Posted on Dec 26, 2022
Why the Marine Corps may nix gender identifiers for drill instructors
7.4K
331
46
25
25
0
What are your thoughts on a study's recommendation to the USMC to drop gender identifiers (Ma'am/Sir) for recruits during basic training?
A recent article* in the Marine Corps Times highlighted some of the suggestions that the University of Pittsburg given by a a study the Corps commissioned back in 2020. The study was in response to a Congressional directive to make boot camp training fully coed.*
The study was to “analyze combinations of gender-integrated training and make recommendations for models that integrate genders to the greatest extent possible while continuing to train Marines to established standards”.
First, to be clear, this is apparently only directed at recruits during basic training. This is not a, "the entire Corps needs to drop gender identifiers" thing.
Second, the study is not some "woke-fest" report and covered a wide variety of topics from recruit injury rates and training deficits to boot camp staffing challenges and male-female interaction*.
Third, according to the study (have to go by that ... it's been a LONG time since I or most of you were at basic...), “The Army, Navy, and Coast Guard effectively de-emphasize gender in an integrated environment,” the report says. “Instead of saying ‘ma’am’ or ‘sir,’ recruits in these Services refer to their drill instructors using their ranks or roles followed by their last names."
So, to the pertinent question - what's your view?
There is some basis to the rational in the report that, "Gendered identifiers prime recruits to think about or visually search for a drill instructor’s gender first, before their rank or role.” In other words, gender before authority.
The Army, Navy and Coast Guard already do this with things such as, "Yes Drill Sergeant!", "No Drill Sergeant!" and "I'm a worm not worthy of sharing the same ground as you Drill Sergeant!" instead of "Yes Ma'am!", "No Sir!", and "I'm a worm not worthy of sharing the same ground as you Ma'am!". Again, this recommendation is only for basic training and wouldn't go Corps-wide.
On the other hand, as Col. Howard Hall, the chief of staff for Marine Corps Training and Education Command, related - it’s not as simple as tweaking training-level policies.
“It’s not something we would change overnight,” Hall said. “We’ve got a history of ‘sir, ma’am, sir, ma’am.’ If we change something at the root level, how do we make the corresponding change at the Fleet Marine Force?"
His point is cultural change is very tough - while it is imperative that cultural change regarding a grave injustice happen regardless of how tough or the costs, does it merit a change in something like this?
Thoughts?
Keep it clean and try to comment on the merit and facts. I know there will be knee-jerk reactions on both sides of the topic which is why I tried to lay out all the facts I was able to dig up on the matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Recent article - https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2022/12/20/why-the-marine-corps-may-nix-gender-identifiers-for-drill-instructors/
* Direction to Corps for boot camp to be fully coed - https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2020/09/01/marines-lay-out-plans-for-gender-integrating-boot-camp-at-the-platoon-level/
* Side note regarding the male-female interaction - I didn't realize the Corps was the service with the youngest average age and the lowest percentage of female members (I knew the fewest, but didn't realize the youngest).
A recent article* in the Marine Corps Times highlighted some of the suggestions that the University of Pittsburg given by a a study the Corps commissioned back in 2020. The study was in response to a Congressional directive to make boot camp training fully coed.*
The study was to “analyze combinations of gender-integrated training and make recommendations for models that integrate genders to the greatest extent possible while continuing to train Marines to established standards”.
First, to be clear, this is apparently only directed at recruits during basic training. This is not a, "the entire Corps needs to drop gender identifiers" thing.
Second, the study is not some "woke-fest" report and covered a wide variety of topics from recruit injury rates and training deficits to boot camp staffing challenges and male-female interaction*.
Third, according to the study (have to go by that ... it's been a LONG time since I or most of you were at basic...), “The Army, Navy, and Coast Guard effectively de-emphasize gender in an integrated environment,” the report says. “Instead of saying ‘ma’am’ or ‘sir,’ recruits in these Services refer to their drill instructors using their ranks or roles followed by their last names."
So, to the pertinent question - what's your view?
There is some basis to the rational in the report that, "Gendered identifiers prime recruits to think about or visually search for a drill instructor’s gender first, before their rank or role.” In other words, gender before authority.
The Army, Navy and Coast Guard already do this with things such as, "Yes Drill Sergeant!", "No Drill Sergeant!" and "I'm a worm not worthy of sharing the same ground as you Drill Sergeant!" instead of "Yes Ma'am!", "No Sir!", and "I'm a worm not worthy of sharing the same ground as you Ma'am!". Again, this recommendation is only for basic training and wouldn't go Corps-wide.
On the other hand, as Col. Howard Hall, the chief of staff for Marine Corps Training and Education Command, related - it’s not as simple as tweaking training-level policies.
“It’s not something we would change overnight,” Hall said. “We’ve got a history of ‘sir, ma’am, sir, ma’am.’ If we change something at the root level, how do we make the corresponding change at the Fleet Marine Force?"
His point is cultural change is very tough - while it is imperative that cultural change regarding a grave injustice happen regardless of how tough or the costs, does it merit a change in something like this?
Thoughts?
Keep it clean and try to comment on the merit and facts. I know there will be knee-jerk reactions on both sides of the topic which is why I tried to lay out all the facts I was able to dig up on the matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Recent article - https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2022/12/20/why-the-marine-corps-may-nix-gender-identifiers-for-drill-instructors/
* Direction to Corps for boot camp to be fully coed - https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2020/09/01/marines-lay-out-plans-for-gender-integrating-boot-camp-at-the-platoon-level/
* Side note regarding the male-female interaction - I didn't realize the Corps was the service with the youngest average age and the lowest percentage of female members (I knew the fewest, but didn't realize the youngest).
Posted in these groups: 
Marine Corps Basic Training
Basic Training
Drill Sergeant
0911: Drill Instructor
Marines
Marine Corps Basic Training Basic Training Drill Sergeant 0911: Drill Instructor Marines
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 20
24
24
0
COL Randall C. I'm I against the change. This is a Marine Corps tradition and also a way of showing respect. You haven't earned the title of "Marine" until you walk the parade ground on graduation day. Until then you are just a "Recruit." A lot of us who joined the Marines need to learn this respect. I was a smarta$$ seventeen-year-old kid when I signed to join. I learned really quick how to be responsible and respectful to those senior to me. Some will say, "Well your just old Corps and they need to change with the times." If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My opinion for what it's worth.
(24)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
COL Randall C. - I know they say this is just about recruit training but it goes deeper then that. You have to look at the whole picture and the culture of the Corps. Yes, it might work fine for the other services. But the Corps has deep roots of culture as to why it’s traditions are so ingrained and necessary to teach its future Marines. It’s hard to change tradition that is as important as any other tradition within the Corps. The Corps is a diffident bred for sure. I guess you just have had to experience the beginning on those yellow footprints and at the end of training to understand how it feels to finally address your DI by rank and name after graduation. The feeling of accomplishment and the self respect and pride that comes with the EGA and becoming a Marine. It really is hard to explain and a hard pill to swallow to the vast majority of Marines past and present.
(7)
(0)
18
18
0
Lt Col Charlie Brown
I do think it is a foot in the door...right now it would be limited and then it spreads
(9)
(0)
COL Randall C.
Lt Col Charlie Brown - Fair point. As a contrarian thought, if other Services have been doing this, is there an eroding present?
Part of me says "Yes" with noticing the disrespect being shown towards officers and NCOs in the Army.
I can't say it's more common-place that it was when I first came in, but I know that the deference (more in actions than words) that was commonly paid to an senior officer and NCO (let alone junior ones) seemed to be a lot different.
However, another part says "No" because it's still the accepted tradition and courtesy in the Service to answer with "Yes sir/ma'am" or "No sir/ma'am" when responding to a higher ranking officer.
Part of me says "Yes" with noticing the disrespect being shown towards officers and NCOs in the Army.
I can't say it's more common-place that it was when I first came in, but I know that the deference (more in actions than words) that was commonly paid to an senior officer and NCO (let alone junior ones) seemed to be a lot different.
However, another part says "No" because it's still the accepted tradition and courtesy in the Service to answer with "Yes sir/ma'am" or "No sir/ma'am" when responding to a higher ranking officer.
(8)
(0)
14
14
0
In my opinion, the woke and this administration has neither business nor standing to make changes to the military. That means any branch of the military. The concentration of efforts must be spent on military readiness for the protection of these United States. If sir or ma'am brings tears to the woke so be it, they probably need a good cry to get over their personal opinions.
COL Randall C. Lt Col Charlie Brown Cpl Vic Burk MSgt James Parker Maj Robert Thornton SFC (Join to see)
COL Randall C. Lt Col Charlie Brown Cpl Vic Burk MSgt James Parker Maj Robert Thornton SFC (Join to see)
(14)
(0)
COL Randall C.
Good points Jeff. I do want to bring this back around to the facts though. This isn't a recommendation or direction from the administration. This is a recommendation from a study commissioned by the Corps.
While the recommendation might appeal to the Woke and possibly the authors of the study have some of that influence in them, it's not a case were there is some cry for change from the "get rid of any gender reference" crown or push from the administration.
While the recommendation might appeal to the Woke and possibly the authors of the study have some of that influence in them, it's not a case were there is some cry for change from the "get rid of any gender reference" crown or push from the administration.
(6)
(0)
SPC Jeff Daley, PhD
COL Randall C. - Understood - There is a relationship that helped form my opinion. I understand that a University completed the research that's a bit left-leaning. The study itself is part of the challenging conversations Gen David Berger invokes in his talent management strategy, or what he terms the Future Force. This is a tiny piece of his overall strategy but if employed he has ownership as does the administration. It seems analogous to Gen Milley who advocates education in the United States Military Academy on CRT or as he said, "white rage" in his testimony on the 2022 National Defense Authorization Budget Request. This subject matter is pushed by the CIC and seems to be more important than military readiness. While our General Officers have to be politically astute their first obligation should be training and outfitting for the effectiveness and survival of our fighting forces. Perhaps it is but it's difficult to see it from the cheap seats. This of course is just my opinion based on the available information at hand. It carries the weight of a goose feather.
Have a wonderfully bright and happy holiday. Stay healthy and safe.
Have a wonderfully bright and happy holiday. Stay healthy and safe.
(7)
(0)
COL Randall C.
SPC Jeff Daley, PhD - Eloquently stated points Jeff. You and yours have a safe and cozy week as well!
(4)
(0)
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google