Originally Posted by Sandlapper3396
This has zero to do with intelligence. This isn't something you pick up in a book and learn. It takes a special level of ignorance or maybe arrogance to believe you know what someone else is capable of. That you can take one look and based on some physical characteristic imply that person isn't good enough. To think you know what they can or cannot handle.
I'll put this another way because it's obvious you are a proud marine as you should be. How do you feel about disabled soldiers? Men who have lost limbs and are incapacitated in some way or another? Should they be allowed to continue fighting? I won't put words in your mouth but I'm pretty sure what your feelings about that are. Something tells me you wouldn't have the audacity to tell one of them they shouldn't be on the front lines with you. It takes flawed thinking, some type of bigotry or prejudice to recognize that heart in one person and not another based on some physical bias you have. It takes effort to be that blind. Trying to keep this out of PRC, but it needs to be said. Sexual discrimination is all this. Dress it up any way you want to feel better about yourself.
To answer your question I didn't go to college. Like I said at the beginning this isn't something you pick up and learn in a book. So if you feel the need to whip out willies and compare that's cool. I already stated that I went through the Navy Nuclear Propulsion pipeline. Can google it or take my word for it but it's considered one of the hardest academic courses in the country. 19 out of an initial starting class of 250ish sounds sounds about right. They even thought I was smart enough to go back and teach.
This ties in with something else that's always bothered me - actually, two things (we're being pedantic.)
1) Just because a soldier is disabled doesn't mean he has nothing to offer. Make him a trainer if he wants, offer
him retirement if he does not. He's probably proven his fighting spirit, the dice just came up wrong. One does not need a sound body to be a trainer - and allowing the man shy a limb to train frees up the "physically perfect" soldiers to go do what soldiers do - break things and kill people.
Chances are pretty good that the disabled soldier will teach you things to watch out for that the "physically perfect" solder doesn't know about.
2) In a similar vein, I have never
liked the "up-or-out" mentality that was becoming prevalent when I signed up (20-odd years ago.) It's not a good idea.
There is no
dishonour in finishing 35 years in as a buck sergeant - if it's where you excel. If a man is a natural squad leader, give him a squad and stay out of his way. If you promote the man to E5 and he starts to come unstitiched; back him down to E4 and let him go on his way - you've obviously pushed him too far.
Some men are natural officers. Some (me...) are natural senior non-coms. Some are natural junior non-comes. And some are natural line-animals.
Don't promote a man beyond his ability due to a false expectation of competence and setting of spurious limitations on what a man should be able to do - let him serve in whatever capacity he serves best, and leave him alone.
(NB: I wen through school long enough ago that the rule of "use a masculine pronoun in cases of mixed or unknown gender" applies, and I'm not about to change just because the PC Lunatic Fringe tells me I should. Fark 'em. Ladies, I do include you as well. But, I find having to continually use "his/hers/its/their" or other compound mixed pronouns to be cumbersome and silly - every language I've spoken has the same rule, but English wants to change it.
(George Carlin pointed out that, as language becomes more PC, it becomes more cumbersome. And, he noticed this about twenty years ago as well. Why is this? Shouldn't language become more
efficient, not less?
(But, I digress.)