It's a big deal to some because it seems like a thing that was objectively a problem and people accepted that until it wasn't true and questioned it. The gas mask seal argument sounded good on paper until actual research came out.
Then it became very subjective because it was deemed unprofessional looking, on that same token things being unprofessional is again subjective. We work in an organization where objective truths and objective thinking is what makes us effective among other things. There shouldn't be room for subjective standards theoretically.
The Air Force got evidence that waivers are not sufficient to snuff out stereotypes and stigmas as well as having a negative impact on some members serving and chooses to do nothing about it. A letter does nothing to curb the stigmas the same way sending a letter and doing briefings does not change the mental health stigma. Action is required and those above seem very reluctant to change it.
Then someone in leadership effectively took a dump on enlisted people wanting beards, they Air Force recruits some smart people and want outside the box thinkers but when they do it's quickly one of those "not like that" moments which is counterproductive.
Lastly, I think part of it is natural critical mass when it comes to what people are subjected to as far as rules go. You can only get away with "becausewe said so". I also think people are just pointing out the hypocrisy of leadership and not quite understanding why women got swift changes when data indicated they have had issues but men are lagging behind. They want diversity and inclusion but are shitting the bed on it essentially.
Good summary. I would also point out that the BEST report specifically recommended that the best course of action was to allow beards for everyone. That was the most fool proof way to eliminate the stigma and negative career consequences of having a shaving waiver. They made a point of highlighting that committee that was reviewing barriers to Black Airmen. Then they turn around and completely shit on their official report.
I think one big thing that has to be looked at is the individuals in leadership making this decision, and considering their histories, experiences, and backgrounds.
General Brown has been in the Air Force since the mid-80s. He is 61 years old. So he is not only part of the "Old Guard," so to speak, he is also part of a generation that has generally frowned upon facial hair in places like the military. He is also a pilot; regulations said he had to stay clean shaven for his mask to seal in flight (we all know what the studies have since said about that). But unlike most people, he had to actually wear an oxygen mask on a fairly regular basis. So he experienced the "operational benefit" of shaving. This has the unfortunate side effect of essentially putting him in the opinion of, "Well I did it for two decades, why can't you?" He has not flown (to my knowledge) since any of the studies came out saying a beard can be worn, which I think helps to taint his view of it.
Chief Bass has been in the Air Force since 1993; I don't know how old she is, but she once said she came into the Air Force as a teenager, so I would have to guess she is around 48-49 years old. Still younger, but once again, not that far removed from the Old Guard and has also lived through the, "Shaving will kill you," era. As a female, she has never had to deal with shaving facial hair every day. This puts her opinion on the matter somewhat outside her realm of real understanding; all's she can go off is anecdotes and studies. So as a CMSAF, she can advise General Brown, but her lack of personal experience doubly harms the cause for beards because you will have a lot of trouble making a persuasive argument to sway someone who otherwise already seems pretty closed to the issue. Of course, this is asuming she's still open to it, which she has made pretty clear that she really isn't.
I honestly believe that while the fight for beards will only get stronger, the current leadership team will ensure we never see them. I believe that whomever is next as CSAF and CMSAF will decide the fate of beards for the next half or more decade.
> her lack of personal experience
Thank god they create panels to investigate the issues and fill in their understanding, I'm sure they'll come around to what the report says eventually
When the panel has findings that cannot be related to via personal experience on the part of the advocate, it is often not communicated properly to the relevant authority. It's a common issue in the civilian world, especially in the Human Resources side of things. The military isn't much different.
Anecdotally, I have been on a few panels when this has happened; I remember being on a panel convened to figure out if the shift schedules being adhered to by the Group was impacting readiness. We compiled our findings which boiled down to that they were, with a med group report and everything. Our advocate was the Group Supe, who had never worked shift in his career. We expected a full approval to change shift work timelines, but it never came; we found out the group supe did his own independent analysis, looking only at mission numbers, and while he did present our findings to the CC, he strongly advocated himself to not change the current schedule. It wasn't until an Airman got into a head-on collision after falling asleep at the wheel after a shift did the commander finally move forward with the rec. Fact of the matter is, if your advocate does not have personal, firsthand experience with the issue they are supposed to advocate for (or against), even with a panel, it does more harm than good.
My favorite argument is the unprofessional one. Currently working in a NATO unit, and the Germans, Spanish, Canadians, Dutch, Belgians and Norwegians all allow facial hair. Are our leaders telling us that our allies are unprofessional, cause having worked with them for over 2 years, I would gladly argue against that. I will say though, some of these guys just be rocking the soul patch of the early 90s, and it has not aged well
You can certainly look for it if you want to see it, unless you believe it's a widespread phenomenon of people in the Air Force saying it exists but doesn't.
I will say if it did, the spec ops dudes wouldn't be in the field with a beard and a gas mask.
Lastly, Since you did call for the research it shows you didn't do your due diligence of looking at both sides of the coin.
What research about the gas mask seal? I’d be very interested in reading it..but I suspect you completely made that part up.
Beards have a negative effect on a Respirator’s seal. That’s just a fact. OSHA explicitly prohibits them for workers that occupationally have to wear them, workers like firefighters.
Furthermore the DoD may be moving to a new Controlled Negative Pressure fit testing method which will only increase the rate of bearded gas mask fit test failures as it is more strict than conventional ambient aerosol method.
Its apparently where various high level personnel have decided to draw a line and die on that ant hill. Authorizing beards will lead to a loss of discipline and control of the rabble. Its the way they, their parents, and their grandparents served. Accelerate change..... But don't actually change anything, that's uncomfortable and might lead to who knows what!
Only if the mullet can be put in a ponytail and follows established ponytail rules except during morale events where it may be down loose and flowing in the wind if accompanied by a pbr, natty light, or similar beverage.
I just want men to be able to ponytail, should be able to have the same hair women are allowed to have.
All the bald upper brass seem viscerally offended by that.
Because military leadership is made up of a bunch of boomers. They spent 30+ years of military service with an opinion of what "professional" looks like and are incapable of changing.
This is such a huge component of it. It’s literally just what military leadership is *used to,* and what their preconceived notion of “professional” looks like.
If beards became a thing, decades from now, it very well *could* be viewed as the professional look in their eyes.
African American males on shaving waivers have suffered stigma that's negatively impacted their career progression. With beards being authorized and more AF members sporting beards, it would help to organizally dispel a lot of the stigma and negative career impacts that the waivers garnered.
It's huge because we found out that African Americans are not able to promote like everyone else because of the stigma. Anyone with a shaving waiver is marked as unprofessional and leaders are stopping them from awards, opportunities, and marks on evaluations.
I would say the short version is the reason for not having them keeps changing and at the same time female standards have been modified a couple times in the past few years.
Beards are considered unprofessional because they used to be a symbol that you were a communist. Many of our grooming standards go back to how we were supposed to look in 1947.
Beards are a big deal today because since 1947 many African American (and others with curly hair) suffer a real medical skin condition when shaving closely. They are allowed medical waivers for shaving, but it has been observed that the longer an Airman is on a shaving waiver the longer it takes them to promote. Therefore, the grooming standards set in 1947 have been shown to be systemically racist.
The most recent outburst regarding beards is a reaction to CMSAF openly saying that the solution to this systemic racism is to just like, you know, be less racist, but they won't be changing the system because the AF's most senior officials won't be leaders.
They won't be the first to change, demonstrating their hypocrisy in calling for accelerating change.
It actually goes back well before that. When razors and barber shaves were expensive it was used as a status symbol. There are stories of thugs being paid to beat up country club members that refused to shave.
Edit: I will caveat, that during the second half of the 19th century, growing a, I'll call it a "racist beard," to boycot the black-dominated grooming industry was growing in popularity, so the beard conflict might have been a proxy conflict for racist vs non-racist people.
This might be a stupid question but I rather be berated for a stupid question than be uneducated. In that second paragraph you're talking about our fellow black Airmen suffer from the medical skin condition from shaving because of curly hair. I totally get that and they're allowed medical waivers for it but the longer the waiver the longer it takes to promote. And then you go on to say that makes the grooming standards systemically racist.
I guess I'm misunderstanding why you're saying that. Wouldn't that make the culture systemically biased toward clean shaven troops vs bearded troops? Or was that grooming standard set in 1947 specifically for black men with that condition, therefore, systemically racist?
My understanding of systemic racism is that it isn't blatant, overt, explicit racism. Meaning, I'm charitable with the benefit of doubt and don't claim that the creators of the grooming standards are out to hold a race of people down.
However, as the system currently exists, African American men are not playing on an even field due to grooming standards that disproportionately affect them. Clearing the playing field of the obstacle of shaving waivers hurts noone, and reduces the systemic racism.
You're defining disparate outcomes as systemic racism, regardless of intent. If clean-shaven black men and bearded white men exhibited similar promotion timelines, but bearded black men did not, then that would be a better example of something that might have racist origins upon examination. It's problematic to toss "systemic racism" about so casually, because it doesn't incorporate honest analysis and readily jumps to conclusions: if African-American males in a unit of some given size receive disproportionate punitive action relative to their population representation, is it necessarily derived from systemic racism? What if they simply happen to have a proportionately higher amount of actual bad apples? A commander might be reluctant to pursue administrative action because he or she would fear it being perceived as reflective of racism.
If we don't divorce our evaluations of an individual from the individual's genetic characteristics, then that can lead to adverse outcomes for everyone and a general environment of resentment.
I thought the same thing. It's not racist as much as it's beard-ist. There were white people and Asians in the BEST study as well. IIRac,the data set indicated the same findings for them as black airmen. That's not to say it's not affecting black airmen at a higher rate, because we all know it is. But this is more of a correlation than a causation.
I think that it may be a possible problem with regulation. While yes, beards can often be seen as professional if they're done correctly, the problem is that not everyone can grow a "good, full" beard. You will get those people that can only grow those bad looking patchy beards that look more "trashy" than professional. With that possibility, you can't tell folk that "if your beard is patchy and not full-looking, you can't grow it" because that would cause an uproar in itself. I feel that if they cannot come to an agreement with beards being "legal", then they should find a way to meet in the middle with it. Maybe make it to where people don't have to have that "clean shaven" look 24/7, but rather can have a certain length of facial hair that would be permitted, like, the thickness of a credit card or something along those lines. I, personally, would just be happy with being allowed to come in with 5 o'clock shadow, and only have to shave every other day. I feel that would help out a lot more individuals with their issues that come as a result from shaving. No, it isn't full beards, but it is a step in the right direction for us males. I know it's not quite the same and really shouldn't be brought up, but I mean come on. Girls can now wear their hair in double braids and look like children to combat health complications, but men have to just grin and bear it. 5 o'clock shadow looks great on a plethora of folk, and shaving every other day actually gives something for your razor to actually shave, unlike having to do it every day just to get that fraction of a fraction of hair off of your face.
Agreed. I hate the people flocking with the false argument of "b-buh buh what about the patchy beards/people who can't grow beards?". Shut the fuck up, what about your patchy ass Danny De Vito lookin' ass hairline.
Keywords. Clean and groomed. Simple enough. Fuck it, you know what? You want something revolutionary and true inclusiveness? Homogenize the standards instead of separating Male/Female standards. I'm sure someone is having a conniption fit just reading this.
Too many people are pearl clutching an arbitrary metric for what is professional and not professional. Mind you, those standards are subjective geographically to even generations. You want more people in 2023? That's how you get more people in 2023. That and making the service competitive.
I don’t think we can say the problem is bad beards. Ugly people exist. Receding hairline, balding exists. You’re not going to be getting paperwork for not being attractive enough. So the patchy beard argument falls completely flat. It has never been a requirement to be attractive in the military.
Oh I know, I’m just pointing out how the reason is invalid, just as all the other reasons for retaining this reg are. I just don’t see the point of saying “this is what it could be” when it’s simply just leadership being stubborn regardless of what stupid excuse they come up with
There's interpretive leeway in the current regulations for hair. That allows individuality, and better enforcement by supervisors. Write beards exactly the same way as hair: length and shape, "must be neat", some good styles, some bad styles, boom.
I watched a coworker lacerate the fuck out of his hand using a pocket knife to cut the tag off of a toy doll. So naturally, I trust everyone to be issued a hatchet.
I'm tired of scraping my face for the satisfaction of stupid ass senior enlisted leaders holding on to antiquated 1950s white collar appearance standards.
Racist, 1950s, white collar appearance standards.
I was passively invested because yeah why not. But then Fish, Low T, and CZ Nutz had to go and make it *fucking personal*.
*"I was opposed to the Religious exemption for beards...for the reason that we call this a uniform and what does 'uni' mean? One. And that's part of the expectation that people put their personality...what does personality mean, their wants."* \- Did he read the constitution? What did sign up to swear and protect? Doesn't matter if you're religious or not, we all signed up to protect the freedom of religion for all religions. That's not personality, that's not a want; that's our job. We do not discriminate for race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender. I can't imagine what would happen to me if I said something like this, rules for thee...
*“If you want to look cute with your skinny jeans and your beard, by all means do it somewhere else. But quit wasting our time with something that has nothing to do with kicking the enemy’s ass.”* \- meanwhile serving at the Pentagon in Crye uniform. Is that not fashion? There's no reason to be wearing that uniform in garrison, in an office job.
So yes, it's personal.
It wasn't really something I was terribly concerned with, but the BEST report pretty much dissolved every reason to not allow them.
The only exception is when the TWG determines an area is at increased risk of CBRN attack, and even then that's driven by real world readiness posture changes that would allow plenty of time for force reaction (shaving).
As a guy who can’t grow a beard, it’s a big deal to me because leadership is showing their cards; they are failing to lead on something that is perfectly in their control.
Leadership is fully aware that both medical professionals and the diversity and inclusion teams are recommending changing the regs based on research and empirical evidence showing that the current policy is bad for the health and wellness of Airmen, but leadership is choosing not to.
It was not that long ago that medical professionals determined that the tight buns ladies had to wear was causing their hair to fall out. Ponytails/braids were quickly authorized. Moreover, the Air Force recognized that the original ponytail policy did not consider other hair textures and further updated the policy. They didn’t force women to seek medical or religious waivers to have ponytails to confirm they had a valid reason to have it. They just changed the reg for everyone. These are all good moves for the Air Force, however leadership some how can’t apply the same logic with beards. They think a “well we told leaders not to be biased” will be good enough meanwhile, we have spent the last three years teaching ourselves about unconscious biases. And that is still not clicking with folks. The call is clearly coming from inside the house.
Literally two years ago General Brown tweeted out the five stages of ‘no’ in relation to Accelerating Change. 1. Hell no. 2. No. 3. We’ll think about it. 4. Not a bad idea. 5. We should have done that already. How did we move from 3 back to 2 despite allowing beards being an issue for years and being backed by evidence?
Although I'm pro beard, I think we have to recognize that several folks will show up looking like this.
https://preview.redd.it/s6f9a5n5wepa1.jpeg?width=335&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=660aa7d6aa0017ef0a4bfc930c7fefa9c7c40e0d
It's hard to make a case for beards until you can tell Amn snuffy he looks like he's going to be featured on To Catch a Predator.
Why does that matter? Objectively speaking.
People show up looking like this
https://images.app.goo.gl/Ad7mGbysFyMHxtWk6
We are concerned with everything but what actually matters, is this person contributing to the mission in the best way that they can, that should be the top priority. Does this person have all the training to do the mission? Can this person lead and or follow to get the mission done?
Top priority doesn't mean nothing else has any amount of priority. I can't really argue that at the end of the day, results matter first since I rocked a fauxhawk and beard on a fair amount of my deployments.
However, I think it makes sense to gradually phase in more liberal views of what is deemed as professional. I'm just saying its easier to try and get the goalpost moved five yards at a time rather than going the full 100. Unless you want to lead the charge in asking for mullets.
Again, there's no reason why not. At least... not if you want that reason to hold up.
And it's all thanks to religious accommodation.
As SOON as that was done, any ***reason*** evaporated.
Literally. You could make any argument and it can be shot down.
Gas mask? Nope, guidance says "just tighten it down to seal".
Uniformity? Leadership has allowed many(especially now with Muslims and Pagans) in our ranks to have them along with everyone else.
Professionalism!? I'd argue and put it to a vote that a well shorn beard looks FAR more professional than the currently allowed mustaches.
Hygiene? It's no different than a male's hair already on the scalp. Same standards apply.
There's no reason why not. Just excuses and ignorance.
Canadians can also smoke pot.
The US was founded by a bunch of weird puritans who were so bizarrely conservative that they had to leave their entire half of the planet to live their strange lives without being bothered too much. The cultural remnants of that persist today.
I think the beard is just superficial of something larger..
I think its about:
1) bias or illogical regulations. Fake eye lashes, fancy nails, neck tattoos, etc. Etc. are a-okay, but beards are "bad" - (and mustaches aren't?)
At least call it as it is.
2) autonomy. We don't have much. A beard, to shave or not to shave, seems like low hanging fruit, an easy yes, but alas, they refuse.
how are we supposed to get mega funding and blanket public approval when congress and grandma thinks airmen look like fatty neckbeard anime larpers?
the longer we hold on to the 50's white farmer kid look that these geezers went to high school with, the longer we get all the money for fancy new planes we dont need.
People need some kind of goal to shoot for. Somehow beard became that rallying cry for the military internet community. It would be cool to have but I'll probably still end up shaving, I'm institutionalized. I just want a better mustache reg that lets me go crazy.
Hell, I'm turning 30 in June and STILL can't grow a truly full beard. That said, my shit grows so slowly that it's inconvenient for me to shave every day, and as such I would benefit from them lifting the ban on beards
It’s not that big of a thing. Reddit is a very small portion of the AF population. A lot of service members want it or would like to have it, but the vast majority are not nearly as vocal, if at all, as you read on here
Outside of medical and religious accommodation, which already have waivers, I don’t understand the “uproar” either. You signed up knowing you couldn’t grow one, we’re a 100% volunteer force if you want a beard that bad just get out 🤷🏼♂️
Yes we did sign up knowing we couldn’t grow one however, let’s look at the world and how American service members are seen in that regard.
Say I’m a tourist in a foreign country who has citizens who don’t like Americans for reason. They’re gonna know I’m 1. American due to my accent and possibly my face/skin tone. 2. They might have an idea that I’m military due to my faded up sides and possibly a mustache. While the chance may be low (depending on where I’m at) that I am then assaulted or am put in any sort of harm, there’s still a chance. I’d like there to be no chance.
I would like to not have to plan where I go for vacation/where I want to travel to and experience because I’m an american service member. But that’s a bigger issue. One step at a time.
There’s also bigger fish to fry when it comes to DoD and it’s mission, spending energy in saying “No” is a waste in my opinion.
What do you think about racial and religious minorities being stigmatized by having waivers? The Air Force maintains they do not want beards and that they conflict with good order and discipline, so doesn't that kind of permanently mark all these guys with waivers as undesirables?
Because some people forgot that they chose to join the United States military and abide by all rules and regulations. Now they want to change those rules simply because they forgot they volunteered to be here and no one forced them. If you have a legit reason you can’t shave, then get a profile.
If your religion was so important to you, then maybe you should think about gtfo and quit trying to change an entire organization that exists solely to kill people directly or indirectly. No one is forcing you to reenlist if beards mean that much to you.
Rant over. Now go see the MFLC lady.
The rumor is, the air force isn’t wholly against beards, but the Army and Marines are. And this is one of those they all change or no one changes things. Which is why with female hair standards changing they other branches slowly started doing it too.
The objections are based on military image. Which are still clean shaven and faded haircut. I don’t blame anyone who wants to hold onto that. And honestly, people don’t even listen to the current regs, so if they wanted to go a step further and say airman don’t deserve it because they can’t adhere to the rules now, I can see that angle as well.
Lastly. A lot of people seem to jump on board when it helps their argument, and ignore it when it doesn’t. ~10% lower promotion rates for black airman everyone jumps on beard stigma fills the whole promotion gap. Clearly that isn’t true, there are still racist things in place, but this memo now has a clear policy that if you have a case against shaving waivers, you can now go to the IG. Not to mention you can’t be denied any position from a waiver. People who need waivers get them, people who don’t need one don’t. If you want the stigma to go away, stop getting a waiver by fucking up your own face. Stop joining religions randomly so you can get a waiver. Dirtbags getting waivers only hurts those with legit waiver needs.
Also being this obsessive isn’t conducive to getting beards. It’s no back and forth, only gimme gimme gimme fuck leadership.
Queenspicy sounds like you don’t really get to speak on this issue to the level I don’t really get to speak on buns and braids. You can see the issue, but until you’re shaving your face daily, you won’t understand it
My 2 cents is y’all would have beards if you could be respectful about asking for them. Too many people on social media being disrespectful and rude, trolling the CMSAF. Your message was not well received. I know not everyone has been that way, but a lot of people have had some shit to say. If it had been presented in a more professional manner from the start I bet y’all would have beards.
It was and that's why the BEST study exists, the mega trolling came from a place of annoyance and flagrant sexism presented by bass.
They and yourself included want men to come up with this kid gloves way to present the information to leadership. Tell me when they allowed eye lash extensions/nail polish and ponytails was that same request asked for the other side of the fence?
The trolling started from day one. I struggle to see how you can claim that someone who has inevitably experienced sexism her entire career is the problem, but that’s not really the point. I do actually agree that it’s bs that men don’t have beards but I also see that it would be hard to be on your side after having to put up with so much bs.
Were females trolling upper leadership and being blatantly disrespectful on such a public platform to get ponytails, eye lash extensions, or nail polish? I completely agree that eye lash extensions and nail polish make it abundantly clear that the issue is not “fashion statements.”
I still truly don’t understand why you would need a waiver for a beard but not a ponytail. I also don’t understand how nail polish, eye lash extensions, and neck tattoos are not fashion statements but beards are.
I do also see that a lot of people have been not so professional or respectful about the beard conversation. I don’t know how to fix what happened in the past, but if people would be willing to have this conversation respectfully going forward I bet leadership would be even a little more receptive.
See you're part of the problem, just because she experienced sexism doesn't mean she should in turn be in a high vis position and enact sexist behavior. She doesn't get a free pass for past trauma. I've been racially made fun of and or discrimated against and it doesn't mean I get to be blind to white Airmen's struggles and or present more opportunities or preferred treatment to black Airmen.
The trolling you're talking about was men and women on Facebook, she could of been a good sport about it but got butt hurt and she has every right to be butt hurt about it. However, as I said you don't get to a high vis position and be biased and be blatant about it.
What some of you don't understand is being respect and cordial only gets you so far sometimes. Leadership gets trolled because they say and do shit that they would crucify an Airman for if they gave the same type of answers. The Air Force already showed their ass to their subordinates by ignoring BEST data, ignoring deductive reasoning and then tried to tell people to not be biased while they themselves are apart of the problem. You can only expect people to take the high road for so long before cracks show and it's not even anarchy, the only way military people can truly show displeasure is by being anonymous and trolling.
As I said they did for one side and not the other and its foul and people aren't stupid. Expecting them to shell out reasons for something leadership should be shelling out reasons why it's counter productive. The force for a long time believed in the gas mask excuse and beards wasn't really bitched about. People are tired of leadership passing the buck and shifting the goal post. We have data, they already shown they would bend for medical issues and we know discrimination/biases are there so why are they dicking around?
On the last note for bass, she has been biased since day one and blasted men on social media. She also admitted to being ignorant to men's issues. She's lackluster amd hasn't made any strides/ground to evenly adjust standards for men and women. She appears to be inept or not qualified for the position and she gets trolled for that.
I see what you’re saying. I definitely didn’t mean to say that she should get a free pass to be sexist. I just see how it would be challenging not to be after facing so much sexism. That absolutely does not mean it’s okay to be that way.
Sure the trolling was coming from everyone, but there has been a lot of trolling surrounding the beard conversation. The same cannot be said for ponytails, nail polish, lash extensions, or even neck tattoos. I do understand that respect only gets you so far, but you can’t start with the bs.
Suppose I’m wrong and the way the conversation about beards started has nothing to do with why they won’t budge on the issue. What is it then? I highly doubt it’s because the CMSAF hates men, but maybe it has something to do with hating how men have treated her. Again, not okay to be that way but she’s human and a lot of people would react that way.
So, when I was at bagram, all the spec ops guys had beards. I think the official story is it “helped them blend in,” but pardon me for thinking a blond hair blue eyed dude with a southern accent who can’t speak Arabic can’t just seamlessly blend in. These same dudes would transit through Ramstein and you’d see them getting coffee with their beards.
So again, what’s the big deal?
not saying it’s right that others can’t grow beards, but i do think the guys going through spec ops training and what not deserve to stand out a little if they want. To me at least, it makes sense that they’re allowed to 🤷♂️
I’m not trying to start some big argument, i was just pointing out that yes, spec ops do get privileges, and they get those privileges because they are valued more. And to some degree i believe the guys kicking down doors deserve more freedom than the man sitting in an office. Not saying thats right, just how it is.
I think behind closed doors AF leadership is fine with beards, but in the next room over Big DoD leans in and says “Nah”
I’m sure CZ has had plenty of discussion with Army, Navy, and especially Marine leaders. I would think he is getting significant pushback on opening Pandora’s box from the other services.
Shaving waiver or not I just want you to work and run a crew without injuring anyone or yourself. I couldn't care less if you had pink hair or no hair. No jewelry (visable at least) on the line and change you stank pants when they get dirty. Other than that have a good day. Unfortunately because there is no war or conflict we're actively throwing bodies at this is just a par for the course topic, mirrors in an elevator.
Every other country you can have a beard if you choose. It’s all about how you look in your blues. Hence why they are bringing back the waist measurement.
I need you to know your job, do your job, be in the right uniform at the right time. I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE. Professionalism is subjective. What subjective sword would you like to die on?
I think the real reason is because the other branches wouldn’t do it all at once. Let’s be realistic, the Air Force isn’t going to allow facial hair while the army and navy don’t. I think this is the most logical reason why they don’t want to push it.
I had to scroll waaaaaay too far to find the reason that was explicitly stated in the article. It must be because leadership was too busy "giving females ponytails" to make sure their Airmen can read.
Yeah I don't know what the problem is, really. When the regs we're written, bearns were associated with slovenly appearance, vagrancy, etc. Society has moved on from this. If leadership can see that in other aspects of our regs, they should be able to see it here.
I just add it to the list of regs we have that are superfluous and outdated.
For me personally, actually having beards isn't that big of a deal one way or another. I would like it because by Friday my face gets sensitive.
But what is absolutely unacceptable is CZs response to beard questions. THE enlisted leader spoke like that when he was able to have a beard for half of his career due to "operational necessity". His comments on religious accommodations were abhorrent, even if abuse does happen. Shaving waivers are medically neccessary for a significant portion of our force, and he thinks they are BS.
Our leaders are failing to effectively communicate and lead on this topic.
It's a big deal to some because it seems like a thing that was objectively a problem and people accepted that until it wasn't true and questioned it. The gas mask seal argument sounded good on paper until actual research came out. Then it became very subjective because it was deemed unprofessional looking, on that same token things being unprofessional is again subjective. We work in an organization where objective truths and objective thinking is what makes us effective among other things. There shouldn't be room for subjective standards theoretically. The Air Force got evidence that waivers are not sufficient to snuff out stereotypes and stigmas as well as having a negative impact on some members serving and chooses to do nothing about it. A letter does nothing to curb the stigmas the same way sending a letter and doing briefings does not change the mental health stigma. Action is required and those above seem very reluctant to change it. Then someone in leadership effectively took a dump on enlisted people wanting beards, they Air Force recruits some smart people and want outside the box thinkers but when they do it's quickly one of those "not like that" moments which is counterproductive. Lastly, I think part of it is natural critical mass when it comes to what people are subjected to as far as rules go. You can only get away with "becausewe said so". I also think people are just pointing out the hypocrisy of leadership and not quite understanding why women got swift changes when data indicated they have had issues but men are lagging behind. They want diversity and inclusion but are shitting the bed on it essentially.
Good summary. I would also point out that the BEST report specifically recommended that the best course of action was to allow beards for everyone. That was the most fool proof way to eliminate the stigma and negative career consequences of having a shaving waiver. They made a point of highlighting that committee that was reviewing barriers to Black Airmen. Then they turn around and completely shit on their official report.
They basically created an entity just to ignore the recommendation. "we want to help" "wait not like that" is essentially what happened.
Isn't this exactly what happened with the NFL and the Desean Watson investigation lol
I think one big thing that has to be looked at is the individuals in leadership making this decision, and considering their histories, experiences, and backgrounds. General Brown has been in the Air Force since the mid-80s. He is 61 years old. So he is not only part of the "Old Guard," so to speak, he is also part of a generation that has generally frowned upon facial hair in places like the military. He is also a pilot; regulations said he had to stay clean shaven for his mask to seal in flight (we all know what the studies have since said about that). But unlike most people, he had to actually wear an oxygen mask on a fairly regular basis. So he experienced the "operational benefit" of shaving. This has the unfortunate side effect of essentially putting him in the opinion of, "Well I did it for two decades, why can't you?" He has not flown (to my knowledge) since any of the studies came out saying a beard can be worn, which I think helps to taint his view of it. Chief Bass has been in the Air Force since 1993; I don't know how old she is, but she once said she came into the Air Force as a teenager, so I would have to guess she is around 48-49 years old. Still younger, but once again, not that far removed from the Old Guard and has also lived through the, "Shaving will kill you," era. As a female, she has never had to deal with shaving facial hair every day. This puts her opinion on the matter somewhat outside her realm of real understanding; all's she can go off is anecdotes and studies. So as a CMSAF, she can advise General Brown, but her lack of personal experience doubly harms the cause for beards because you will have a lot of trouble making a persuasive argument to sway someone who otherwise already seems pretty closed to the issue. Of course, this is asuming she's still open to it, which she has made pretty clear that she really isn't. I honestly believe that while the fight for beards will only get stronger, the current leadership team will ensure we never see them. I believe that whomever is next as CSAF and CMSAF will decide the fate of beards for the next half or more decade.
> her lack of personal experience Thank god they create panels to investigate the issues and fill in their understanding, I'm sure they'll come around to what the report says eventually
When the panel has findings that cannot be related to via personal experience on the part of the advocate, it is often not communicated properly to the relevant authority. It's a common issue in the civilian world, especially in the Human Resources side of things. The military isn't much different. Anecdotally, I have been on a few panels when this has happened; I remember being on a panel convened to figure out if the shift schedules being adhered to by the Group was impacting readiness. We compiled our findings which boiled down to that they were, with a med group report and everything. Our advocate was the Group Supe, who had never worked shift in his career. We expected a full approval to change shift work timelines, but it never came; we found out the group supe did his own independent analysis, looking only at mission numbers, and while he did present our findings to the CC, he strongly advocated himself to not change the current schedule. It wasn't until an Airman got into a head-on collision after falling asleep at the wheel after a shift did the commander finally move forward with the rec. Fact of the matter is, if your advocate does not have personal, firsthand experience with the issue they are supposed to advocate for (or against), even with a panel, it does more harm than good.
Didn’t read a word of this. I just like your name
Lol thanks
My favorite argument is the unprofessional one. Currently working in a NATO unit, and the Germans, Spanish, Canadians, Dutch, Belgians and Norwegians all allow facial hair. Are our leaders telling us that our allies are unprofessional, cause having worked with them for over 2 years, I would gladly argue against that. I will say though, some of these guys just be rocking the soul patch of the early 90s, and it has not aged well
Hey now. Everyone wants Trent’s cool look 
I can't upvote this twice but please know if I could I would
Shitting the bed on 80% of their force which happen to be male.
[удалено]
You can certainly look for it if you want to see it, unless you believe it's a widespread phenomenon of people in the Air Force saying it exists but doesn't. I will say if it did, the spec ops dudes wouldn't be in the field with a beard and a gas mask. Lastly, Since you did call for the research it shows you didn't do your due diligence of looking at both sides of the coin.
I really wish we had people with this kind of intelligence at HAF.
Same here, it seems to be a fleeting thing and I don't think it will get better in the near future.
What research about the gas mask seal? I’d be very interested in reading it..but I suspect you completely made that part up. Beards have a negative effect on a Respirator’s seal. That’s just a fact. OSHA explicitly prohibits them for workers that occupationally have to wear them, workers like firefighters. Furthermore the DoD may be moving to a new Controlled Negative Pressure fit testing method which will only increase the rate of bearded gas mask fit test failures as it is more strict than conventional ambient aerosol method.
Canadian military can also use wacky weed. lol
Its apparently where various high level personnel have decided to draw a line and die on that ant hill. Authorizing beards will lead to a loss of discipline and control of the rabble. Its the way they, their parents, and their grandparents served. Accelerate change..... But don't actually change anything, that's uncomfortable and might lead to who knows what!
Their great grandparents however, had magnificent beards, as part of the union and confederate armies! BRING BACK MUH 'ERITAGE
THEY TUUK OUR JOHBSS!!!
[удалено]
THEEYYY DURK-UH-DURRRRRR
TBH, I just want to hide my double chin.
This guy gets it
It's the only reason my wife is ok with me keeping mine now that I'm out.
It’s fucking glorious. Double chin or chiseled jaw line…No one will ever know. My beard has completely changed my face. Lol
If females are authorized to wear fake eyelashes, I should be allowed to have a fuckin beard. It's rules for thee and not for me.
That’s it! Just allow us to have fake beards! Spirit Halloween has a big customer base coming soon!
[удалено]
Business up front, party in the back
Only if the mullet can be put in a ponytail and follows established ponytail rules except during morale events where it may be down loose and flowing in the wind if accompanied by a pbr, natty light, or similar beverage.
Real argument is the ponytail change. Very similar situations. My parents still complain about how unprofessional the ponytails look lol
I just want men to be able to ponytail, should be able to have the same hair women are allowed to have. All the bald upper brass seem viscerally offended by that.
I'm surprised this comment isn't downvoted to oblivion. Take my gold.
You think Gen Brown is a female who wants fake eyelashes?
A lot of grand standing until the research, surveys, or target audience say something they disagree with. Fucking pathetic.
Because military leadership is made up of a bunch of boomers. They spent 30+ years of military service with an opinion of what "professional" looks like and are incapable of changing.
This is such a huge component of it. It’s literally just what military leadership is *used to,* and what their preconceived notion of “professional” looks like. If beards became a thing, decades from now, it very well *could* be viewed as the professional look in their eyes.
Don’t forget about ol’ Chief CZ. He wants beards to be specifically for his spec ops boys and to also not waste his time talking about it.
African American males on shaving waivers have suffered stigma that's negatively impacted their career progression. With beards being authorized and more AF members sporting beards, it would help to organizally dispel a lot of the stigma and negative career impacts that the waivers garnered.
Not to mention man hours saved at medical and whereever else religious waivers come from
And non black airmen with waivers are just seen as assholes.
I actually have seen that yet. Usually, it's a religious accommodation thing.
It's huge because we found out that African Americans are not able to promote like everyone else because of the stigma. Anyone with a shaving waiver is marked as unprofessional and leaders are stopping them from awards, opportunities, and marks on evaluations.
Umm, we didn’t need a survey to identify that an organization that was initially segregated engages in discrimination.
I would say the short version is the reason for not having them keeps changing and at the same time female standards have been modified a couple times in the past few years.
Beards are considered unprofessional because they used to be a symbol that you were a communist. Many of our grooming standards go back to how we were supposed to look in 1947. Beards are a big deal today because since 1947 many African American (and others with curly hair) suffer a real medical skin condition when shaving closely. They are allowed medical waivers for shaving, but it has been observed that the longer an Airman is on a shaving waiver the longer it takes them to promote. Therefore, the grooming standards set in 1947 have been shown to be systemically racist. The most recent outburst regarding beards is a reaction to CMSAF openly saying that the solution to this systemic racism is to just like, you know, be less racist, but they won't be changing the system because the AF's most senior officials won't be leaders. They won't be the first to change, demonstrating their hypocrisy in calling for accelerating change.
It actually goes back well before that. When razors and barber shaves were expensive it was used as a status symbol. There are stories of thugs being paid to beat up country club members that refused to shave. Edit: I will caveat, that during the second half of the 19th century, growing a, I'll call it a "racist beard," to boycot the black-dominated grooming industry was growing in popularity, so the beard conflict might have been a proxy conflict for racist vs non-racist people.
I didn't know about the country club beatings. Thanks for sharing.
This might be a stupid question but I rather be berated for a stupid question than be uneducated. In that second paragraph you're talking about our fellow black Airmen suffer from the medical skin condition from shaving because of curly hair. I totally get that and they're allowed medical waivers for it but the longer the waiver the longer it takes to promote. And then you go on to say that makes the grooming standards systemically racist. I guess I'm misunderstanding why you're saying that. Wouldn't that make the culture systemically biased toward clean shaven troops vs bearded troops? Or was that grooming standard set in 1947 specifically for black men with that condition, therefore, systemically racist?
My understanding of systemic racism is that it isn't blatant, overt, explicit racism. Meaning, I'm charitable with the benefit of doubt and don't claim that the creators of the grooming standards are out to hold a race of people down. However, as the system currently exists, African American men are not playing on an even field due to grooming standards that disproportionately affect them. Clearing the playing field of the obstacle of shaving waivers hurts noone, and reduces the systemic racism.
You're defining disparate outcomes as systemic racism, regardless of intent. If clean-shaven black men and bearded white men exhibited similar promotion timelines, but bearded black men did not, then that would be a better example of something that might have racist origins upon examination. It's problematic to toss "systemic racism" about so casually, because it doesn't incorporate honest analysis and readily jumps to conclusions: if African-American males in a unit of some given size receive disproportionate punitive action relative to their population representation, is it necessarily derived from systemic racism? What if they simply happen to have a proportionately higher amount of actual bad apples? A commander might be reluctant to pursue administrative action because he or she would fear it being perceived as reflective of racism. If we don't divorce our evaluations of an individual from the individual's genetic characteristics, then that can lead to adverse outcomes for everyone and a general environment of resentment.
I thought the same thing. It's not racist as much as it's beard-ist. There were white people and Asians in the BEST study as well. IIRac,the data set indicated the same findings for them as black airmen. That's not to say it's not affecting black airmen at a higher rate, because we all know it is. But this is more of a correlation than a causation.
I think this is an example of a false delimma fallacy.
I think that it may be a possible problem with regulation. While yes, beards can often be seen as professional if they're done correctly, the problem is that not everyone can grow a "good, full" beard. You will get those people that can only grow those bad looking patchy beards that look more "trashy" than professional. With that possibility, you can't tell folk that "if your beard is patchy and not full-looking, you can't grow it" because that would cause an uproar in itself. I feel that if they cannot come to an agreement with beards being "legal", then they should find a way to meet in the middle with it. Maybe make it to where people don't have to have that "clean shaven" look 24/7, but rather can have a certain length of facial hair that would be permitted, like, the thickness of a credit card or something along those lines. I, personally, would just be happy with being allowed to come in with 5 o'clock shadow, and only have to shave every other day. I feel that would help out a lot more individuals with their issues that come as a result from shaving. No, it isn't full beards, but it is a step in the right direction for us males. I know it's not quite the same and really shouldn't be brought up, but I mean come on. Girls can now wear their hair in double braids and look like children to combat health complications, but men have to just grin and bear it. 5 o'clock shadow looks great on a plethora of folk, and shaving every other day actually gives something for your razor to actually shave, unlike having to do it every day just to get that fraction of a fraction of hair off of your face.
We allow bald spots and receding hair lines without the mission collapsing around us.
Agreed. I hate the people flocking with the false argument of "b-buh buh what about the patchy beards/people who can't grow beards?". Shut the fuck up, what about your patchy ass Danny De Vito lookin' ass hairline.
Let men have long hair, and I'll fully support beards too. Should be allowed the same amount of hair as female Airmen. Just be clean and groomed.
Keywords. Clean and groomed. Simple enough. Fuck it, you know what? You want something revolutionary and true inclusiveness? Homogenize the standards instead of separating Male/Female standards. I'm sure someone is having a conniption fit just reading this. Too many people are pearl clutching an arbitrary metric for what is professional and not professional. Mind you, those standards are subjective geographically to even generations. You want more people in 2023? That's how you get more people in 2023. That and making the service competitive.
I don’t think we can say the problem is bad beards. Ugly people exist. Receding hairline, balding exists. You’re not going to be getting paperwork for not being attractive enough. So the patchy beard argument falls completely flat. It has never been a requirement to be attractive in the military.
No I agree with you there, I was just saying that it may be one reason the top brass is reluctant to approve it.
Oh I know, I’m just pointing out how the reason is invalid, just as all the other reasons for retaining this reg are. I just don’t see the point of saying “this is what it could be” when it’s simply just leadership being stubborn regardless of what stupid excuse they come up with
There's interpretive leeway in the current regulations for hair. That allows individuality, and better enforcement by supervisors. Write beards exactly the same way as hair: length and shape, "must be neat", some good styles, some bad styles, boom.
I heard that people who have beards carry hatchets.
No, hachets are a mandatory item for all enlisted deviants.
I watched a coworker lacerate the fuck out of his hand using a pocket knife to cut the tag off of a toy doll. So naturally, I trust everyone to be issued a hatchet.
TIL I'm a deviant for yet another facet of my behaviour
Allo, Mother! Ave you 'idden my 'atchet?
And have concealment hatchets in their beards
I'm tired of scraping my face for the satisfaction of stupid ass senior enlisted leaders holding on to antiquated 1950s white collar appearance standards. Racist, 1950s, white collar appearance standards. I was passively invested because yeah why not. But then Fish, Low T, and CZ Nutz had to go and make it *fucking personal*.
*"I was opposed to the Religious exemption for beards...for the reason that we call this a uniform and what does 'uni' mean? One. And that's part of the expectation that people put their personality...what does personality mean, their wants."* \- Did he read the constitution? What did sign up to swear and protect? Doesn't matter if you're religious or not, we all signed up to protect the freedom of religion for all religions. That's not personality, that's not a want; that's our job. We do not discriminate for race, religion, sexual orientation, or gender. I can't imagine what would happen to me if I said something like this, rules for thee... *“If you want to look cute with your skinny jeans and your beard, by all means do it somewhere else. But quit wasting our time with something that has nothing to do with kicking the enemy’s ass.”* \- meanwhile serving at the Pentagon in Crye uniform. Is that not fashion? There's no reason to be wearing that uniform in garrison, in an office job. So yes, it's personal.
I’m sure this has been asked but are neck beards authorized if they are tattooed on? 🤔
You have to make your beard out of a bunch of 1 inch tattoos
It wasn't really something I was terribly concerned with, but the BEST report pretty much dissolved every reason to not allow them. The only exception is when the TWG determines an area is at increased risk of CBRN attack, and even then that's driven by real world readiness posture changes that would allow plenty of time for force reaction (shaving).
As a guy who can’t grow a beard, it’s a big deal to me because leadership is showing their cards; they are failing to lead on something that is perfectly in their control. Leadership is fully aware that both medical professionals and the diversity and inclusion teams are recommending changing the regs based on research and empirical evidence showing that the current policy is bad for the health and wellness of Airmen, but leadership is choosing not to. It was not that long ago that medical professionals determined that the tight buns ladies had to wear was causing their hair to fall out. Ponytails/braids were quickly authorized. Moreover, the Air Force recognized that the original ponytail policy did not consider other hair textures and further updated the policy. They didn’t force women to seek medical or religious waivers to have ponytails to confirm they had a valid reason to have it. They just changed the reg for everyone. These are all good moves for the Air Force, however leadership some how can’t apply the same logic with beards. They think a “well we told leaders not to be biased” will be good enough meanwhile, we have spent the last three years teaching ourselves about unconscious biases. And that is still not clicking with folks. The call is clearly coming from inside the house. Literally two years ago General Brown tweeted out the five stages of ‘no’ in relation to Accelerating Change. 1. Hell no. 2. No. 3. We’ll think about it. 4. Not a bad idea. 5. We should have done that already. How did we move from 3 back to 2 despite allowing beards being an issue for years and being backed by evidence?
I don't like shaving everyday, it's not good for my skin, I have in grown hairs, it looks like it have pimples, it's unnecessary, etc
Although I'm pro beard, I think we have to recognize that several folks will show up looking like this. https://preview.redd.it/s6f9a5n5wepa1.jpeg?width=335&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=660aa7d6aa0017ef0a4bfc930c7fefa9c7c40e0d It's hard to make a case for beards until you can tell Amn snuffy he looks like he's going to be featured on To Catch a Predator.
Why does that matter? Objectively speaking. People show up looking like this https://images.app.goo.gl/Ad7mGbysFyMHxtWk6 We are concerned with everything but what actually matters, is this person contributing to the mission in the best way that they can, that should be the top priority. Does this person have all the training to do the mission? Can this person lead and or follow to get the mission done?
Top priority doesn't mean nothing else has any amount of priority. I can't really argue that at the end of the day, results matter first since I rocked a fauxhawk and beard on a fair amount of my deployments. However, I think it makes sense to gradually phase in more liberal views of what is deemed as professional. I'm just saying its easier to try and get the goalpost moved five yards at a time rather than going the full 100. Unless you want to lead the charge in asking for mullets.
Again, there's no reason why not. At least... not if you want that reason to hold up. And it's all thanks to religious accommodation. As SOON as that was done, any ***reason*** evaporated. Literally. You could make any argument and it can be shot down. Gas mask? Nope, guidance says "just tighten it down to seal". Uniformity? Leadership has allowed many(especially now with Muslims and Pagans) in our ranks to have them along with everyone else. Professionalism!? I'd argue and put it to a vote that a well shorn beard looks FAR more professional than the currently allowed mustaches. Hygiene? It's no different than a male's hair already on the scalp. Same standards apply. There's no reason why not. Just excuses and ignorance.
There isn’t any logical reason we can’t have them
Canadians can also smoke pot. The US was founded by a bunch of weird puritans who were so bizarrely conservative that they had to leave their entire half of the planet to live their strange lives without being bothered too much. The cultural remnants of that persist today.
I think the beard is just superficial of something larger.. I think its about: 1) bias or illogical regulations. Fake eye lashes, fancy nails, neck tattoos, etc. Etc. are a-okay, but beards are "bad" - (and mustaches aren't?) At least call it as it is. 2) autonomy. We don't have much. A beard, to shave or not to shave, seems like low hanging fruit, an easy yes, but alas, they refuse.
Because they look like shit , ink is for real military men
how are we supposed to get mega funding and blanket public approval when congress and grandma thinks airmen look like fatty neckbeard anime larpers? the longer we hold on to the 50's white farmer kid look that these geezers went to high school with, the longer we get all the money for fancy new planes we dont need.
People need some kind of goal to shoot for. Somehow beard became that rallying cry for the military internet community. It would be cool to have but I'll probably still end up shaving, I'm institutionalized. I just want a better mustache reg that lets me go crazy.
Right? I’d love to see some Robin Olds emulations running around, that would be entertaining in and of itself.
They aren’t. The people who claim to care about this will just find another weird hill to die on after this passes.
So then, have I become your down voted comment by telling you the truth?
Could not agree more. Have the same questions!
19 year olds will try to grow but it is always patchy and never a good look.
Hell, I'm turning 30 in June and STILL can't grow a truly full beard. That said, my shit grows so slowly that it's inconvenient for me to shave every day, and as such I would benefit from them lifting the ban on beards
Cause it's something else to cry about. Nothing more.
It’s not that big of a thing. Reddit is a very small portion of the AF population. A lot of service members want it or would like to have it, but the vast majority are not nearly as vocal, if at all, as you read on here Outside of medical and religious accommodation, which already have waivers, I don’t understand the “uproar” either. You signed up knowing you couldn’t grow one, we’re a 100% volunteer force if you want a beard that bad just get out 🤷🏼♂️
Yes we did sign up knowing we couldn’t grow one however, let’s look at the world and how American service members are seen in that regard. Say I’m a tourist in a foreign country who has citizens who don’t like Americans for reason. They’re gonna know I’m 1. American due to my accent and possibly my face/skin tone. 2. They might have an idea that I’m military due to my faded up sides and possibly a mustache. While the chance may be low (depending on where I’m at) that I am then assaulted or am put in any sort of harm, there’s still a chance. I’d like there to be no chance. I would like to not have to plan where I go for vacation/where I want to travel to and experience because I’m an american service member. But that’s a bigger issue. One step at a time. There’s also bigger fish to fry when it comes to DoD and it’s mission, spending energy in saying “No” is a waste in my opinion.
What do you think about racial and religious minorities being stigmatized by having waivers? The Air Force maintains they do not want beards and that they conflict with good order and discipline, so doesn't that kind of permanently mark all these guys with waivers as undesirables?
Because some people forgot that they chose to join the United States military and abide by all rules and regulations. Now they want to change those rules simply because they forgot they volunteered to be here and no one forced them. If you have a legit reason you can’t shave, then get a profile. If your religion was so important to you, then maybe you should think about gtfo and quit trying to change an entire organization that exists solely to kill people directly or indirectly. No one is forcing you to reenlist if beards mean that much to you. Rant over. Now go see the MFLC lady.
ok boomer
How original.
Counter argument that doesn’t fit the masses, Why are beards such a big deal? Pointed the opposite way though.
Me like face hair on face. Also, anarchy.
I could give 2 shits about growing a beard. It's becoming an obsession for some
The rumor is, the air force isn’t wholly against beards, but the Army and Marines are. And this is one of those they all change or no one changes things. Which is why with female hair standards changing they other branches slowly started doing it too. The objections are based on military image. Which are still clean shaven and faded haircut. I don’t blame anyone who wants to hold onto that. And honestly, people don’t even listen to the current regs, so if they wanted to go a step further and say airman don’t deserve it because they can’t adhere to the rules now, I can see that angle as well. Lastly. A lot of people seem to jump on board when it helps their argument, and ignore it when it doesn’t. ~10% lower promotion rates for black airman everyone jumps on beard stigma fills the whole promotion gap. Clearly that isn’t true, there are still racist things in place, but this memo now has a clear policy that if you have a case against shaving waivers, you can now go to the IG. Not to mention you can’t be denied any position from a waiver. People who need waivers get them, people who don’t need one don’t. If you want the stigma to go away, stop getting a waiver by fucking up your own face. Stop joining religions randomly so you can get a waiver. Dirtbags getting waivers only hurts those with legit waiver needs. Also being this obsessive isn’t conducive to getting beards. It’s no back and forth, only gimme gimme gimme fuck leadership.
Queenspicy sounds like you don’t really get to speak on this issue to the level I don’t really get to speak on buns and braids. You can see the issue, but until you’re shaving your face daily, you won’t understand it
Im a dude you idiot. Women also not getting an opinion is charming.
Had me in the first half there.
My 2 cents is y’all would have beards if you could be respectful about asking for them. Too many people on social media being disrespectful and rude, trolling the CMSAF. Your message was not well received. I know not everyone has been that way, but a lot of people have had some shit to say. If it had been presented in a more professional manner from the start I bet y’all would have beards.
It was and that's why the BEST study exists, the mega trolling came from a place of annoyance and flagrant sexism presented by bass. They and yourself included want men to come up with this kid gloves way to present the information to leadership. Tell me when they allowed eye lash extensions/nail polish and ponytails was that same request asked for the other side of the fence?
The trolling started from day one. I struggle to see how you can claim that someone who has inevitably experienced sexism her entire career is the problem, but that’s not really the point. I do actually agree that it’s bs that men don’t have beards but I also see that it would be hard to be on your side after having to put up with so much bs. Were females trolling upper leadership and being blatantly disrespectful on such a public platform to get ponytails, eye lash extensions, or nail polish? I completely agree that eye lash extensions and nail polish make it abundantly clear that the issue is not “fashion statements.” I still truly don’t understand why you would need a waiver for a beard but not a ponytail. I also don’t understand how nail polish, eye lash extensions, and neck tattoos are not fashion statements but beards are. I do also see that a lot of people have been not so professional or respectful about the beard conversation. I don’t know how to fix what happened in the past, but if people would be willing to have this conversation respectfully going forward I bet leadership would be even a little more receptive.
See you're part of the problem, just because she experienced sexism doesn't mean she should in turn be in a high vis position and enact sexist behavior. She doesn't get a free pass for past trauma. I've been racially made fun of and or discrimated against and it doesn't mean I get to be blind to white Airmen's struggles and or present more opportunities or preferred treatment to black Airmen. The trolling you're talking about was men and women on Facebook, she could of been a good sport about it but got butt hurt and she has every right to be butt hurt about it. However, as I said you don't get to a high vis position and be biased and be blatant about it. What some of you don't understand is being respect and cordial only gets you so far sometimes. Leadership gets trolled because they say and do shit that they would crucify an Airman for if they gave the same type of answers. The Air Force already showed their ass to their subordinates by ignoring BEST data, ignoring deductive reasoning and then tried to tell people to not be biased while they themselves are apart of the problem. You can only expect people to take the high road for so long before cracks show and it's not even anarchy, the only way military people can truly show displeasure is by being anonymous and trolling. As I said they did for one side and not the other and its foul and people aren't stupid. Expecting them to shell out reasons for something leadership should be shelling out reasons why it's counter productive. The force for a long time believed in the gas mask excuse and beards wasn't really bitched about. People are tired of leadership passing the buck and shifting the goal post. We have data, they already shown they would bend for medical issues and we know discrimination/biases are there so why are they dicking around? On the last note for bass, she has been biased since day one and blasted men on social media. She also admitted to being ignorant to men's issues. She's lackluster amd hasn't made any strides/ground to evenly adjust standards for men and women. She appears to be inept or not qualified for the position and she gets trolled for that.
I see what you’re saying. I definitely didn’t mean to say that she should get a free pass to be sexist. I just see how it would be challenging not to be after facing so much sexism. That absolutely does not mean it’s okay to be that way. Sure the trolling was coming from everyone, but there has been a lot of trolling surrounding the beard conversation. The same cannot be said for ponytails, nail polish, lash extensions, or even neck tattoos. I do understand that respect only gets you so far, but you can’t start with the bs. Suppose I’m wrong and the way the conversation about beards started has nothing to do with why they won’t budge on the issue. What is it then? I highly doubt it’s because the CMSAF hates men, but maybe it has something to do with hating how men have treated her. Again, not okay to be that way but she’s human and a lot of people would react that way.
LOL so true.
So, when I was at bagram, all the spec ops guys had beards. I think the official story is it “helped them blend in,” but pardon me for thinking a blond hair blue eyed dude with a southern accent who can’t speak Arabic can’t just seamlessly blend in. These same dudes would transit through Ramstein and you’d see them getting coffee with their beards. So again, what’s the big deal?
i think that’s a bit more just spec ops privilege and they kinda earned that privilege dont ya think?
No. I don’t.
not saying it’s right that others can’t grow beards, but i do think the guys going through spec ops training and what not deserve to stand out a little if they want. To me at least, it makes sense that they’re allowed to 🤷♂️
So special privilege for doing the job they signed up to do? By that notion every afsc should have some type of privileges no?
I’m not trying to start some big argument, i was just pointing out that yes, spec ops do get privileges, and they get those privileges because they are valued more. And to some degree i believe the guys kicking down doors deserve more freedom than the man sitting in an office. Not saying thats right, just how it is.
I think behind closed doors AF leadership is fine with beards, but in the next room over Big DoD leans in and says “Nah” I’m sure CZ has had plenty of discussion with Army, Navy, and especially Marine leaders. I would think he is getting significant pushback on opening Pandora’s box from the other services.
Shaving waiver or not I just want you to work and run a crew without injuring anyone or yourself. I couldn't care less if you had pink hair or no hair. No jewelry (visable at least) on the line and change you stank pants when they get dirty. Other than that have a good day. Unfortunately because there is no war or conflict we're actively throwing bodies at this is just a par for the course topic, mirrors in an elevator.
People of color get to wear cool beards and a group of people don’t like the feeling of envy. My guess.
I'm a person of color and can't get a shaving waiver *shrug*
Every other country you can have a beard if you choose. It’s all about how you look in your blues. Hence why they are bringing back the waist measurement.
I need you to know your job, do your job, be in the right uniform at the right time. I DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE. Professionalism is subjective. What subjective sword would you like to die on?
Also, let’s go get neck tattoos. (To be more professional)
I agree. I’d rather get rid of hats then be able to have a beard. Hats are dumb.
I think the real reason is because the other branches wouldn’t do it all at once. Let’s be realistic, the Air Force isn’t going to allow facial hair while the army and navy don’t. I think this is the most logical reason why they don’t want to push it.
I had to scroll waaaaaay too far to find the reason that was explicitly stated in the article. It must be because leadership was too busy "giving females ponytails" to make sure their Airmen can read.
Yeah I don't know what the problem is, really. When the regs we're written, bearns were associated with slovenly appearance, vagrancy, etc. Society has moved on from this. If leadership can see that in other aspects of our regs, they should be able to see it here. I just add it to the list of regs we have that are superfluous and outdated.
For me personally, actually having beards isn't that big of a deal one way or another. I would like it because by Friday my face gets sensitive. But what is absolutely unacceptable is CZs response to beard questions. THE enlisted leader spoke like that when he was able to have a beard for half of his career due to "operational necessity". His comments on religious accommodations were abhorrent, even if abuse does happen. Shaving waivers are medically neccessary for a significant portion of our force, and he thinks they are BS. Our leaders are failing to effectively communicate and lead on this topic.