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:19:11 -0400

Well if we are going this far, we might as well remove the "man" from woman and the "male" from female... Arnt we getting alittle Ridiculous.

Response by MSgt Ken "Airsoldier" Collins-Hardy made Apr 12 at 2016 2:21 PM

MSgt Ken "Airsoldier" Collins-Hardy — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:21:12 -0400

ALCON, Juxtapose our beloved mascot next to our sisters and tradition may have already issued our branding that exacts our Warrior Ethos, Excellence-in-Airmanship and sustains the Alpha Line-up—Falcons, Marines, Sailors and Soldiers.

Response by TSgt Orin Taylor Sr made Apr 12 at 2016 2:30 PM

TSgt Orin Taylor Sr — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:30:37 -0400

I do not think an alternative is needed. Leave it as Airman.

Response by Maj Shawn Fitzgerald made Apr 12 at 2016 2:37 PM

Maj Shawn Fitzgerald — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:37:20 -0400

Airdales, squids,doggies, coasties, & jarheads.

Response by TSgt Thomas Monaghan made Apr 12 at 2016 2:47 PM

TSgt Thomas Monaghan — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:47:39 -0400

Man is also in women

Response by MSgt Jack Son made Apr 12 at 2016 2:51 PM

MSgt Jack Son — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:51:44 -0400

How about whiny little bitches- we will never win another WAR.

Response by SGT Marika Waiters made Apr 12 at 2016 2:54 PM

SGT Marika Waiters — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 14:54:44 -0400

I think it's ludicrous that there is even a need for this discussion.

Response by PO1 Gregg Mundy made Apr 12 at 2016 3:01 PM

PO1 Gregg Mundy — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:01:32 -0400

Why should we remove anything. Just because someone in a high position thinks it outdated really makes NO sense. On a lighter note, "Why don't we remove the problem instead of making a problem"!!

Response by SMSgt John Gereaux, PHR made Apr 12 at 2016 3:10 PM

SMSgt John Gereaux, PHR — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:10:43 -0400

Winged Warrior

Response by LCpl L Lawrence made Apr 12 at 2016 3:11 PM

LCpl L Lawrence — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:11:51 -0400

Much like 'congress member' and 'council member,' Air Force member seems an appropriate alternative. 'Aires' could be up for consideration.

Response by SPC Patrick Gresch made Apr 12 at 2016 3:13 PM

SPC Patrick Gresch — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:13:54 -0400

Genderless Airperson. Just so the LGBTXYZ community doesn't freak out. God are you freaking kidding me. I hope the Army doesn't start messing with titles too. Our civilian "Leaders" must not have anything more important to do. Let's worry about social engineering and making everyone feel all cuddly and warm. I fear for our future if these people make all the changes they probably want to do. I respect women and we had some of our best shooters were women. They were better than me I will freely admit. They were soldiers and so was I. They will ruin our Armed Forces if left unchecked all in the name of equality.

Response by SSG Robert Spina made Apr 12 at 2016 3:15 PM

SSG Robert Spina — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:15:54 -0400

BOY YOU CANT MAKE THIS STUFF UP IS THIS WHAT ARE MILITARY IS BECOMING THEY NEED TO KEEP ALL THIS PC BULL OUT OF THE MILITARY AND START SPENDING THIER TIME ON HOW TO FIGHT AND WIN WARS

Response by TSgt James Carson made Apr 12 at 2016 3:17 PM

TSgt James Carson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:17:40 -0400

I'd love to see leadership stop being Politically correct so much. I've seen for myself how basic training has degraded and how the military in general is so quick to get on the political band wagon. Get back to thinking problems out instead of going off in any direction as the wind blows.

Response by PO3 Walter Bohdan made Apr 12 at 2016 3:26 PM

PO3 Walter Bohdan — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:26:17 -0400

I don't think they should be changed, corpsman, airman, seaman are about as nuetral as you can get and still allow for reference to the job they need to do

Response by SSgt Stephen Lindsey made Apr 12 at 2016 3:30 PM

SSgt Stephen Lindsey — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:30:41 -0400

I just can't help to see where this may lead. Instead of medals and ribbons the Air Force will one day call them as "Frequent Flyer Awards" and refer to Air Force personnel as "Stratosphere Combat Aviators" - whoops, must leave out the word "Combat" - too war like. Hmmmm, what would the military call combat? "Armed Pugilistic Events" - it's all so lame. There's nothing dignified about these proposed changes. Nothing at all! No dignity - no respect.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 3:30 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:30:53 -0400

I guess the nouns "woman" or "women" are not gender neutral either. Hmmm!

Response by SSgt Jason Schad made Apr 12 at 2016 3:44 PM

SSgt Jason Schad — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:44:21 -0400

Do we need SJW nonsense invading the ranks of the military. Can our leaders please stop with the PC nonsense? If someone is so offended by having a affix of -man on the end of whatever they are (i.e. corpsman, airman, etc...), you are focused on the wrong things in the military. Leave those arguments for the social media/tumblr mobs. It is ridiculous that this is even a discussion.

Response by PO1 Jack Howell made Apr 12 at 2016 3:49 PM

PO1 Jack Howell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:49:23 -0400

Who cares about gender-neutral? The focus is, and should always be, on taking care of those you lead and accomplishing the mission. Those that don't like it can leave the Air Force and go somewhere else and cry about it.

Response by LtCol Mac McCarty made Apr 12 at 2016 3:52 PM

LtCol Mac McCarty — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:52:57 -0400

Wait. SecNav wants to change "Corpsman"? How many words do we have to shout now to get somebody up to treat our wounded? Even when the rate was Pharmacists Mate, the cry on the battlefield was "Corpsman! Corpsman!"

Response by SFC Jim Ruether made Apr 12 at 2016 3:54 PM

SFC Jim Ruether — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 15:54:10 -0400

Well ladies and gentlemen, The word woman has "Man" in it and the plural form women has "Men" in it so why the concern over a rank or title. These men and women know who they are and what the speaker is referring to when they use the term Airman or Airmen in the Air Force. If you feel foolish about calling a female corpman a Corpman then call them all medics, it works great in the ARMY.....simple huh? Geez I should join the Navy and straighten them out. Tell that politically correct E-9 that's all worried that this needs to be changed and ask him or her to retire. We have more important things to concern ourselves with like a livable wage and retirement for our Armed Forces personnel. better death benefits for the family survivors, better medical support when they come home with debilitating injuries, suicide prevention and support for vets suffering from PTSD and better care for our aging veteran population.

Response by SFC Robert Grandbois made Apr 12 at 2016 4:02 PM

SFC Robert Grandbois — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:02:46 -0400

Worse, Naval persons named Semen, I mean Seamen. The Navy is full of Semen, oh there it is again.

Response by MAJ James May made Apr 12 at 2016 4:37 PM

MAJ James May — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:37:12 -0400

Female Airman; She Airman ; Don't mess with something that is not broken. Women are wanting equality, keep calling them airmen

Response by SFC Derrick Graves made Apr 12 at 2016 4:42 PM

SFC Derrick Graves — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:42:50 -0400

Since the military in genera is deep in tradition, I would think that should be a determining factor with this topic to change an identity that has done no harm to women that have served in the Armed Forces. I would ask has their been a poll conducted by women across the military indicating they want such a change! Also what about the women who have served and received awards that have airmen, corpsman, seaman, etc imbedded into the award write up. Is there going to be an effort to go back and change the records of those service members to meet the current trend. It would be nice if we lived in a perfect world where everybody is the same, but that isn't reality!

Response by CCMSgt Mike Ramsey made Apr 12 at 2016 4:43 PM

CCMSgt Mike Ramsey — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:43:39 -0400

Already neutral

Response by MAJ James May made Apr 12 at 2016 4:47 PM

MAJ James May — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:47:01 -0400

How stupid and a waste of taxpayer money. The Greek word for man is for all mankind including women!

Response by MSgt John Carroll made Apr 12 at 2016 4:53 PM

MSgt John Carroll — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 16:53:55 -0400

It would still be Airman. There is nothing wrong with it containing "man". Woman ends in "man". are we doing to change that too?

Response by Cpl Gerard Babin made Apr 12 at 2016 5:01 PM

Cpl Gerard Babin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:01:17 -0400

WHy are we falling for this limp wristed pacifist propaganda. If there are those who do not like the historical references we have in the military my alternative would be "Discharge for good of service". We have too much "acceptance" out in the civilian world - its disgusting. Now these weak minded policies and thoughts are infiltrating our military.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 5:01 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:01:19 -0400

Alright Jim, How far are we taking this? Are we going to change the word women because men is in the name? Really, lets stop being a social experiment and lets be a military. Enough is enough.

Response by GySgt L. Kimpell made Apr 12 at 2016 5:08 PM

GySgt L. Kimpell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:08:39 -0400

casualty

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 5:14 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:14:27 -0400

I would suggest toughening up, sucking it up and driving on. It's a job title and has nothing to do with the individual performing the mission. The mission is what's important, not the title. We can twist, manipulate, and batter the English language into submission in an attempt to make it innocuous and inoffensive to all but we'll just end up communicating by grunts and clicks.......and somebody will still get butt hurt over those.

Response by CPL Robert Ray made Apr 12 at 2016 5:15 PM

CPL Robert Ray — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:15:45 -0400

How about "AirTechs". The Air Force is widely held to be a highly technical branch and many of the jobs are specialist jobs that could rate the term "technician". AirTech would be a simple term with the same syllable count as the current term, which is an important consideration for adoption for widespread use. Further, I'd suggest the initial enlisted ranks be changed to the term to help facilitate such a change. One potential side benefit is that junior enlisted may find increased morale and pride in the new rank titles. Who knows, the Navy may even take note. :-)

Response by SFC Michael Barnett made Apr 12 at 2016 5:24 PM

SFC Michael Barnett — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:24:53 -0400

Magots!

Response by Capt Arthur Williams made Apr 12 at 2016 5:57 PM

Capt Arthur Williams — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:57:36 -0400

Wo man...

Response by PO2 Joseph Hodges made Apr 12 at 2016 6:06 PM

PO2 Joseph Hodges — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:06:32 -0400

Airdale.

Response by SSG Connie Wilson made Apr 12 at 2016 6:14 PM

SSG Connie Wilson — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:14:28 -0400

I would suggest they leave it alone and the military toughen up. It is not refering to calling anyone a man it is a title, dont take this the wrong way but people are getting to soft and we need to go back to the old military.

Response by SGT Joseph Dutton made Apr 12 at 2016 6:15 PM

SGT Joseph Dutton — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:15:12 -0400

It should be left as is. If the rank and the MOS title originally has man in it then it should stay. Have to remember that men found the military. This Political Correctness is for the birds and a bunch of B.S. and when one changes things it cost a lot of money to rewrite everything to make reference to the change. So every Job Description, Regulation, Policy, Rules, The UCMJ and etc. will have to be rewritten.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 6:15 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:15:17 -0400

While Airman (or Seaman for the navy) is perfectly fine and includes all (as in MANkind, which is short from huMANkind.

I would also suggest Aviator, just because it sounds cool and kick-ass in the same way that soldier is better than armyman and marine is cooler than rifleman.

Response by PO3 Ron Stacks made Apr 12 at 2016 6:16 PM

PO3 Ron Stacks — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:16:58 -0400

How about Zoomie. ,And who's the fool thats worried about it ?

Response by CPT Dave Brest made Apr 12 at 2016 6:21 PM

CPT Dave Brest — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:21:13 -0400

Even " person" contains a masculine.

Response by SFC Brian Fejfar made Apr 12 at 2016 6:28 PM

SFC Brian Fejfar — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:28:21 -0400

Why change it? 'man' is part of 'woman'!

Response by SrA Branon Lamphere made Apr 12 at 2016 6:38 PM

SrA Branon Lamphere — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:38:21 -0400

Sky Warriors

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 6:46 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:46:38 -0400

You could call them soldier since the air force is derived from the Army Air corps

Response by SSG Max Goodman made Apr 12 at 2016 6:52 PM

SSG Max Goodman — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:52:57 -0400

Do not change the name just to conform to some one that has a butt hurt on them. These names have be around for a lot longer than these whiners

Response by PO2 Neal Harris made Apr 12 at 2016 6:53 PM

PO2 Neal Harris — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 18:53:06 -0400

Keep it an all male military and less issues will arise !!

Response by SFC Michael Barnett made Apr 12 at 2016 7:05 PM

SFC Michael Barnett — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:05:13 -0400

Just call them Magots!

Response by SPC Armando Punceles made Apr 12 at 2016 7:08 PM

SPC Armando Punceles — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:08:46 -0400

When trying to come up with a gender neutral title for Air Force members, the first title that comes to mind is "Air Head." Because there is no such thing as "gender neutral." You either have "a pair" and you're a man, or you don't have "a pair" and your're a woman. What's wrong with being called Airman or Airwoman? But, allowing myself to play this politically correct nonsense, I suggest, "Airguardian."

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 7:13 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:13:29 -0400

What is the possible benefit of changing this? How is gender theory somehow viable given that it is a recent concept versus what has worked for millennia?

Response by GySgt Charles O'Connell made Apr 12 at 2016 7:25 PM

GySgt Charles O'Connell — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:25:22 -0400

"Airperson" springs to mind. Too much importance is being place on this issue, oddly not by woMEN, but by persons who have found fault, where none exists, within our military force structure. In my time in service I don't recall having trouble telling my male Marines from my female Marines, nor do I think anyone in the Air Force will have trouble telling their male Airmen from their female Airmen.

Response by LTC Wayne Dandridge made Apr 12 at 2016 7:28 PM

LTC Wayne Dandridge — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:28:58 -0400

Corpsman could be called a combat medic as in the Army. Airmen could become aviation specialists or Air Force Specialists.

Response by SSgt Chuck “Gunz” Gundlach USMC Ret., MBA made Apr 12 at 2016 7:36 PM

SSgt Chuck “Gunz” Gundlach USMC Ret., MBA — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:36:13 -0400

Why do we waste time on more and more of these ridiculous PC pushes. Next they will be looking for a new word for huMAN or woMAN, et cetera. We need to focus on important shit while we can and leave this frivolous bull to idiots who have nothing better or important to do. An airman is an airman, just like a Marine is a Marine, an army dog is an army dog or a squid is a squid...lol.

Response by CW5 Randall Hirsch made Apr 12 at 2016 7:40 PM

CW5 Randall Hirsch — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:40:51 -0400

Keep tradition in, that is what makes the Marine Corps so great. It believes in tradition and teaches it in boot camp and lives it after boot camp.

Response by CPT John J. Dobise Jr. made Apr 12 at 2016 7:48 PM

CPT John J. Dobise Jr. — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:48:37 -0400

Well, at least this important issue won't arise once the member is killed, e.g. Army dead, Navy dead, Air Force dead.

Response by SSgt Stevan Auldridge made Apr 12 at 2016 7:50 PM

SSgt Stevan Auldridge — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 19:50:02 -0400

Perhaps we should take the "man" out of woman and just call them Woms? Man is also a generic term for human. If it offends you, your the problem not society.

Response by SFC Mikael Boyd made Apr 12 at 2016 8:21 PM

SFC Mikael Boyd — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:21:54 -0400

Does our leadership not have enough to worry about than this stuff leave it alone

Response by MAJ Will Sullivan made Apr 12 at 2016 8:26 PM

MAJ Will Sullivan — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:26:58 -0400

I'm sorry but I don't think there is a gender neutral term.......Airman. It is all encompassing. Lets stop with the PC crap already.

Response by CMSgt Cliff Wagner made Apr 12 at 2016 8:33 PM

CMSgt Cliff Wagner — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:33:34 -0400

Airman/Airmen is just fine ... there is no sexual connotation unless you decide to make it one!

Response by SFC Thomas Sierra made Apr 12 at 2016 8:37 PM

SFC Thomas Sierra — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:37:00 -0400

I would say all this PC is just stupid. Call it the way it has been for years!!! I am so tired of all these stupid A** Politicians trying to make something out of nothing!! Get a real job!!!

Response by MSgt Terry Grant made Apr 12 at 2016 8:41 PM

MSgt Terry Grant — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 20:41:05 -0400

Airman is what it has been and always should be. Tradition always first especially because the term is not exclusionary. Secondly, on another tilt I am really tired of these feminists who demand equality but are not required to meet the same physical standards as men so, they either have standards separate from the men's as in the USAF of they have the standard lowered as the Marine Corp has recently done with their 3 pull up requirement. Equal is equal not Equal but different. I may be old school but men and women are not equal in all aspects by design. I believe that women in combat are detrimental to the whole, not because they are incapable of performing but, because I as a man am programmed to protect women. I believe it is chromosomal and I believe that is a good thing, it is by design.

Response by CW4 Peter McHugh made Apr 12 at 2016 9:17 PM

CW4 Peter McHugh — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:17:23 -0400

Occurs to me the change will require a good deal of thinking and rewriting of documentation....let's see:

enlisted men and women could become enlisted persons....but then we would have to do something about the word "son", a male term, in the collective "persons" and a lot of other words. Human would have to become something else...and I haven't coined a politically correct replacement. There would eventually have to be consideration of a host of other terms and words....what will we do with menhaden, or menstrual cycle, or how will we cope with resolving the obvious bias of the word "manly" or the perceived incorrectness of "womanly"...? What term do we apply to appropriately include or exclude cross gender connotations, particularly where local jurisdictions amend laws to broaden access to traditional latrines (excuse the unintentional use of the gender biased term "broad"? I don't see an early end to this debate... nor a way to properly "man"age the outcome...

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:17 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:17:25 -0400

All due respect, but why change it. Women have been in the AF for years without a change. It's unfair to change the terminology for transgender people when you did nothing to acknowledge women all this time.

Response by CPT Richard Fematt made Apr 12 at 2016 9:24 PM

CPT Richard Fematt — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:24:59 -0400

this is another reason why I retired...there are far more better topics to discuss then these mundane topics about women in the service. I don't care what the Air force comes up with but they will be changing what worked for many years. This is another example of cow towing to a political agenda which will have far reaching impact on the force. Women do play an integral role
in the military but you can not keep changing due to political pressures from the Liberals.

Response by CPT Bruce Chester made Apr 12 at 2016 9:26 PM

CPT Bruce Chester — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:26:42 -0400

That's just ridiculous. Mature people understand that it is all inclusive. I'm surprise you guys wasted you time with this.

Response by MSgt Wayne Morris made Apr 12 at 2016 9:31 PM

MSgt Wayne Morris — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:31:02 -0400

Airstud or Airstudettes if female. If gender confused call them Airheads.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:37 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:37:28 -0400

That should be easy Like to be HUMAN is to a Airman so that does not say men ,Look at Women and now you have that still a problem or is it BS

Response by SPC Ann T. made Apr 12 at 2016 9:44 PM

SPC Ann T. — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:44:02 -0400

I am getting tired of all the PC BS. We didn't fight so long and so hard to be allowed to do what we can't, and we didn't fight to change all tradition to please some overzealous few. Leave names as they are, and work to be the best possible you so that you can honestly say you earned what you got. Quit trying to change things that have no effect on readiness and focus on making our military the best and most effective on the planet forever. We need to have the best artillery, the best infantry, the best air, land and water forces. The best personnel and finance and logistics. What you get BORN with should not be the issue, but what you make out of it. What you call a particular rank or position is more a matter of tradition and pride, not some foolish attempt to make all things gender neutral, or to keep some people with sand where it shouldn't belong happy.

Response by PV2 Chuck Adams made Apr 12 at 2016 9:44 PM

PV2 Chuck Adams — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:44:42 -0400

Airgendernueutral, corpsgenderneutral, etc

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:49 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:49:39 -0400

Lt Col Jim Coe Sir, no time and money should be spent on changing titles. Instead we need to expend resources on keeping our readiness up and preparing for upcoming conflicts around the globe.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 9:56 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:56:41 -0400

Soldier!

Response by A1C Joe Edwards made Apr 12 at 2016 9:58 PM

A1C Joe Edwards — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 21:58:33 -0400

Why don't these idiots just stop the BS already with their infiltrating every aspect of our lives with the politically correct nonsense Why don't you just start calling everyone asshole, because everyone unless they have had a colostomy has one

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:03 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:03:28 -0400

I would have zero problem with being called "airman." It is simply a term.

Response by MSgt Sandra McKinney Dent made Apr 12 at 2016 10:07 PM

MSgt Sandra McKinney Dent — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:07:45 -0400

AIRMAN - singular and AIRMEN - plural

Keep it simple, we are all AIRMEN, it is both a rank and a term of address, similar to MARINE.
It is not an identification of gender.

Response by Capt Michael Halpin made Apr 12 at 2016 10:15 PM

Capt Michael Halpin — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:15:08 -0400

How about BirdSoldiers?

Response by Cpl David Klassen made Apr 12 at 2016 10:21 PM

Cpl David Klassen — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:21:20 -0400

Keep things like they are. If people have a problem with the titles of military personnel then the choice is simple, don't join our ranks. We are and shall ever be; Soldiers, Sailors, Airman, and Marines. This political correctness makes me want to puke! Please keep it our of our armed forces and let us do our jobs.........

-Semper Fi!

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 10:36 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:36:24 -0400

Holy crap. Seriously? This is an issue that we really need to be thinking about right now? I am a female airman and proud to be one. To some femi-nazi who has never served a day in uniform in their entire life... Get your PC BS out of places it doesn't belong. Did you happen to poll the female airmen in the Air Force before you decided to force us down this road? Of course not because you obviously know better than us poor miserable military members. Are you freakin kidding me. We have an entire region of the world where people want to kill us and instead we are worried about what to call female members of the Air Force. We are so screwed...

Response by SSG Bill Cooke made Apr 12 at 2016 10:51 PM

SSG Bill Cooke — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:51:30 -0400

I do not do gender neutral. One is either male or female - nothing else except neutered. And Airman referrs to both. Or Airwomen if the is desired. I was in the early 70s and 80s and that is how I did it. I was Army and we were soldiers period.

Response by PO2 Michael Henry made Apr 12 at 2016 10:58 PM

PO2 Michael Henry — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:58:30 -0400

"Man" in a title has nothing to do with gender, it is a rule in the English language. The PC BS has to stop. Was rated a Fire Controlman and will never change that.

Response by CWO4 Al Heb made Apr 12 at 2016 10:59 PM

CWO4 Al Heb — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:59:22 -0400

Keep it simple, Just call them all AIRMEN just like when we write manules and orders or directives we put a cluase that states he or she means AIRMEN

Response by SGT Cecilia McMullen made Apr 12 at 2016 11:03 PM

SGT Cecilia McMullen — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:03:25 -0400

I am now a mail carrier. Previously people called us mailman. Perhaps a title that is not either gender specific would be better for example. Technicican, specialist, or adopt the army ranks since the air force did get its start in the army.

Response by SGT Marlon Cuevas made Apr 12 at 2016 11:27 PM

SGT Marlon Cuevas — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:27:37 -0400

Remove political correctness from our military and ranks. The military is not in the business of being politically correct generally speaking. I don't understand why anyone wearing a uniform is buying into this left wing progressive nonsense or attempting to push it down onto the service members. Political views LEFT or RIGHT should be excluded and completely absent when establishing new doctrine. Serving in the military is already challenging; why add nonsense to it?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 11:41 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:41:39 -0400

The only thing I can think of to help is "Airmember", a mix of crewmember and airmen.

Response by SPC Armando Punceles made Apr 12 at 2016 11:42 PM

SPC Armando Punceles — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:42:57 -0400

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 11:54 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:54:01 -0400

absolutely Fucking NOT. sick of this fucking ass kissing civi politically crap taking over a organzation thats sole reason for existing is to protect the weak and kill evil people, not lick everyones ass

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 12 at 2016 11:55 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 23:55:57 -0400

Air people. :D

Response by SPC Justin Prettiman made Apr 13 at 2016 12:32 AM

SPC Justin Prettiman — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 00:32:52 -0400

Zoomies?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 1:10 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:10:46 -0400

I would definitely be down to bring buck sergeant back in place of senior airman

Response by SGT Danielle Genack made Apr 13 at 2016 1:20 AM

SGT Danielle Genack — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:20:21 -0400

I agree with many other posters. I am a female, former Army couldn't give a crap less about gender neutrality. I know what I am. I know there are toolsheds who worry about stupid things like this.

Response by MAJ Rk Smith made Apr 13 at 2016 1:29 AM

MAJ Rk Smith — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:29:45 -0400

Not sure why this discussion continues to come forward. The Air Force is a team of men and women. Look closely at both words. Do you plan on changing the word, "Women"? The leaders at all position regardless of service respect men and woman the same. Any leader that says otherwise, should not be in a leadership position. Airmen should not be changed. If it does, shame on the Air Force for doing so.

Response by SGT Justin Scaffinger made Apr 13 at 2016 1:45 AM

SGT Justin Scaffinger — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:45:59 -0400

Why change it. There is nothing wrong with Airman. Just because someone gets upset about being called an Airman grow up. I didn't like being called a Private ether but I didn't gripe about it I just got promoted. Are some people so sensitive they can't handle it. Really!! Is that what this country coming to. What ever happened to the child saying sticks and stone may brake my bones but names can't hurt me. Oh I'm sorry if I offended someone. Not! I stopped caring what people thought about or said a long time ago. I get called a lot of different name and nasty words so what there just words. The only ones that matter is from my wife and kids. Everyone else just don't rate.

Response by BG Mike Bridges made Apr 13 at 2016 1:48 AM

BG Mike Bridges — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:48:41 -0400

Leave it alone.

Response by BG Mike Bridges made Apr 13 at 2016 1:49 AM

BG Mike Bridges — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:49:08 -0400

Leave it alone.

Response by MSgt Paul Jasko made Apr 13 at 2016 1:55 AM

MSgt Paul Jasko — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:55:57 -0400

How about "Airhead". Seriously Airman is just fine. Forget PC.

Response by Sgt Joe Quesada made Apr 13 at 2016 2:01 AM

Sgt Joe Quesada — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 02:01:34 -0400

Well let's see as SrA Stacey put it we can find man in a lot of different references that can be looked at as neutral. Last time I checked human has man in it too.

Response by PO2 David Allender made Apr 13 at 2016 2:16 AM

PO2 David Allender — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 02:16:46 -0400

If it has to be neutral, then how about "air-person?"

Response by MAJ Joe C Mayfield made Apr 13 at 2016 4:19 AM

MAJ Joe C Mayfield — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 04:19:39 -0400

I think "Airman" is fine. We have policeman, fireman, postman, why not airman?

Response by CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar made Apr 13 at 2016 4:29 AM

CPT Quentin von Éfáns-Taráfdar — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 04:29:09 -0400

Why not refer to all Air Force personnel as “Angels”? Angels are gender neutral and they have wings.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 5:36 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 05:36:04 -0400

Get this PC crap out of here, we are not here to make sure everyone gets a participation trophy for self esteem, we are here to protect our nation and defeat those whom threaten us. The very fact you proposed this leads me to believe that you need to be removed from any leadership position.

Response by AA Bryan Griffin made Apr 13 at 2016 6:24 AM

AA Bryan Griffin — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:24:29 -0400

Huge waste of time and resources the word "man" is in "woman"

Response by MGySgt Theodore Loepp made Apr 13 at 2016 7:06 AM

MGySgt Theodore Loepp — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 07:06:33 -0400

After 30 yrs in the Marines I can truly say I am at a loss of word at how PC the Military has become. I say leave it as is and focus on something more important. I mean if you're that sensitive that being called an Airmen offends you then you have some serious issues. But hey that's just my opinion

Response by GySgt Michael Neidy made Apr 13 at 2016 7:48 AM

GySgt Michael Neidy — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 07:48:18 -0400

I believe that we as a society have more important concerns than correcting every perceived politically incorrect name, word, phrase, or logo. Get over it and let's work on what's really troubling our great nation.

Response by SGT Ralph Swartz made Apr 13 at 2016 7:56 AM

SGT Ralph Swartz — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 07:56:37 -0400

How about this push to demasculinize the armed forces dies out.

Response by MSgt Bill Loveli made Apr 13 at 2016 7:59 AM

MSgt Bill Loveli — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 07:59:17 -0400

Who gives a shit what the air force does!

Response by CW3 Vernon Messer made Apr 13 at 2016 8:18 AM

CW3 Vernon Messer — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:18:22 -0400

The question implies there is no alternative to "gender neutral." So why participate in this exercise in political correctness? America, you are losing your soul to these do-gooders and speech and thought police.

Response by PO1 Harry Champagne made Apr 13 at 2016 8:23 AM

PO1 Harry Champagne — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:23:44 -0400

just a note on the article.i am a ret. merchant SEAMAN. the title SEAMAN is is applied evenly to male and female i think the term now used is MARINER. i am also ret. U.S. NAVY

Response by LCpl William Perry made Apr 13 at 2016 8:46 AM

LCpl William Perry — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:46:17 -0400

If this is what needs to be done then why not follow suit with the Corps and the Army and have Private stated as the lower rank. The title Medic could also be used but have 1,2,3...Etc after to reflect position such as hospital or field. I believe in the KISS concept.

Response by SMSgt John Clifford made Apr 13 at 2016 8:51 AM

SMSgt John Clifford — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 08:51:59 -0400

I'm so glad I'm retired. I can't believe they are bringing this politically correct garbage into the military.

Response by COL Timothy J Polaske made Apr 13 at 2016 9:02 AM

COL Timothy J Polaske — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:02:04 -0400

Stop the silly quest.

Response by SMSgt Steve Neal made Apr 13 at 2016 9:08 AM

SMSgt Steve Neal — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:08:58 -0400

I always called fellow airmen "Zoomies" if they are in flight operations, and "Boomies" if they work in ordnance, EOD, or air refueling. In the past we could have referred to USAF troops as "Roomies", but the new housing standard is migrating toward one-to-a-room to avoid gender-identity issues and sexual conflicts

Why waste another brain-cell or minute on erasing a proudly traditional service name?

Response by Col David Pope made Apr 13 at 2016 9:21 AM

Col David Pope — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:21:30 -0400

I'd suggest we leave Airman alone and push back to leave as is. There's a man in woman, isn't there? I'm part of a growing number of old farts who are sick and tired of all the BS also known as PC.

Response by LTC Marc King made Apr 13 at 2016 9:31 AM

LTC Marc King — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:31:21 -0400

What a waste of time when there are so many more important issues. How many women in Congress have dropped Congress Woman and prefer to be addressed as "Congressmen ..." And is "Senator" really gender neutral -- I think my head is going to explode. How many female actors in Hollywood have dropped the feminine gender title of Actress and prefer to be identified as an "Actor". The leadership of the DoD has simply lost their way... While they debate Corpsmen or Airmen the proficiency and war fighting capabilities are dwindling and they don't give a s**t. And this is so because you will never find any of them on the business end of an M4 Carbine or a 155mm Howitzer or heads down in a ditch as the A10's make a strike to the front of their position. Truly misplaced priorities.

Response by CPT Tex Pete made Apr 13 at 2016 9:33 AM

CPT Tex Pete — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:33:39 -0400

Mamby-pamby?

Response by CPT Tex Pete made Apr 13 at 2016 9:34 AM

CPT Tex Pete — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:34:56 -0400

From the looks of them, just don't call them late for dinner!
But seriously folks, how about Bull Dyke?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 9:39 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:39:58 -0400

Etymology teaches that the term man can trace it's roots, in part, to the Germanic phrases wǣpmann and wīfmann, which means male person and female person respectively. It was adopted by English speakers and shortened to just "mann" which is defined as "human being, person (male or female); brave man, hero; servant, vassal,". The word has since been shortened to being spelled with a single "n" roughly five or six hundred years ago. So the terms "airman", "corpsman", etc. are in fact already gender neutral.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 10:09 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:09:51 -0400

As a female in the aviation community in the Navy I was at one time called an Airman and the term never bothered me. My gender has nothing to do with my title. I think it would be a mistake to take man out of titles. We might as well stop calling Navy personnel Sailors since it conjures up images of drinking and womanizing. You can only change the military so much before you ruin it.

Response by MSgt Ani Stubbs made Apr 13 at 2016 10:33 AM

MSgt Ani Stubbs — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:33:34 -0400

Airmen

Response by Maj Ken Brown made Apr 13 at 2016 10:42 AM

Maj Ken Brown — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 10:42:55 -0400

Why is there a problem with this?

Response by CPO Don Lamb made Apr 13 at 2016 11:14 AM

CPO Don Lamb — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:14:51 -0400

There is no alternative. Do not destroy tradition, especially for the AF which has only 50 plus years of tradition. I am Navy and do not believe the Navy should destroy any further tradition. Tradition is part of what allow the core values to exist. Most core values are based on those traditions. Just my thought.

Response by CPT Jim Schwebach made Apr 13 at 2016 11:15 AM

CPT Jim Schwebach — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:15:02 -0400

Why not use the traditional titles for members of the services in question? I have, on occasion, heard Sailors referred to as squids. How does Radiosquid 2d Class sound? Or Deckape Third? As for our colleagues in the Air Force certain traditional tags like flyboy won't work, but there is one old tag that fits - Airdale. Airdale Basic, Airdale First, Airdale Etc. They virtually trip off the tongue.

Another way to deal with this obviously critical strategic problem of global proportions is for the "Navy's top enlisted leader" to stop wasting his time on this and find a real live issue to spend our money on.

Response by SFC Javier Pon made Apr 13 at 2016 11:44 AM

SFC Javier Pon — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:44:26 -0400

Why? This is about the dumbest thing I've read all year

Response by PO1 T.M. Ritchie made Apr 13 at 2016 11:51 AM

PO1 T.M. Ritchie — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:51:49 -0400

Only an idiot would join the Air Force or so I was told by many who had so that term should be considered. One sailor from west Texas I served with had joined the Air Force to see the world and spent his entire 4 years in Texas. He said the day he was discharged he went to the Navy recruiter and enlisted. He told the recruiter he never wanted to see Texas again and never did. He made E-9 in 16 years became a CWO-4 and served for 30 years and a friend of his from their time together in the Air Force who out ranked him when he left stayed in never made E-7 in 20 years of service. Only an idiot would do that.

Response by CPT Derwin Howell made Apr 13 at 2016 12:39 PM

CPT Derwin Howell — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 12:39:17 -0400

I think it's a crying shame that the armed forces is bowing down to liberal bull crap of "gender neutral" titles. IF women are so upset about it, why don't they remove "men" from "women" first. I take offense to being associated with such pansies.

Response by SGT Shahin Shahmir made Apr 13 at 2016 1:23 PM

SGT Shahin Shahmir — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:23:31 -0400

It depends on how far one is willing to go to alter the military tradition(s) we had over the years. Why fix something that's broken? But as far as " equality " is concerned, people should stop being overly sensitive about stupid little things that has nothing to do with winning the war on radicalism. So, with that being said, stop being sensitive, grow a pair, and worry about something that will impact the future of this nation.

Response by PO1 Kevin Arnold made Apr 13 at 2016 2:01 PM

PO1 Kevin Arnold — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:01:24 -0400

How about Air Warriors or Air Peacekeepers but should keep it simple like it already is. For centuries these are just names. Like another post said there is word man in woman. No longer call a woman a woman would you just say lady or mam.

Response by SGT Robert George made Apr 13 at 2016 2:17 PM

SGT Robert George — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 14:17:23 -0400

I suppose when our political correctness becomes perfect in 20 years or so it will solve all the worlds problems and walk around like happy faced sponge bobs....

Response by CPL Daniel Nimrod made Apr 13 at 2016 3:10 PM

CPL Daniel Nimrod — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:10:08 -0400

Airman is just fine. Why fix it if it ain't broken? For that matter corpsman should be kept as well.
If the lower enlisted cannot handle the structure the way it is then its two to call them civilians.
I used to say. "Airforce is a great alternative to joining the military." Until I actually had two airmen under my supervision.
They worked harder than any two of my soldiers and anytime I wanted something done right and in a timy manner I always fell back to them.
The Airforce is not a joke.
There's a reason they are so picky about the requirements to join their brach.
Fly High Airforce.
I got nothing but respect.

Response by CPL Alfred Martinez made Apr 13 at 2016 3:11 PM

CPL Alfred Martinez — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:11:21 -0400

Airhead...
Birdies
Chickenhawks
List is endless

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 3:34 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:34:41 -0400

Here is the problem as I see it. It seems we worry about BS poliicies that have little consideration about our troops.

Response by 1LT Steve Dunlap made Apr 13 at 2016 3:37 PM

1LT Steve Dunlap — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:37:43 -0400

Wing nut works for us 11B types. It is gender neutral

Response by 1LT Steve Dunlap made Apr 13 at 2016 3:39 PM

1LT Steve Dunlap — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:39:59 -0400

I also think the Air Force has several issues that need addressing such as sexual assault and the cheating scandal and readiness of our nuclear silos, but hey if this is where you want to spent your time Go Air Force

Response by Amn Tito Stevens made Apr 13 at 2016 3:40 PM

Amn Tito Stevens — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:40:39 -0400

Is the name of rank now also going to be PC or will it remain Airman 1st class, 2nd class, third class. I concur with Col. Swegel. It's a sad day in this country when we are worried about things like this. Keep them as is or do you want to succumb to the PC masters and make it Airperson?

Response by COL Theresa MercadoSconzo made Apr 13 at 2016 3:41 PM

COL Theresa MercadoSconzo — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:41:00 -0400

Air Professional

Response by MSgt Bill Loveli made Apr 13 at 2016 3:54 PM

MSgt Bill Loveli — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 15:54:49 -0400

Who gives a shit what the air force does!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 4:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:04:07 -0400

Heroes of the sky, if it had to change.

Response by MSgt Jim Bain made Apr 13 at 2016 4:12 PM

MSgt Jim Bain — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:12:55 -0400

The title of any Air Force member in those 3 enlisted ranks should always be... "airmen", is the liberal political correctness of the Obama years going to change that also???? What's next, if a former crew member in the Navy mentions, "I served on the " USS Franklin D Roosevelt", SHE was a great ship", look out brother, you better say, IT was a great ship to serve on, you might offend some bureaucrat who knows "0" of Navy tradition! Why, lately, are these people wanting to change the way traditionally the military has operated for decades, (political correctness) and it seems this is all taking place within the last few years. Leave well enough alone, especially in the Air Force, the USAF which became what it is, in 1947, does not have the traditions the other older services have, at least let them have that one.
People in the mid-east are trying to wipe us off the face of the earth, should we not be worrying about that instead of this crapolla ?

Response by SGT Rocky Venti made Apr 13 at 2016 4:29 PM

SGT Rocky Venti — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:29:24 -0400

"Hairmen"

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made Apr 13 at 2016 4:31 PM

Lt Col Jim Coe — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:31:28 -0400

I've done a non-scientific analysis of the results of my question and come to some conclusions RP members may find interesting:
1. A great majority of RP members hate political correctness.
2. Many RP members don't have a sense of humor when it comes to political correctness and military tradition.
3. Most RP members who responded believed terms like "airman" and "seaman" are already gender neutral.
4. Many RP members overlooked the fact that the gender-neutral discussion started with the Navy and thought it was an AF issue.
5. Alternatives with the most "votes" were aviator and airperson.

Thanks to everybody who responded!

Response by SGT Lloyd Burge made Apr 13 at 2016 4:38 PM

SGT Lloyd Burge — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:38:43 -0400

I can't resist this one. I have to give another service branch a jab. How about Airhead?

Response by TSgt Cory Harrington made Apr 13 at 2016 4:39 PM

TSgt Cory Harrington — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:39:08 -0400

in the navy they are sailors, in the army they are soldiers, in the marines they are jarheads..oops, devil dogs, in the air force they are airmen...this is how they are referred to in the collective..you can personalize a little with " air man" or "air woman"(singular, not plural)..but the rank of lower enlisted is airman, and the whole air force (enlisted and officers) are airmen..it also differentiated the ranks when we split from the army in '47 (not private,corporal)....don't even consider "AIR-PERSON"...we are huMAN...not huWOMAN or huPERSON....get real people, not ridiculus

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 4:56 PM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 16:56:44 -0400

If that is the case that they want to remove the word man from woman or women, then do we call them "WO"? That will end up being "HO" and we can't call them that. No more seamen in the Navy that's going to be hard for them to swallow haha. Come on it's been like this since 1947 and longer for the Navy, why change it now? Other branches will call us "AirHeads"

Response by PO2 Jim Burger made Apr 13 at 2016 5:31 PM

PO2 Jim Burger — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 17:31:06 -0400

Chairforce Participant.

Response by SGT Chris Birkinbine made Apr 13 at 2016 6:05 PM

SGT Chris Birkinbine — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:05:55 -0400

I think some issues are worth fighting for. This is not one of them. It is a product of language that the word man has more than just its gender definition. Man has historically been used to refer to all the human race. Man comes from huMAN , or all of huMAN kind.

We should spend more time on actual issues of equality and inclusion. That being said, I don't think we need terms to distinguish between branches on that level. Soldier is a sufficient descriptor in my mind for all military men and women.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 6:07 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 18:07:33 -0400

Space cadets

Response by SFC Richard Bennett made Apr 13 at 2016 7:22 PM

SFC Richard Bennett — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 19:22:14 -0400

Air head

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 8:12 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 20:12:07 -0400

Sir, It should stay the way it is.
Here is the definition of "men"
noun, plural men.
1. an adult male person, as distinguished from a boy or a woman.
2. a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man.
3. the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind: Man hopes peace, but prepares for war.
4. a human being; person: to give a man a chance; When the audience smelled the smoke, it was every man for himself.
5. a husband.
6. a male lover or sweetheart.
7. a male follower or subordinate: the king's men. He's the boss's number one man.
As you can see, just like the statement "you guys", when used in generalization context it carries a general meaning and not a gender specific meaning. So no need to make it something its not.
Saying Airmen is just as respectful to women as it is to men.

Response by CPO David Siglin made Apr 13 at 2016 9:16 PM

CPO David Siglin — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:16:10 -0400

Where ever the "Men" is replace it with "mate" as for the ratings use the such as Corpsman, it would fit in with all the others in use such Aviation Machinists mate and so on. in the case of the airfare they should go to what the Army and Marines do, just call them Private, Sargent and so on just drop the "Air" altogether.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 9:46 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:46:54 -0400

Honestly, sir, nothing could possibly win over that term. Once an Airman, always an Airman. That is who I am, what I am, and it is what I always desire be. To me, changing the term "Airman" to something more gender friendly would make just much sense as changing the term "woman" to something more gender friendly would.

Response by 1LT Michael Bowen made Apr 13 at 2016 9:57 PM

1LT Michael Bowen — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:57:13 -0400

I remember my drill sergeants had a huge vocabulary for each of us. They would be gender neutral. The problem then is that they were not really that nice.

Response by Sgt Judy Leonard made Apr 13 at 2016 10:51 PM

Sgt Judy Leonard — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:51:40 -0400

Airhead

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 13 at 2016 11:09 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 23:09:09 -0400

Airmen and Airwoman are what we use in CAF.
Soldier. Tanker. Bombardier. Sailor....

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 12:06 AM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 00:06:44 -0400

None.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 12:29 AM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 00:29:41 -0400

Ok I need to say this. I am an Air Force Veteran, I am wondering where all the Air Force Leaders are? I am amazed that NOT one senior NCO or General officer is standing up for the History and Customs of the United States Air Force. The Title "Airmen" reflects the Types of jobs that we do and the "AIR" we defend. I have not seen or heard anyone especially female "Airmen" complain about being call Airmen. The problem is coming from the outside of the Air Force like ALL the civilians that have no idea on how the Military works. The Men and Women that serve this great nation have more character and are stronger then anyone else in this country. I classify Airmen like I classify Seamen for the navy and Marines for the Marines and Grunts for the Army. I have never heard anyone complain about the other services. I am proud to be an Airman even though I am not retired and I left before 20 years. People that are offended are to scared to serve and are haters of ALL military, period. But they are the first to call us when they need to be saved or protected. These antagonists are the ones that want things for free and they want to be controlled by the government. Or they want free stuff and not earn anything. I and others earned the title AIRMEN. The ones that want to change our speech are wimps and weak emotionally stunted. ((I was going to say PU**Y) But I may get banned or even call a bigot for that word.) Take a look at Emory College that had to set up "SAFE ZONES" because some one wrote "TRUMP 2016" on the sidewalk. That should explain everything we need to know about those that are offended by the Word(s) AIRMAN, TRUMP, BOSSY or any other statement that makes one fell hurt because I and other are smarter and use our brain to examine facts and not live in a fantasy world. Lets stand up to them and END POLITICAL CORRCTNESS or what I like to call CENSORSHIP OF SPEECH and THOUGHT. GOD Bless all AIRMEN past, present, and Future. Long live the US Air force.

PS here is a little something for all of you to listen to.
https://youtu.be/zzI3-73ELxw

The Warrior Song - Aer Vis (video with lyrics)

This is the same video as The Warrior Song - Aer Vis, but with added lyrical overlays so you can read along. To the United States Air Force, with our thanks....

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 1:06 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:06:00 -0400

We do not have this problem in the Army. Soldiers are soldiers.

Response by MSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 3:19 AM

MSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 03:19:58 -0400

Air person

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 4:30 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 04:30:29 -0400

Corpsman have been called corpsman since the beginning of the rate. If someone is so concerned about being called a Corpsman or airmen then they should choose a different rate. The Navy need to stop paying people for all this silly nonsense and get back to the things that are important.

Response by LTC John Wilson made Apr 14 at 2016 6:13 AM

LTC John Wilson — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 06:13:22 -0400

Fairies?

Response by SGT David Brimmer, MS, MPA made Apr 14 at 2016 8:59 AM

SGT David Brimmer, MS, MPA — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 08:59:08 -0400

I served in the army. We're soldiers. Dating back to the dawn of ancient military formations, soldiers were males. I have always viewed the term as having a masculine connotation. That said, female soldiers are still soldiers, female marines are still marines, and female sailors are still sailors. So what if the term has a masculine connotation? It's because these professions have a masculine history. Airman is an entirely acceptable term for someone serving in the air force.

This wouldn't be such an issue if we spoke a language like Spanish or Italian, where there are very distinctly masculine or feminine words. If "the airman" were "el airman," it would be clear that it was the word that was masculine, not the individual in the uniform. (No, I'm not saying we should be speaking Spanish. I'm merely referencing a point.)

Response by SGT Jose Perdelia-Torres made Apr 14 at 2016 9:05 AM

SGT Jose Perdelia-Torres — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:05:01 -0400

Please allow me to offer up nothing as an alternative. No disrespect to you Sir, but the political correctness needs to just cease. Isn't it funny how everything seems to suddenly bother people, it has become very commonplace and laughable. Things that have been a certain way for years, suddenly are labeled as bigoted, anti-this or anti that, etc. It's high time the citizens of this Nation of The United States of America; join collectively and shout a big "Screw You" to all those seeking to undermine and change everything.

Response by SSgt Bruce Wood made Apr 14 at 2016 9:55 AM

SSgt Bruce Wood — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:55:37 -0400

I think it should be left the way it is. Women are a part of the program and they should fit in and go by the same title as men do. That should not be considered discriminate or derogatory. That is just the way it is and everything doesn't have to be politically correct. I think time is more important than trying to figure something like this out. Man or men is found in women/woman and man/men. There shouldn't be a problem with it. I think there is a lot more problems facing our country than this. I think most women would agree with this too.

Response by SSG Jeremy Todd made Apr 14 at 2016 10:07 AM

SSG Jeremy Todd — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:07:21 -0400

airpeeps

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 12:41 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:41:39 -0400

If we are truly going there I would say aerospace warrior

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 12:46 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:46:31 -0400

There's really only two options:
- American Rage Machines
- Meat Servos
If we are going for accuracy: Shut Up and Color Specialists (SUACS), but that doesn't sound cool.

Response by SrA Christopher Clukey made Apr 14 at 2016 2:12 PM

SrA Christopher Clukey — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:12:33 -0400

There is no need to make this change, and no benefit from doing so. When I met my wife, she was an Airman First Class. I did not mistake her for a man. She did not have any doubts about her womanhood.

Seriously, consider this: What kind of airman (or service member) is the woman likely to be who is ate up about the title "Airman?" Is she likely to be highly mission focused, keeping attention on the big picture of the mission rather than nitnoy details like a rank title? Is it likely she would be a person confident in her abilities and training if she's also the type of person who hears "airman" and feels somehow degraded? Is this person more or less likely to be offended by completely innocent comments or actions in the workplace which are in no way intended to insult or diminish anyone, and use up time, energy and goodwill correcting such "injustices?" And please, feel free to go back through those questions and ask them about a male airman who is ate up about women perhaps having to hear the horrible word "man." Is that guy focused on what defenders of the world's greatest nation should be focused on, or is he too busy looking for problems to address real issues and mission needs?

Response by SFC Michael Poole made Apr 14 at 2016 2:16 PM

SFC Michael Poole — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:16:41 -0400

Keep it just as it is. I am all for gender rights and equality but the words woman and women both have the words man and men in them and that doesn't take anything away from them. Traditions are important and should be considered before a constantly changing "political correctness".

Response by Dr Bruce Stewart made Apr 14 at 2016 2:23 PM

Dr Bruce Stewart — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:23:43 -0400

The "man" in "airman" is as gender neutral as the "man" in "mankind". If we are going to be so pedantic, let's consider removing the "man" from "woman" and the "male" from "female" ... mmm, perhaps not such a good idea.

Response by SFC Joe Haralson made Apr 14 at 2016 3:17 PM

SFC Joe Haralson — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:17:18 -0400

So do we now call them a Woperson? Feperson?

Response by CPT Michael Maag made Apr 14 at 2016 3:35 PM

CPT Michael Maag — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:35:48 -0400

QUIT Pussy foootin around. if they dont like. it.. then dont join..

Response by SGT Michael Lawler made Apr 14 at 2016 5:27 PM

SGT Michael Lawler — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:27:46 -0400

I am of the belief, why change the title/rank for political correctness? Time & effort have been wasted countless times on meaningless tripe. Instead of wasting effort, spend productive & positive measures on training for enhancing personnel capabilities to defend our interests!

Response by Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 5:31 PM

Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:31:37 -0400

point. Airpoint.

Response by Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 5:33 PM

Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:33:02 -0400

AirPoint--CorpsPoint--

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 5:33 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:33:40 -0400

Using a thesaurus for the word crew, these were the best options company, corps, crew, squad, team, and troop. However you do have a definition of the word "man": a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex. This also includes the plural form "men"

Response by MSgt Dale Baker made Apr 14 at 2016 7:18 PM

MSgt Dale Baker — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:18:21 -0400

Really? More PC Bulls**t? So the enlisted leader needs a good bullet for his EPR, huh? Just leave it alone. It doesn't need to be changed. Haven't we had way too much PC in America as well as the military? Just leave it as is. The term "man" is used as a general term for all people. It has no gender meaning at all. There has been enough irrational changes to the military. Please stop the silliness already!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 7:51 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:51:12 -0400

We changed fireman to firefighter, but Air fighter might be a possibility, but it sound like an aircraft rather than a person. Airperson is ridiculous. Lets just leave it the way it is. Its getting too silly!

Response by MSG Don Burt made Apr 14 at 2016 7:57 PM

MSG Don Burt — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:57:06 -0400

This Political Correctness "CRAP" is what has caused our country to sink to the low level that
it's in now....Sorry, but PISS ON THAT CRAP! I'm fed up with the minority of idiots who can't stand
right ways as opposed to non-conformity. Someone with the Right Stuff needs to take the lead and get the Military back to where it once was. Screw the Liberal, Left-Wing Socialists Humanists that are guiding the Pentagon. Once the useless flesh and his cronies in the white house are gone, then MAYBE, JUST MAYBE a true God fearing Patriot will certainly stand up and just do
the right thing. This gender neutral "CRAP" has got to go, along with those idiots that think up that crap! If I have offended one of you PC piss ants, too bad!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 8:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 20:30:20 -0400

If we can can't use airman or airmen what are we going to change woman, women and female to? This is all silliness!!!!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 9:30 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 21:30:37 -0400

All jobs being gender-neutral has nothing to do with political correctness. It's because women have been in harm's way serving in combat roles for the past 15 years, so there's no good reason to deny them the opportunity to serve under the combat jobs that were previously restricted. With that point being considered, there's no good reason to turn this into an issue of political correctness by changing nomenclature. Pay respect to tradition, and expect all servicemembers to do the same.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 12:48 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 00:48:35 -0400

Get over it and stop the plague of "political correctness " spreading through this country. Military is going to have "safe place" at the rate this is going.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 1:18 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 01:18:30 -0400

Leave it alone! That was the way it started/founded and it is a traditional thing that should not be changed just because someone is offended by it. If they are offended by being called a Airman/Airmen, then maybe they joined the wrong force. This is getting ridiculous. This should not even be up for discussion.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 5:24 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 05:24:56 -0400

Honestly, I am disappointed that this is even an issue. I have talked to many women about this subjext, and I haven't found a single one that is offended by being called an Airman. It is part of our heritage. We need to to stop trying to please every person that has a complaint, because it is simply not possible. So there are a few that are offended by the word Airman. What about all the people that will be offended if the word "man" is taken out of everything?

Response by SPC Daniel Joslin made Apr 15 at 2016 8:57 AM

SPC Daniel Joslin — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 08:57:01 -0400

Call 'em all dirtbag. That fits everyone and covers every rank

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 11:11 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:11:52 -0400

Being former Navy and than joining the ranks in the Army. I have to say keep it the way it is. But if change has to happen then I would suggest Airedale solider sailor or whatever their rank is. If people find seamen airmen privet offensive than don't join.

Response by PO2 Gail Grace made Apr 15 at 2016 12:38 PM

PO2 Gail Grace — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:38:54 -0400

I wish some of these radical feminists could understand that "man" in airman, fire man, police man, corpsman, etc etc, is more intended a designation of being human, than gender specific, and if they are so hyper sensitive of their feelings to feel slighted and their delicate self esteems just be crushed from such woeful abuse, perhaps they are too delicate with withstand the rigors of military service (or common adulthood even).

Response by SGT Mark Washburne made Apr 15 at 2016 12:49 PM

SGT Mark Washburne — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:49:51 -0400

Air Troopers

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 3:06 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 15:06:52 -0400

Honestly folks, there are other things that our government, our services and our leaders need to focus on other than this. I wish I could see vote results on how many people think that the name of an enlisted rating defines gender. This kind of political correctness just goes to show how politicians that have never served try to influence the military and move away from traditions that have spanned generations.

Response by Lt Col Rick Helmer made Apr 16 at 2016 10:43 AM

Lt Col Rick Helmer — Sat, 16 Apr 2016 10:43:03 -0400

Even the words "human" and "woman" have the root word "man" in them…it's not about misogynistic oppression of the other vital and indispensable half of the Ying and Yang that is humanity but simply the English language...some traditions shouldn't be changed – Airman is one of them...Stop focusing on the word and look at the function and proud history that belongs to both men and women of the U.S. Air Force…if there was a simple language fix for the challenges of the human condition I’d gladly take it but making-up new words for a language misses the point…while some things shouldn’t be done just because it’s traditional, and we should always look to improve our military Services, ignoring our heritage, culture and traditions can also take the focus off our core focus to fly, fight and win…Rather we need to institute policies that respect and celebrate the gender and differences that balance the human condition…changing a title won't improve recruiting, promotion rates or change gender inequality...only sincere action can do that. Vive la différence!

Response by MSgt Dennis Dudley made Apr 16 at 2016 11:12 AM

MSgt Dennis Dudley — Sat, 16 Apr 2016 11:12:34 -0400

Let's stop the political correctness!! Airman it is.

Response by MSG Carolyn Hunter-Drake made Apr 16 at 2016 9:09 PM

MSG Carolyn Hunter-Drake — Sat, 16 Apr 2016 21:09:41 -0400

Airman is fine. It's only offensive when some female wants to say "I'm an Airwoman, of Band of Sisters", no, some things just sound right.

Response by SFC Charles Temm made Apr 16 at 2016 9:46 PM

SFC Charles Temm — Sat, 16 Apr 2016 21:46:00 -0400

I'd say someone obviously needs to get his priorities in order. That the top enlisted man in the Fleet is worried about PC terms for job descriptions tells me a lot about him. I'm not surprised the AF is working on such though given it's historical concern for fluff and stuff in the public eye.

Response by CPT Maria Burns made Apr 17 at 2016 2:01 AM

CPT Maria Burns — Sun, 17 Apr 2016 02:01:41 -0400

Shiny happy people, aircrew or airperson.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 17 at 2016 10:04 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 17 Apr 2016 10:04:16 -0400

Warrior typically was used by Marines. Soldier by the Army.
Airman if need be replaced would be tough. I just saw your post. I am interested in this topic very much. As I am a SOF Soldier and former unit CDR. This is the tip of the ice berg in a sense. I would consider warrior if possible or sky fighter. Sir, when do you need to have this?

Response by Sgt Den OBrien made Apr 18 at 2016 12:32 AM

Sgt Den OBrien — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 00:32:26 -0400

" Airholes"

Response by Sgt Michael Johnson made Apr 18 at 2016 1:16 AM

Sgt Michael Johnson — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 01:16:37 -0400

So by reading the posts let's summarize the officers and enlisted alike answers to this important issue that the Navy's top enlisted leader is wrestling with. There is no need to change this term for our members. As SrA Nadine pointed out "man" is in woman. "Airman" similar to "Policeman", "Fireman:, and etc.does not mean it is a group of men but a group of people who have the same job duty. To save lives. Any moron who doesn't understand this should not be in the military. They just wouldn't have the common sense to survive in this elite group of brave men and women. Please make sure the General or whomever it may be gets this message loud and clear! It's time to deal with more serious issues than this.

Response by TSgt Charles Holmes made Apr 18 at 2016 4:21 PM

TSgt Charles Holmes — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:21:38 -0400

Leave it alone. Let the women bitch about it. ANd change nothing. If they want to be equal, then they should be required to have equal rank structuring. Airmen is all.

Response by MSG Mitch Dowler made Apr 18 at 2016 6:49 PM

MSG Mitch Dowler — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:49:51 -0400

The Air Force already did the hand wringing over this in the Clintopian era when DADT was created. It was the new politically correct era and only right wing crazies believed it would lead to gay marriage and transgenders in the military.

Response by SPC Nathaniel O. made Apr 18 at 2016 7:42 PM

SPC Nathaniel O. — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 19:42:04 -0400

Maybe the air force can take battle buddy as appearently thats to insensitive of a term in the army for those who have not deployed...

Response by CMSgt J. DeForrest III made Apr 18 at 2016 9:47 PM

CMSgt J. DeForrest III — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:47:13 -0400

Worked with many great women on active duty. They were great Airmen!

Response by PO1 Sean Reynolds made Apr 18 at 2016 10:36 PM

PO1 Sean Reynolds — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:36:16 -0400

Have we as a society become so sensitive and P.C. that we really need to remove "man" from every term/name in the military? It's pathetic. So when the full blown "transgender" are allowed in the military, the males whom say they are female (oh shit got to change that word too) get to use the female Body fat and PRT figures?

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2016 6:42 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Apr 2016 06:42:51 -0400

Many many women are proud as hell to be called "Airman."

This is just bullshit, P.C., internet traffic fodder for ad revenue and drama.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2016 3:13 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:13:03 -0400

I guess if the military wanted to truly become gender neutral, they will stop addressing individuals as "Sir and Ma'am". Especially if one is not sure of which they want to be addressed by. I guess we can address everyone by "HOOAH", that way it isn't offending anyone. PC is killing the productivity and the heritage of the military.

Response by SSgt M. Har made Apr 24 at 2016 6:13 AM

SSgt M. Har — Sun, 24 Apr 2016 06:13:48 -0400

Airmen and Women both end in "men" do we need to change that name too?

Response by SSG John Jennett made Apr 24 at 2016 9:02 AM

SSG John Jennett — Sun, 24 Apr 2016 09:02:54 -0400

I wouldn't change any of them. There is a lot of history behind those rank titles. We need to stop catering to everyone's sensitivities and concentrate on the things that are important. Like the defense of our Country and how the services are being decimated systematically because of funding.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 6:42 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 06:42:31 -0400

So if this happened in the army. Would we refer to female privates as vaginas??

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 1:52 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:52:51 -0400

Airtech Grades 1-4, Medtech grade 1-4

Response by MSgt Jason McClish made Apr 25 at 2016 8:15 PM

MSgt Jason McClish — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 20:15:20 -0400

Airmen!!!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2016 11:01 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:01:56 -0400

Call them Coast-Guard

Response by SGT Richard H. made Apr 25 at 2016 11:06 PM

SGT Richard H. — Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:06:21 -0400

Airheads?

Sorry. Sometimes I just can't help being like this.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 5:56 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 17:56:38 -0400

I bet the people offended are not even in the Air Force.

Response by CMSgt David Lewis made Apr 26 at 2016 8:09 PM

CMSgt David Lewis — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 20:09:02 -0400

Just pick the Army or Marine ranks then standardize across the DoD...

Response by CPO Albert Kennison made Apr 26 at 2016 10:12 PM

CPO Albert Kennison — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 22:12:36 -0400

Why does everything have to be gender neutral now days? Stop with all the crap!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 11:16 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 23:16:51 -0400

Birdy boys

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2016 11:17 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 26 Apr 2016 23:17:04 -0400

Birdy folk

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2016 9:29 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 09:29:49 -0400

"Man" is already gender neutral, being descended from Sanskrit for "person". "Woman" is the only gender specific word, literally meaning "female-person."

Response by Sue Bankston made Apr 27 at 2016 11:52 AM

Sue Bankston — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 11:52:32 -0400

Once again the 'minority' is causing problems for all. The tail is wagging the dog. Why do we continue to let those minority whiners dictate? Not only is this whole thing stupid but consider the cost of making the changes. Let's give all airmen (both male and female) a raise in pay instead.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 27 at 2016 3:35 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 15:35:41 -0400

Air woman? Wtf

Response by MSgt Greg Diehl made Apr 27 at 2016 7:02 PM

MSgt Greg Diehl — Wed, 27 Apr 2016 19:02:45 -0400

From my days in Minot (85-88) I seem to recall that "Wingnut" is/was gender neutral.

Response by SPC Gregory Carr made Apr 28 at 2016 2:16 PM

SPC Gregory Carr — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 14:16:53 -0400

Were all men in some way. Men and women. The term "man" denotes a species, not a gender(i.e. mankind). This PC stuff has gotten waaaaaay out of hand.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2016 2:57 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 14:57:34 -0400

Is this a serious question? This is exactly why our military is in trouble. We get wrapped around the axle about minutiae & silly nonsensical issues and the mission gets lost in the haze of pettiness. How about we focus on doing our jobs efficiently & effectively and forget what we're called, or if this & that is fair, or if I'm offended or if I have good enough bullets for my OPR/EPR.

Response by SP5 Carl Harrison made Apr 28 at 2016 4:26 PM

SP5 Carl Harrison — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 16:26:49 -0400

Air force has but 3 category of personal -pilot- flight crew- ground support.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2016 6:32 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:32:48 -0400

How about "superior man". It is critical to leave the space in this title. It ensures that all know that men are superior. Also it is a well known fact that men have a bigger brain than woman which means we are smarter.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2016 6:44 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:44:47 -0400

Please focus on important issues. (Read: recapitalization, manpower shortages....)

Response by SrA Chris Spencer made Apr 28 at 2016 6:59 PM

SrA Chris Spencer — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 18:59:23 -0400

I guess we could all be airheads , sounds neutral enough :)

Response by SGT Mitch Kress made Apr 28 at 2016 7:21 PM

SGT Mitch Kress — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:21:07 -0400

Goodby America hello Idiocracy cause that's where we are all going. Gender neutral stuff is retarded and so are the people pushing for it. If you have an innie use the women's if you have an outtie use the mans.

Response by PO1 Gregg Mundy made Apr 28 at 2016 7:45 PM

PO1 Gregg Mundy — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 19:45:07 -0400

First of all, I would like to go on record as saying that the person or persons that ever came up if this topic of discussion is, in my estimation, a complete and total idiot. (My opinion) When we are born we were born Male or Female and grow to be Boys and Girls, then, hopefully, responsible Men and Woman. Never heard or seen a gender neutral person. YOU ARE ONE OR THE OTHER!!

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Apr 28 at 2016 10:47 PM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 22:47:29 -0400

From the Dictionary. Man- noun; A human being of either sex, a person. Verb; work at, run, or operate (a place, or piece of equipment) or defend (a fortification).
An aircraft is manned, meaning it has a human operating it. A person who operates an aircraft is called an Airman. The term is already gender neutral.

Response by SSgt John Voss made Apr 29 at 2016 1:07 AM

SSgt John Voss — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 01:07:32 -0400

Grow a pair of balls. This is the military not kindergarten.

Response by MSgt Mark Roca made Apr 29 at 2016 1:23 AM

MSgt Mark Roca — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 01:23:01 -0400

First we must address the micro-aggressions of Mr., Mrs., and Ms. being applied to human beings.

Response by SGT Ron Egan made Apr 29 at 2016 8:46 AM

SGT Ron Egan — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 08:46:02 -0400

Airman, piss on PC

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 29 at 2016 4:31 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 16:31:02 -0400

Airman, Seaman, Fireman, Corpsman, and etc. are just titles, and this political correctness is starting to go a bit far. Should we start referring to ourselves has Homo Sapiens, male/female, just to avoid offending the delicate sensibilities of someone who doesn't have the sense of mind or strength of character to understand and accept that it is just a title and doesn't define us as a woman or a man. Leave the job titles alone.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 29 at 2016 6:15 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 18:15:53 -0400

I would suggest growing up, or leaving the military and returning to the safe space in your parent's basement.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2016 12:48 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 00:48:24 -0400

How about we simply address each other as "Comrade", like in communist countries of the Cold War era?

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2016 12:49 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 00:49:39 -0400

How about addressing each other as "comrade", as was done in Cold War era communist countries?

Response by Cpl Ed Mitchell made Apr 30 at 2016 11:40 AM

Cpl Ed Mitchell — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 11:40:07 -0400

Sir, without being gender based I think a acronym would be accepted without offending anyone.
(AFP) Air Force Professional as with rank standards AFP 1 or AFP Chief so on and so forth,

Hope this gives a little help on the brainstorming,

Respectfully,

ED Mitchell

USMC

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2016 7:44 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 19:44:08 -0400

Clearly the way to go is cute and cuddly: Air-Mouse, Air-Hamster, Air-Kitten and Air-puppy. We can change our broad term description to Flying Squirrels. Then again, that might offend Peta members or something and we can't have that.

Response by SPC Frank White made Apr 30 at 2016 8:38 PM

SPC Frank White — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 20:38:03 -0400

When is all this PC BS going to end? America was founded on offending people.. Get over it grow some thicker skin and move forward..!

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 30 at 2016 9:27 PM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 21:27:36 -0400

This is a massive waste of resources... If you have a problem with it then dont sign up, nobody held a gun to your head and forced you to sign...

Response by PVT Todd Little made Apr 30 at 2016 10:28 PM

PVT Todd Little — Sat, 30 Apr 2016 22:28:26 -0400

Airmen

Response by SPC Jim Senner made May 1 at 2016 9:03 AM

SPC Jim Senner — Sun, 01 May 2016 09:03:03 -0400

Airfolks? Airblacks/Airwhites? Airiyans? Air-uns? Airheads?

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2016 12:41 PM

A1C Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 May 2016 12:41:12 -0400

Airmans creed, airmans coin, airman leadership school (ALS). We air american AIRMAN. PERIOD

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2016 6:31 PM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 May 2016 18:31:00 -0400

It's hard to believe we still drop bombs on people, it might offend someone.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 1 at 2016 11:35 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 May 2016 23:35:10 -0400

I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that we deal with the manning issue that has people working insane hours and shifts to meet the flying schedule so that leadership gets the EPR bullets they want. Oh wait, I said "man" in manning. So...um...personing?? *shakes head*

Response by MSG Rogelio Watson made May 2 at 2016 12:12 PM

MSG Rogelio Watson — Mon, 02 May 2016 12:12:39 -0400

Don't see no harm in it, as long as you identify the concerned gender or describe either males or females. Not a war stopper!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 2 at 2016 7:45 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 May 2016 19:45:01 -0400

I respectfully recommend Air Heads? Because it's AIR Force and you do HEAD Counts in the military.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made May 3 at 2016 7:27 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 May 2016 07:27:23 -0400

Airman, it doesn't need to be changed. Society needs to stop being so stupid.

Response by MSgt Jerry Miranda made May 3 at 2016 11:20 AM

MSgt Jerry Miranda — Tue, 03 May 2016 11:20:11 -0400

Air "Warriors," Medical Warrior, Infantry Warrior, Administrative Warrior, so on and so forth

Response by A1C Joe Edwards made May 5 at 2016 12:55 PM

A1C Joe Edwards — Thu, 05 May 2016 12:55:40 -0400

OK when does the nonsense end with all this political correctness? Seriously, why should the military bend to the will of the jagoffs who can't leave what has worked for so many yeas alone? The military is a fighting force, even if you do paperwork, you are one of our warriors. There are enough rankings and titles in each service to be confusing from branch to branch, why don't the PC police try and do something new, and concentrate on fighting and winning to get us out of the situation(s) we are in by lame ass politicians making a fortune of the spilled blood of our soldiers. It's all about money, and how they can pocket it, or waste it to justify their means. If we truly wanted "world peace", you have to Eliminate the problems in the way. Our government is corrupt and has been for decades, even possibly from the 1880's when we ended up with 2 sets of laws, Constitutional, and Corporate. We are never going to be a free country until we go back to our constitutional foundings

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2016 1:08 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 May 2016 13:08:09 -0400

I'm not a member of the Air Force, but it seems to me that an extremely small percentage of the Air Force, or Navy for matter, has any sort of issue the Airman or Seaman title or anything of the sort. Almost all of the enlisted are worried about more important things such as there jobs, their units, and their lives. This PC campaign, while having good intentions, are seriously drawing valuable monetary and mental resources from mission readiness and improvements that could be made elsewhere.

Response by PO2 Damien Holliday made May 6 at 2016 1:16 AM

PO2 Damien Holliday — Fri, 06 May 2016 01:16:29 -0400

Airtroop

Response by MSG John Wirts made May 8 at 2016 2:03 AM

MSG John Wirts — Sun, 08 May 2016 02:03:09 -0400

I started out in U.S. Civil Service the man issue came up. I was originally an Instrument Repair Man, as I progressed I became an Electro-Mechanical Gyroscopic Instrument Repairman. Then the PC POLICE came in The Instrument repairman, became an Instrument Repairer. All titles had man replaced with er.Wasted a whole lot of scarce funding to satisfy the feminazi's ip out at the mention of "man or men"

Response by LCpl Jim Pleace made May 12 at 2016 12:28 PM

LCpl Jim Pleace — Thu, 12 May 2016 12:28:55 -0400

And that's what they're paying the wonks to do? How about going about the business of defending our country instead of servicing a politically correct agenda? What a load of PC bullshit

Response by MSgt Jim Bain made May 26 at 2016 1:20 PM

MSgt Jim Bain — Thu, 26 May 2016 13:20:04 -0400

Leave it the way it is, the only problem is, is if you decide to make it one!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2016 2:01 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 May 2016 14:01:20 -0400

Ok this is stupid. What's next, taking out the "man" out of woman?

Response by SrA Chris Spencer made May 26 at 2016 4:12 PM

SrA Chris Spencer — Thu, 26 May 2016 16:12:39 -0400

Airman and Seaman are are already gender neutral by long time military practice. To my knowledge no woman in the military has ever been confused about her gender or ever been mistaken for a man because of this title or designation. We are as a group , Airmen or Seamen ,.... and the singular versions of these titles are Airman and Seaman. There is no gender discrimination or sexism going on here.

Response by SGM Thomas Adderley made May 26 at 2016 5:01 PM

SGM Thomas Adderley — Thu, 26 May 2016 17:01:26 -0400

NONE. We are all soldiers, sailors and or airmen. No need to change. All of this gender and equality talk is balderdash. We do not need to be concerning ourselves with the equality and gender issue as seen in the politically correct civilian establishment. All we need to do is get on with soldering and taking care of business. There are no gender or equality problems when the bullets begin to fly.

Response by 1stSgt Al Herter made May 27 at 2016 9:21 PM

1stSgt Al Herter — Fri, 27 May 2016 21:21:46 -0400

nonsense!

Response by MSgt Zachary Wiederstein made Jun 1 at 2016 6:20 AM

MSgt Zachary Wiederstein — Wed, 01 Jun 2016 06:20:31 -0400

They tried this back in '98 some of the ranks that were seriously considered were "Thrust" and "Lift". I kind of like the sound of Thrust Wiederstein. just saying.

Response by AB Zach Jenkins made Jun 2 at 2016 11:31 AM

AB Zach Jenkins — Thu, 02 Jun 2016 11:31:46 -0400

Are we then going to change the Airman's Creed? Seems like people need to pull up their grown up pants and suck it up. We aren't the one percent for nothing. We are above this petty bullshit.

Response by GySgt Charles O'Connell made Jun 3 at 2016 8:55 AM

GySgt Charles O'Connell — Fri, 03 Jun 2016 08:55:16 -0400

I would not suggest any alternative. The AF Chf of Staff publishes an order stating all enlisted members, male or female, will be addressed as, Airman. There ya go, problem solved! Wait, you say Airman is not gender neutral? If you apply it to males and females, it's no longer gender specific, simple.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2016 4:25 PM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 04 Jun 2016 16:25:23 -0400

I don't understand the apprehension to simply examining the question. We're the only branch with a gendered pronoun, there's nothing wrong with *asking* if there's a viable alternative–especially if women and/or gender non-conforming folks have input. Additionally, I have even less understanding of the antagonistic relationship some people have with "political correctness"; as if being considerate of the language you use when taking to or about people unlike one's self is somehow unbecoming.

Response by SPC Gerardo Aguilar made Jun 9 at 2016 4:37 PM

SPC Gerardo Aguilar — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 16:37:41 -0400

Well, when I had to work with some AF guys attached to our light infantry unit, I had never herd a pair of whinier little girls. Of course when you count the AF unit that was at Mannheim, Germany that complained that their m-4'S were too heavy to carry around for post guard duty. So, in my experience none of them should ever be referred to as men in any way.

Response by MSG Rogelio Watson made Jun 16 at 2016 6:32 PM

MSG Rogelio Watson — Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:32:54 -0400

It was always an American tradition, so why change it. Once you address the situation to a female Air person, just be specific. If it ain't broken, don't fix it!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 17 at 2016 2:09 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 17 Jun 2016 02:09:28 -0400

WOMEN is there not MEN in that word??????? Enough said

Response by A1C Michael David Severson made Jun 23 at 2016 4:31 PM

A1C Michael David Severson — Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:31:53 -0400

I am going to take a different vector on this topic... If anyone is still Active duty, and has some pull at their Command level, Pentagon, JCS, etc., This is what really NEEDS to be said:

At what time in modern military history, has gender neutrality TRULY mattered when it comes to Mission effectiveness, unit cohesion, leadership and discipline in the ranks, or esprit de corps?

This politically-correct nonsense is tinkering with the very heart and soul of the Armed Forces. The last time I swore my oath to "support and DEFEND the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC," I drew a line in the sand.

With graying hair and some wisdom learned in my advancing years, I realize that asymmetric warfare comes in subtle nuances, cyber assaults, etc.

These subtle and not-so subtle skirmishes that seek to unravel the fabric of our nation's warriors through dissension, factionalizing, marginalizing, polarizing, adverse rationalizing and the narcissistic attitude behind all this nonsense is just as treacherous in my book, as the Tokyo Rose broadcasts of Japanese propaganda were aimed at undermining/subverting the morale of our troops in WWII.

Psyops is nothing new, but it is most insidious when it is a tactic applied within the ranks or from above them. As a Oath-keeping veteran, my responsibilities did not cease when my enlistment ended. I am responsible for what I know, and to do something about it!

When I enlisted 37.7 years ago, neither the JCS, NCA nor the Secretary of the Air Air Force came to my barracks to ask me how they should run MY Air Force. Why? Because it is ***NOT*** "MY Air Force!" I became part of a Mission-oriented TEAM in which my part was intended to seamlessly connect and integrate into the tapestry of that team.

One of the 3 pillars of the US Air Force is: "Service before self." That deals a death-blow to this narcissistic, self-importance-at-the-expense-of-all-else-because-I'm-entitled rationale. Whatever and whoever is behind propagating all of this nonsense is an ideological enemy of our military institutions.

Of course, to counter such a threat, we must take scaled and appropriate measures to stop this insidious attack against the very fabric of our Armed Forces' ability to stand united. Our voice, a pen or a keyboard can be sufficient enough to accomplish victory in such a battle.

So, from the least of the enlisted ranks, to the highest ranking officers, I am sounding a call to stand up and call this nonsense into account, and to neutralize this threat into non-existence. The core of our calling is to be uncompromisingly focused where we all started: With the Oath and our Constitution. This is where the buck stops for us as well.

You are free to re-post, share, and publicize what I have said on one condition: WHEN, not IF these protagonists come to attack me, I expect you who are also Oath-keepers to stand with me to watch/keep my back.

The subtlety of this matter may seem innocuous for now and even humorous, but given time, you will see the truth of their intentions. Let's be a proactive deterrent of this issue NOW, rather than find ourselves on the defensive down the road. The current battle for gender-neutral bathrooms should be enough of a forewarning!

Let's rumble and roll!

MD "Doc" Severson :-)

Response by CCMSgt Milton Jenkins made Jun 28 at 2016 4:13 PM

CCMSgt Milton Jenkins — Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:13:39 -0400

Vote and elect Donald Trump and then we can put this mess away.

Response by CDR William Kempner made Oct 4 at 2016 10:42 AM

CDR William Kempner — Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:42:24 -0400

Airperson.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 1:28 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:28:19 -0400

Airperson BUT shorten it to AP. i.e AP Jones, AP Smith. What is the Navy doing? Theirs is Seaman. Are they using ":Seaperson". They could go with "SeaP" i.e SeaP Jones, SeaP Smith. They really need to make rank insignia consistent. Navy has 2 stripes for an E-1, Air Force has 3 stripes for an E-4. If they get that straightened up, they could all go with Private, PFC, Corporal , etc, etc. lol, I imagine calling ANY Sailor a private or Airman a private or corporal borders on blasphemy on this forum.

Response by PV2 Glen Lewis made Oct 6 at 2016 2:01 PM

PV2 Glen Lewis — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:01:18 -0400

Colonel I don't have an alternative but I'm so tired of this PC crap I could scream. It's like learning a second language.

Response by CMSgt Jay Pine made Oct 6 at 2016 3:10 PM

CMSgt Jay Pine — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 15:10:04 -0400

That's as dumb as asking, "What would be your gender-neutral alternative to referring to the human race as 'mankind'".

Response by SMSgt John Clifford made Oct 6 at 2016 7:46 PM

SMSgt John Clifford — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 19:46:41 -0400

AIRMAN. Simple. We don't need to give up our tradition for so called political correctness.

Response by SSgt Chuck “Gunz” Gundlach USMC Ret., MBA made Oct 13 at 2016 1:00 PM

SSgt Chuck “Gunz” Gundlach USMC Ret., MBA — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 13:00:01 -0400

Marine, Soldier, Seaman and Airman are all gender neutral. Leave something that is not broke or killing anyone alone. We need to stop categorizing and separating people by sex, color, creed, etc…we are all Americans, and a Marine is a Marine, a Soldier a Soldier, a Seaman, a Seaman and a Airman a Airman… in the military your individualism begins with your name, not your rank or service.

Response by Col Dona Marie Iversen made Oct 14 at 2016 11:10 PM

Col Dona Marie Iversen — Fri, 14 Oct 2016 23:10:32 -0400

Our nation is at war with one another, the political arena is like an asylum, homelessness and drug addiction is sky rocking, child abuse is out of control, 50% of marriages ending in divorce, need I go on?
And the @#$% PC commandos have our titles as a priority? Lets change Airmen to Air People, Air Heads or because the Air Force is air and space, let's call them Space Cadets.

Some people have their priorities OUT of WHACK.

I was an Airman & damn proud of it - to us it's gender neutral . Why not spend the funds on equipping them with what they REALLY need and it's sure as hell not a new title!

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2016 12:48 PM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:48:45 -0400

How about returning the USAF back to the US Army and we just call them all soldiers?

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 24 at 2016 2:21 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:21:50 -0400

I would like to focus on more important things such as the overwhelming debt, the fact the world is on fire, and that our own countrymen are losing their patriotism. If these things are not fixed, we will not have to worry about being politically correct, just learning a new language under a new regime.

Response by PO1 Glenn Roesener made Oct 27 at 2016 12:41 PM

PO1 Glenn Roesener — Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:41:57 -0400

I know, how about we just drop the term "woman", "lady", or "female" from our vocabulary, and just call everyone "Man".

Wait, no good? Why? Is it because we aren't recognizing women anymore? Or maybe it's because in our push to boost the downtrodden we're simply switching sides, changing the names of what we all know to be true, and changing whom we choose to put down and marginalize. The subtle mentality that "men are tough, and can take the malignment of being emasculated better than women" has snuck in here. It is every bit as sexist and more-so than the gender-descriptive "Airman" or "Seaman". We are not improving the culture, society, or species by this faddish mockery of "sensitivity".

Men are men, women are women. No one misunderstands that when you say "Airman" (or, in my experience, "Seaman"), you can be referring to either gender. Nobody misunderstands this. The military must communicate, and it must do so in as efficient a way as possible. to change everything we say to a new modality just to accommodate a sensitive minority adds confusion and is a distraction to the business of defending our country. it is the antithesis of efficiency. It has nothing to do with military strength, fitness, or readiness, and is therefore a side-issue to keep unnecessary senior personnel busy.

If this is what our leaders are thinking about in their pretty offices, I have no faith that they still remember how to provide tactically superior leadership in battle. They've become accustomed to a life of comparative ease and will fail us when someone punches us in the mouth.

Response by SPC Jason Sharp made Oct 29 at 2016 11:34 PM

SPC Jason Sharp — Sat, 29 Oct 2016 23:34:24 -0400

This is an absolutely ridiculous topic, started by ultra liberals and feminists. There is nothing wrong with being called by your chosen profession. Those with a problem are just changing how we say it and then saying it's offensive. To use the example in the question, corpsman is pronounced CORPSman, feminists say it corpsMAN. That is the basis of their offense. There is no gender in any of the military ranks or titles. AIRman or SEAman only designate you as a lower enlisted of the Air Force and Navy respectively. If feminists have such a problem with -man in their titles what else should we start calling woMEN?

Response by PV2 Glen Lewis made Nov 3 at 2016 1:51 PM

PV2 Glen Lewis — Thu, 03 Nov 2016 13:51:12 -0400

I already gave a response to this but just soldier (Army), Marine(Marine), (Squid not intended to be offensive, y'all know what you use among yourselves) so whatever term that is common to all Navy or Coast Guard, to the Air Force I don't have one but I'm sure they must have one common among themselves, just use it. Damned PC crap! My personal favorite; get a damned grip and do your frikkin' jobs. What you get called in Basic is enough to curl your hair so be glad your not insulted to that degree.

Response by SSgt Bob Lamary made Nov 3 at 2016 2:17 PM

SSgt Bob Lamary — Thu, 03 Nov 2016 14:17:17 -0400

I can not understand why this line is continuing so long, since most every comment I have seen over the past months has been against such a "politically correct" change. We are what we are and what we have been and done in our service. Why don't we focus our efforts on the things that are not happening that are most vital, like adequate training and maintenance...our pilots and others are not getting enough flight time (we are lucky that deployed units get time in the air) and too many aircraft are cannibalized for parts to keep others flyable, but using already used parts means more maintenance sooner; this is not really a cost savings in the long term and makes us less ready to respond to a national emergency. We will not be ready for emergencies if we keep waiting for planned deployments to give aircrews flight time and make all aircraft flight worthy. We need to change the political culture that has put us in this dangerous position, especially those of us who are no longer in active status and are more free to be politically engaged. And we all need to vote for those who will support our needs next week.

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Nov 3 at 2016 7:38 PM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Thu, 03 Nov 2016 19:38:18 -0400

Airheads? Hey, I used to be one of them 35 years ago.

Response by A1C Joe Edwards made Nov 17 at 2016 12:01 PM

A1C Joe Edwards — Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:01:31 -0500

This PC crap has gone way too far, time to just nip it, and get back to being a military. Are we going to fight the enemy or each other?

Response by MSgt Christopher Schoen made Nov 17 at 2016 12:09 PM

MSgt Christopher Schoen — Thu, 17 Nov 2016 12:09:21 -0500

Bring back Buck Sergeant and Warrant Officer instead of dicking around with the PC Airmen shit.

Response by PO1 John Johnson made Nov 25 at 2016 8:14 AM

PO1 John Johnson — Fri, 25 Nov 2016 08:14:18 -0500

In response to the criticism in this thread directed at JCS and the top leaders of the 5 branches of the US Military, I offer this point of view: These Officers (and quite a few E-10's) are completely under the thumb of the President, SECDEF and SECNAV, Politicians, and myriad numbers of other "Political" civilians with their fingers in the pot stirring up the shit so to speak, and are caught between a rock and a hard place. Like every other member of the military who plans to make the military a career, I suspect that the vast majority of these upper echelon leaders are torn between "doing what is right for their Country and their respective Service" and preserving their own six's (which is a natural "human condition"). Can you imagine being told by the Pres. and SEC DEF/NAV to swallow and the consequences be damned, no matter how bitter the pill is? Now, I'm quite sure there are a few "Blue Falcons" in the Leadership mix who will swallow with a smile on their face, ask for more, and then gladly push the pill over their cliff to begin it's decent through the ranks; hopefully at those ranks in the Leadership they are few and far between. It's a direct result of complete civilian control over the Military, which is enshrined in the Constitution, and a necessary evil to prevent a Military Dictatorship. The Service Leadership is duty bound to obey the orders of the Commander in Chief (unless the orders are illegal). Our only recourse is to continue "pushing back" from below, and voting for a President who understands the role of the Services and respects the traditions and ceremony of the Services (which I hope just occurred). I also believe that issues like "the application of PC" are designed to take our eye off actual problems (both Military and Civilian) and focus it on an "manufactured problem" elsewhere, a common Political ploy used for millennia. Just my opinion; take it or leave it.

Response by SSgt Jim Gilmore made Nov 25 at 2016 9:36 AM

SSgt Jim Gilmore — Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:36:54 -0500

Political correctness run amok.....

Response by MSgt John McGowan made Nov 25 at 2016 10:04 AM

MSgt John McGowan — Fri, 25 Nov 2016 10:04:27 -0500

LT COL Leave it alone. Do you gets people bitching about it or is just some BS PC crowd that wants it. You will never get the sexes to Change in most cases and there will always be men and women. Besides I like the sound of women. The AF started this crap way long ago and you telling me it''s not complete yet. Someone is setting on their butts.

Response by SFC Michael Barnett made Dec 1 at 2016 11:58 AM

SFC Michael Barnett — Thu, 01 Dec 2016 11:58:09 -0500

I am getting tired of all this Gender, Sexuality Stuff. The problem is that those that believe in these things have to push it on us. I really liked the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy. It does not bother me as long as I am unaware of it. Why do they have to make me agree with them. We need to delete this post and get rid of the issue all together. Go back to the way it was. That is a private issue between the person and his or her partner. I don't tell you about my sex life with my wife! Why should I have to hear that you are doing something different!

Response by LCDR Bruce Sheppard made Dec 1 at 2016 1:48 PM

LCDR Bruce Sheppard — Thu, 01 Dec 2016 13:48:19 -0500

since the current Administration is about to become history, maybe we can forget about this nonsense, 99.99% of our military were not complaining (and who cares about folks outside the military), let's get on to more serious topics

Response by Sgt Wayne Harper made Dec 8 at 2016 11:35 AM

Sgt Wayne Harper — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 11:35:12 -0500

This is all bull capooty. You are what your genitals show, penis- male, vagina- female, not what the stupidity that comes out of your mouth says.

Response by Dr Bruce Stewart made Dec 8 at 2016 12:01 PM

Dr Bruce Stewart — Thu, 08 Dec 2016 12:01:10 -0500

This is becoming ridiculous. What's next? To remove "man" from "human" and "men" from "menstruation"? And then "man" from "woman"? Airman and corpsman are job titles, not gender identifiers. Similarly a manhole is an object, separate from the gender of who might enter. It is however problematic in finding a gender-LGBT-neutral revision to "MAN OVERBOARD!" While trying to figure out the correct call, the whole situation might become moot.

Response by LCpl Jim Pleace made Dec 22 at 2016 11:44 AM

LCpl Jim Pleace — Thu, 22 Dec 2016 11:44:25 -0500

Somebody please put the knife through the jugular on this post. It is a waste of oxygen. Time to stop the breathing and start the bleeding

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2016 1:52 AM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 30 Dec 2016 01:52:14 -0500

wing-wiper

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2017 7:51 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Jan 2017 19:51:33 -0500

What are we going to do about Mankind, Manual, Manager, Mangrove, and Manatee? But while we are on the subject, what is the First Lady going to be called if a woman is elected, or a homosexual wins?

Some people have way too much time on their hands.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2017 7:11 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Jul 2017 19:11:10 -0400

Flyingpeople.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2017 7:46 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Jul 2017 19:46:16 -0400

Airman.

Response by Sgt Mike Sanderson made Jul 9 at 2017 9:35 PM

Sgt Mike Sanderson — Sun, 09 Jul 2017 21:35:49 -0400

Leave it alone...sheesh

Response by A1C Joe Edwards made Jul 13 at 2017 2:00 PM

A1C Joe Edwards — Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:00:38 -0400

Why does the military feel they need to cater to these liberal, politically correct, morons. This is the military, when you sign up, you are not your own property, you belong to uncle Sam. You knew the names and ranks of the branch of service you signed up for, so accept it, you know that liberal thing called acceptance? The Liberal thinking has caused so much damage to our society by their appeasement thinking which they are finding out through other studies how they are weakening the genders. There are women who will fight along side men, and in a situation, why confuse fellow soldiers with a too long hyphenated politically correct label to get their fellow soldier's attention? This is another attempt at the globalist theory to make everyone equal, it won't work, and our fighting ability will suffer

Response by SSgt Art Arvizu made Jul 13 at 2017 2:42 PM

SSgt Art Arvizu — Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:42:49 -0400

Airheads

Response by SSgt Art Arvizu made Jul 13 at 2017 2:47 PM

SSgt Art Arvizu — Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:47:09 -0400

SkyFlake

Response by SSgt Boyd Welch made Jul 27 at 2017 12:53 PM

SSgt Boyd Welch — Thu, 27 Jul 2017 12:53:21 -0400

Thank you Colonel. One mission. One force.

Response by MSG Don Burt made Jul 27 at 2017 5:23 PM

MSG Don Burt — Thu, 27 Jul 2017 17:23:29 -0400

I would strongly suggest that the Military MAN-UP and don't screw with a system that has worked for ions of time. Secondly, all this is Liberal, PC crap and there's not a place for that type of change, PERIOD!

Response by SPC Rick Norris made Jul 27 at 2017 5:27 PM

SPC Rick Norris — Thu, 27 Jul 2017 17:27:56 -0400

"Airedales."

Response by MAJ Stephen Barnard made Jul 28 at 2017 3:03 AM

MAJ Stephen Barnard — Fri, 28 Jul 2017 03:03:27 -0400

Civilian

Response by Sgt Den OBrien made Jul 28 at 2017 10:44 AM

Sgt Den OBrien — Fri, 28 Jul 2017 10:44:39 -0400

The big distraction continues. The "most pressing" topics lately are transgender b.s. and "gender neutrality". These false flags are being pushed by the alinskyites to keep the confusion to the fore.

Response by MSgt Jeff Stephens made Aug 3 at 2017 1:02 PM

MSgt Jeff Stephens — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 13:02:49 -0400

There is not alternative. I mean are they going to change the word woman because it has "man" in it? Airman covers both men and woMEN!

Response by TSgt Thomas Monaghan made Aug 3 at 2017 2:24 PM

TSgt Thomas Monaghan — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 14:24:25 -0400

It has been acceptable so why change. The last 3 letters in Woman are Man so what'ts the issue?

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Feb 23 at 2018 4:21 PM

SSG Edward Tilton — Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:21:40 -0500

Airhead would be more gender neutral

Response by 1SG Dave Carello made Mar 14 at 2018 11:05 AM

1SG Dave Carello — Wed, 14 Mar 2018 11:05:40 -0400

SOLDIER!!!

Response by SGT Morrison (Mike) Hogwood made Mar 14 at 2018 11:47 AM

SGT Morrison (Mike) Hogwood — Wed, 14 Mar 2018 11:47:30 -0400

I do not think that it is possible to change some descriptions into a neutral, but as we have been been taught some words are used in a masculine form when no feminine or neutral word, you use the masculine form,I feel that some jobs descriptions will no be able to change,the military has gotten way to PC,if you feel you can not do your job based a name, it may be time to leave the military,I thought the military mission was accomplish the mission.What a waste of money for something so petty.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Mar 14 at 2018 5:14 PM

SGM Bill Frazer — Wed, 14 Mar 2018 17:14:55 -0400

birds!

Response by SSgt Gerald Davis Jr made May 22 at 2018 4:49 PM

SSgt Gerald Davis Jr — Tue, 22 May 2018 16:49:33 -0400

Wing Wiper

Response by SMSgt Lawrence McCarter made Jun 3 at 2019 1:24 AM

SMSgt Lawrence McCarter — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 01:24:15 -0400

The PC people need to butt out, Woman or Man, Airman applies to them all and I've yet to find a female member "Airman" that has a problem with that title. When Men and women work side by side doing the same job don't come from the outside and think You know what they want or whats best for them or what is "Politically Correct" Once again the people that work the jobs, Men and women are the last ones asked. They are all Airmen on the same team, both Men and women, We don't need the divisions being forced on the civilian world by people that just don't know any better. Special treatment and whining about terminology that people Who are already there and have no problem with it is getting pretty sickening !

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jun 3 at 2019 11:30 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Mon, 03 Jun 2019 11:30:07 -0400

First, remove the men part of women and woman, then move on to titles.

Response by SPC Charles Sewell made May 6 at 2020 8:54 AM

SPC Charles Sewell — Wed, 06 May 2020 08:54:32 -0400

Why is it necessary to remove man. It's universal kinda like human. They are taking this thing too far. It should be understood airmen includes both genders is that so bad? What, man hole cover , should become woman hole cover? Good grief already.

Response by SPC Charles Sewell made May 6 at 2020 11:28 AM

SPC Charles Sewell — Wed, 06 May 2020 11:28:03 -0400

I see the question was posted a while back. Thank you for posting it sir, I just had to make comment on it. Seems like the gender thing is always a hot issue and sometimes it gets a bit ridiculous.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Aug 26 at 2021 7:17 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Thu, 26 Aug 2021 07:17:14 -0400

"Airpersons of unspecified gender"