Transgender

Hello, I am Cadet Airman Basic Bailey Watchorn of CAP Pilgrim Squadron. I am, to my knowledge the only transgender member in my squadron. Two weeks ago my squadron leader asked me why my hair was so long, and I told him I was transgender. Yesterday, Tuesday December 11th, 2017 my squadron had a meeting. I missed it due to being sick, yet one of my fellow squad-mates goes to my school, and he told me they had talked about gender rules. Is there anyone here in Plymouth squadron? If not, what are the rules on transgender cadets?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I truly do not know if there is a policy (I plan on searching when I’m home Incase this comes up in my own unit) but I’m wondering if the 36-1 perhaps might touch on it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You are not the only transgender cadet in CAP. That said, you may be the first transgender person your squadron leadership has ever met.

NHQ/CP has provided guidance regarding transgender cadets, and the national cadet programs manager is on the forums regularly and will likely chime in with more information.

Welcome to CAP!

There are several threads between 2014 and 2016 discussing this topic. I don’t know if the info is still valid but here’s one

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=20708.0



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quoting from CAPR 36-1, Civil Air Patrol Nondiscrimination Program:

It is CAP policy that no member shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination with respect to accessibility to any CAP program or activity on the basis of race, color, sex, age, religion (creed), national origin (ancestry), sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, disability (formerly handicap), marital status, military or veteran status.

Every year squadrons cover CAP's nondiscrimination policy (we just had ours last night), so it's possible that's what your squadmate is talking about. Otherwise you could check with your chain of command and get caught up with what happened during the meeting.

Welcome to CAP, C/AB Lemondyde!

What are the rules on transgender cadets?

See CAPR 36-1: https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R036_001_D6D80CB431788.pdf

Which in turn references DOD instruction 1300.28: https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/features/2016/0616_policy/DoD-Instruction-1300.28.pdf

Brand new CAP Pamphlet 1-10 also contains guidance on TG issues.

Since it is new, your squadron members might not have seen it.

Ned Lee
National Cadet Programs Manager

What are you registered as on your eServices/personnel profile, if you know? If you are listed as a male, and that's all anyone may really know just from reading your file (say, at Encampment, or even at the home unit obviously) until told otherwise, then you would be assumed to meet the uniform standards of your profile gender.

I find it odd that your command staff would not have been privy to this, perhaps just on the notion that your file would list a gender (male or female), and that you would immediately fall into the category of that gender listed. Nobody would really know otherwise unless it was brought up. So if you're listed as a male, and decided to grow your hair out, I can see where it would be assumed that you would meet male standards as a male cadet (as they knew it). Now, if your profile said male, but they were informed that you are transgender, then I would assume there either would have been a discussion with you (and/or parent), and this addressed early on in your membership.

Now, your personal life isn't really the business of anyone on here or anyone else in your unit for that matter (and others may disagree; personal opinions of the subject of transgenderism should not dictate this discussion). So what I would have expected, as a Deputy Commander for Cadets, is that you would be registered as a cadet under your identifying gender, and I likely would have heard from my Commander, Recruiting Officer, Personnel Officer, or directly from your parent, and all of this would have been squared away upon entry.

The discussion with the unit could just have been coincidental in the timing of the Non-Discrimination discussion that units are supposed to have once a year, or it could have been due to your case. You could always discuss this with your unit leadership.

As an Airman Basic, I can only assume you are fairly new to CAP, and your unit. Do you know if this was discussed with your Commander when you joined? Also, is your hair in accordance with the standards for the gender in which you identify, to include, if female, proper styling of longer hair?

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

Yeah, that seems to be the approach consistent with the new pub, as the baseline for new members. Members should wear the uniform consistent with, and groom to standards for, their currently legal sex. THEN, Para. 9.3 in the new pub then suggests that transgender members who want to wear an alternate need to submit their request in writing through their chain (with medical documentation) to HQ CAP/DP.


I would assume that's simply because no one in CAP below CAP-USAF has the delegated authority to waiver the USAF style uniforms (any Wing supplements to the uniforms similarly have to go up for approval too). It isn't intended to make it harder on people, but rather to make sure that we are following the USAF guidance.


Cadet Watchorn, welcome to CAP. Please read the link from Ned carefully. The option is there to go forward if you choose.


V/r
Spam

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

They can request accommodations but must do so in writing to National.

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

They can request accommodations but must do so in writing to National.

Talking to a lieutenant in my squadron, and a sergeant in my squadron, I have heard that there is a possibility of doing *something*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

They can request accommodations but must do so in writing to National.

Talking to a lieutenant in my squadron, and a sergeant in my squadron, I have heard that there is a possibility of doing *something*


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Read CAPP 1-10 posted above. If need be print it off and take it to them.

Hmmm.... I thought I saw a clarification on this about a year or so ago. If I remember it correctly, what CAP decided to do is to use the gender that is listed on the birth certificate and that determines the applicable regulations.

They can request accommodations but must do so in writing to National.

Talking to a lieutenant in my squadron, and a sergeant in my squadron, I have heard that there is a possibility of doing *something*

Don't rely on a local accommodation or anything else that doesn't involve National Headquarters, and includes
documentation. Your local leadership may allow for things outside their authority in the name of being sensitive
and wind up making things worse.

If you plan to attend encampments, NCSA, or similar activities outside your unit, those Commanders
are under no obligation to adhere to local agreements or accommodations in this regard that have not
been authorized and / or mandated by NHQ.

These are complicated conversations, and you may not always get the response you are hoping for,
but the time to have them is >now<, not when you're standing in line at registration.

As long as you meet the basic requirements of membership, your gender has no bearing on your membership. Having said that you (and your parents) should have a discussion with your unit leadership about what is expected from both sides, uniforms, what accommodations are needed, etc.

Regardless of the gender of your identity, in checking your CAP profile, your hair is out of regulations for both male and female standards. So there's the issue that I know of.

If you identify as a male, you need to meet male grooming standards. If you identify as a female, you're going to need to either cut your hair, or style it appropriately in a bun, or straighten in a way that it falls to a position neatly above your shoulders. It's not so much the length but the height and overhang on the sides that I see as the styling problem.

You won't receive any accommodations in this regard, with the exception of allowing to groom to the standard of your identity versus biological sex. An accommodation will not include a "however you want to wear it" clause.

Question:  A male at birth with male genitalia says he identifies as a female.  Is he going to be allowed to wear the female uniform/skirt?

MG

Question:  A male at birth with male genitalia says he identifies as a female.  Is he going to be allowed to wear the female uniform/skirt?

As of today, NHQ indicates that a member must wear the uniform which corresponds to his or her legal gender.

Any other allowances or accommodations must be, and can only be made at the National Level.
No other echelon or Commander has the authority to make allowances or accommodations.

Several states have potentially complicated this issue by allowing for non-descriptive indications of gender on legal
documents.  NHQ has not made any statement or indication how that would be handled, but regardless
it would be in their court.

Question:  A male at birth with male genitalia says he identifies as a female.  Is he going to be allowed to wear the female uniform/skirt?

MG

As per CAPP 1-10, yes:

9.3. Transgender Accommodations. Members may request authorization to wear the uniform corresponding to their gender identity. A letter, including medical documentation that the individual is a transgender person, is required. Members submit their requests in writing through the chain of command to CAP/DP. For help with policy questions, contact CAP/DP. 

And just to further the answer:

6. Unacceptable Reasons for Denying an Accommodation

While CAP is not always able to approve accommodation requests, the non ‐ discrimination policy prohibits local leaders from denying those requests for the wrong reasons. Some examples of improper reasons for denying requests include:

6.1. Inconvenience to staff or other participants; time ‐ consuming; “we’ve always done it this way.” By definition, every request for an accommodation is a request to alter the usual way of doing business in some manner, and as such, every accommodation imposes at least some inconvenience or demands extra time and effort from local leaders or the overall group. Inconvenience on its own is not sufficient reason for denying a request. In adopting a nondiscrimination policy, CAP recognizes that it sometimes will need to devote extra time, attention, and resources to individuals protected by that policy.

6.2. Personal bias; desire not to associate with the member because of his or her special need. If a member prefers not to associate with a fellow member because of the member having a special need that is protected by the non ‐ discrimination policy, the remedy is for the displeased member to choose CAPP 1 ‐ 10 Special Needs 1 September 2017 6 to stay home. Local leaders cannot exclude a member from participation on the grounds that someone or even a majority of the group prefers that a person not participate.

6.3. Detracts from esprit de corps or desire for a standardized appearance. In the cadet environment especially, military ‐ style standardization of appearance is an ideal. But it is not appropriate for local leaders to cite a negative impact upon standardized appearance as grounds for denying participation. For example, a cadet who uses a wheelchair cannot be denied participation in a parade on the grounds that the wheelchair detracts from the formation’s appearance. On its surface, a rule of “every partici ‐ pant must keep in step” sounds neutral and fair, but in effect, it creates a disparate impact, unfairly limiting the participation of the cadet solely on the grounds of her disability.

6.4 Moral Objections or Religious Beliefs. Denying an accommodation must be based on the effect such an accommodation will have on CAP resources, or on CAP’s missions, activities, or operations. Denying an accommodation purely because one or more persons are morally against it is insufficient. For instance, refusing to accommodate a homosexual person’s request simply because other members have a moral objection to homosexuality, would not be permitted. 

Question:  A male at birth with male genitalia says he identifies as a female.  Is he going to be allowed to wear the female uniform/skirt?

MG

Long answer short, if eServices says male, then male standards are adhered to; if eServices says female, then female standards are adhered to. When in doubt, contact NHQ on this one.

A more important issue to cadets, one which has been ignored so far, is what is NHQ going to do about PT?

This whole issue of transgenderism is going to open up a Pandora's box of issues that are going to have to be dealt with.  I see lawsuits a plenty in the future.  The issue of PT that Eclipse brings up is a valid one and just one of many that will arise.

MG

A more important issue to cadets, one which has been ignored so far, is what is NHQ going to do about PT?

As far as I know, the military enforces it according to one's preferred gender. People could argue that this is "unfair" and that "transgender/transsexual cadets have an unfair advantage", however from what I read it's worked fine for the military, and if it does end up being a problem, a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

This whole issue of transgenderism is going to open up a Pandora's box of issues that are going to have to be dealt with.  I see lawsuits a plenty in the future.  The issue of PT that Eclipse brings up is a valid one and just one of many that will arise.

MG

Care to provide evidence for said claim?  Or why your opinion has any validity?  Or provide examples of the “lawsuits a plenty”?

This whole issue of transgenderism is going to open up a Pandora's box of issues that are going to have to be dealt with.  I see lawsuits a plenty in the future.  The issue of PT that Eclipse brings up is a valid one and just one of many that will arise.

MG

I disagree. CAP has a long history of accommodating members who may not have welcome in other organizations: physical disabilities, learning disabilities, religious beliefs, sexual orientation don't matter. The organization was founded on the belief that civilians not eligible for military service could serve their country.

This is merely a speed bump on a road that will soon be smoothed over.

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

As far as I know, the military enforces it according to one's preferred gender.

No they don't there is a lengthy process involved, a mil member can't just wake up the next morning or on the spur of the moment decide they are different gender.  And should a member feel they are transgender simply saying they are or feeling they are does not allow them any entitlements.

As far as I know, the military enforces it according to one's preferred gender.

No they don't there is a lengthy process involved, a mil member can't just wake up the next morning or on the spur of the moment decide they are different gender.  And should a member feel they are transgender simply saying they are or feeling they are does not allow them any entitlements.

To clarify - by "preferred gender" I meant their legal gender (such as how a trans male would be recognized as a male). Yes, there is a whole process with a medical professional to determine whether gender transition is necessary. At that point, after gender transition, they are to be recognized as their gender.

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

Hi, eTodd.

The wear of blues uniforms by cadets under 18 is not in any way linked to performance on PT tests. One does not "qualify" to wear the USAF style uniforms in any way other than being a current member properly groomed and in weight standards; cadets under 18 are currently allowed to be significantly obese and still wear blues without penalty, even as the current PT program urges them to adopt a healthy, exercise-enhanced lifestyle (but we don't withhold the wear of the uniform as a penalty for obesity).

Members (including cadets) over 18 who don't meet the CAPM 39-1 height/weight tables may not wear blues, and will wear other options.

Just trying to make sure we don't cross the streams here...

R/s
Spam

(modified: added grooming/weight)

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Just an observation: While I know very few females who pass all requirements at both the female and male standards, only one out of six male cadets in my squadron who struggles with PT regularly meets the female standard for his age and rank. And with the new PT program, the differences are even less noticeable, except for PACER, which nearly everyone hates anyway.

And with the new PT program, the differences are even less noticeable, except for PACER, which nearly everyone hates anyway.

You may want to review those numbers again - they are significantly different, especially at the older end of
the range / phases.

The differences [in male cadets who fail PT but meet the female standards], in my squadron, was what I referred to. But let's pretend that I was referring to the blanket difference between males and females:

I'm aware of the numbers. Are you telling me that the difference between an 8:04 mile (male) and 9:22 mile (female) is significantly different, when compared to, hmm, 8:06 mile (male) and 12:11 mile (female), or 6:35 versus 9:14, when both genders are 17? http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Cadet_Super_Chart_94732A5667D92_C5995ABD1FAC3.pdf

In my experience, nearly everyone passes curl-ups under both programs. Push-ups are capped at 18 for males and 7 for females under the new program; those caps were 46 for males and 22 for females under the old. I don't know about you, but I find it easier to go from 7 to 18 than from 22 to 46. So IMO, the gender disparity for PT and potential implications with trans cadets is less serious under the new program (because there's less difference).

I'm aware of the numbers. Are you telling me that the difference between an 8:04 mile (male) and 9:22 mile (female) is significantly different, 

It's absolutely night and day, and I've personally seen even less margin be the difference between
"I was a Spaatz." and "I basically completed the Cadet Program...Spaatz is just icing on the cake for some..."

A minute on a mile might as well be a month if you're a marathoner and not a sprinter.  Some top out and are never
able to cut their time.

You're entitled to your opinion, but you are significantly discounting the differences,
and should consider yourself luck that your atypical squadron is currently having little
issues with the expectations, because I can assure that's not the general CAP experience.

On the norm you will have cadets hanging for months on 1 or two push ups or curl ups
or 10 seconds on the mile.

The practical reality of a full minute on the mile, double the curl ups, 2/3rds the pacer,
triple the push ups, 25% more curl ups, is that these are not trivial numbers and for
many cadets would literally be the difference between pass or fail.

You're also entitled to your opinion that six cadets failing PT every month is 'luck' - my squadron only has about 12-15 active cadets. I would call it a serious issue.

I didn't say the numbers were trivial. I indicated that they are becoming less unequal with the new program. I consider that a one minute mile difference, while noticeable, isn't nearly as noticeable as a four minute difference. Previously it was double the push ups (but again, 11 more is probably slightly easier than 14-22 more) and 10 more curl ups (now 6, but not with a 1-minute time). "Less" serious does not equal "trivial"

You cut my quote. I said, "Are you telling me that the difference between an 8:04 mile (male) and 9:22 mile (female) is significantly different, when compared to, hmm, 8:06 mile (male) and 12:11 mile (female)..."

Currently I'm struggling to bring down a 9:45 mile to a 9:34. It's eleven seconds. It's not a fast mile, but I'm struggling. I have some understanding of the difference between and 8 minute and a 9 minute mile, because while I can sometimes get 9 to 9:15 and it feels the same, it's not consistent, and getting below 9 minutes will be challenging (hopefully attainable). I have no idea if I will be able to get below 7:30 in a year or two when I attempt Spaatz. The lower the times are, the greater the difficulty in shaving off time. I get that. (translatable to other physical activities as well, of course)

deleted

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

The military has had that same debate endlessly.

Equality is "hurtful."

Currently I'm struggling to bring down a 9:45 mile to a 9:34. It's eleven seconds. It's not a fast mile, but I'm struggling. I have some understanding of the difference between and 8 minute and a 9 minute mile, because while I can sometimes get 9 to 9:15 and it feels the same, it's not consistent, and getting below 9 minutes will be challenging (hopefully attainable). I have no idea if I will be able to get below 7:30 in a year or two when I attempt Spaatz. The lower the times are, the greater the difficulty in shaving off time. I get that. (translatable to other physical activities as well, of course)

Run faster.

There are people that can run 5:15 miles.

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

Why would standards be lower? As a mother of a female cadet, stop assuming girls can’t run, do push ups etc. Push females to reach their peek physical abilities, and then push them further. I would love to see the PT standards for females changed to a healthier standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

Why would standards be lower? As a mother of a female cadet, stop assuming girls can’t run, do push ups etc. Push females to reach their peek physical abilities, and then push them further. I would love to see the PT standards for females changed to a healthier standard.

Great! So there is one vote to move the female standards, along with all transgenders, to the higher standards traditional of males, and just have one set of requirements. I'll second that motion. Shall we vote and let Hdqs know? 

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

Why would standards be lower? As a mother of a female cadet, stop assuming girls can’t run, do push ups etc. Push females to reach their peek physical abilities, and then push them further. I would love to see the PT standards for females changed to a healthier standard.

Great! So there is one vote to move the female standards, along with all transgenders, to the higher standards traditional of males, and just have one set of requirements. I'll second that motion. Shall we vote and let Hdqs know? 

Dooooo it lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Currently I'm struggling to bring down a 9:45 mile to a 9:34. It's eleven seconds. It's not a fast mile, but I'm struggling. I have some understanding of the difference between and 8 minute and a 9 minute mile, because while I can sometimes get 9 to 9:15 and it feels the same, it's not consistent, and getting below 9 minutes will be challenging (hopefully attainable). I have no idea if I will be able to get below 7:30 in a year or two when I attempt Spaatz. The lower the times are, the greater the difficulty in shaving off time. I get that. (translatable to other physical activities as well, of course)

Run faster.

There are people that can run 5:15 miles.

Maybe I'm perceiving a tone there that you didn't intend. Firstly, I am not fit, and I'm well aware of that, although a year ago I was obese and now I'm at a normal weight and am at least capable of running for the whole mile (and 3-4 miles at a snail's jog). And secondly, cool, my boyfriend can run a 4:30 mile. Neither 5:15 or 4:30 is a practical mile standard to apply to everyone (too harsh) and I'd say a 9:30 is too slow (most somewhat fit teens, male or female, in my acquaintance (I know it's not a significant sample) can get 8:00).

a gender-neutral CPFT plan could be implemented, where everyone would be held to the same standards, while still being fair for both males and females alike.

I don't frankly know why CAP doesn't have this already - one less argument.

"Equal" is "equal".

So do you set the standard at the current level for males, or do you lower the standards for all, to be at what females do now? Or do you just split the difference, which makes it easier for those who are born male, but harder for those who were born female?

Or just let everyone get by with a 30 minute mile run/walk? LOLOL

No matter what ... standards will be lower.

Recruiting may benefit from this. But few will qualify to wear blues ever again.

Why would standards be lower? As a mother of a female cadet, stop assuming girls can’t run, do push ups etc. Push females to reach their peek physical abilities, and then push them further. I would love to see the PT standards for females changed to a healthier standard.

Great! So there is one vote to move the female standards, along with all transgenders, to the higher standards traditional of males, and just have one set of requirements. I'll second that motion. Shall we vote and let Hdqs know? 

Dooooo it lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Awesome! Under these delightful standards, I get to pass sit&reach with barely even stretching, and with the curl-ups and sit-and-reach, who even needs to pass push-ups? No one except Spaatz candidates need get below an 8-minute mile, too.

Awesome! Under these delightful standards, I get to pass sit&reach with barely even stretching, and with the curl-ups and sit-and-reach, who even needs to pass push-ups? No one except Spaatz candidates need get below an 8-minute mile, too.

So, just for discussion's sake, how would that be "bad"?

CAP's adoption and execution of PT is completely arbitrary, internally created (based on whatever standard the current administration sees fit),
and not specific to the preparation for anything other then a "healthy lifestyle".  It also generally lags the school norms of the respective era.

Academy Cadets, PD Cadets, Fire Cadets, Soldiers, etc., are all training to a standard to perform one or another specific operation,
for CAP it's just general "fitness" at whatever level NHQ sees "fit" (see what I did there?).

So what difference does it actually make what the "real" numbers are, since they aren't targeted at any specific ability?

I'd rather have a room full of happy cadets who are generally active, flexible, and within a range of normal, then 4-5 Spaatz candidates
who, despite their best efforts, are not likely to be Academy bound.

Instead of sad cadets who don't make 8, how about happy cadets all making 7?

I didn't say it was bad. I think an 8-minute mile is actually an "average" standard for adults, so requiring that of 18+ cadets, male and female, with somewhat laxer requirements for younger cadets, could be quite reasonable.

We have certainly discussed CPFT standards many times, both here and in other settings.

It bears repeating that the whole point of relying on the evidenced-based standards put out by the federal government is to avoid any arbitrary CAP-specific PT standards. 

As in "Well, I think that a C/SSgt should run a mile in 7:30. Because NCOs should set a good example for their cadets."  "No, that is unrealistically fast and will make cadets stall in grade.  We should set it at a very achievable 10 flat so that everyone can advance in grade regularly."

And so on.

We looked very, very hard for evidence-based fitness metrics for contemporary Americans in our age cohort.  We scoured the net.  We consulted academics and health professionals. We went to national youth fitness conferences seeking guidance.  And all paths led to the Presidential Youth Fitness Program, which is literally the only dataset / program that met our needs.  So we adapted it to our use as the Active Cadet Fitness Program.  And the assessment portion has been successfully beta-tested by over a hundred units for over a year.  It appears to be working, and has reduced the number of cadets who have "stalled" at an achievement based on the prior CPFT standards.

Let me also note that the official goal of our Fitness Element is:

To develop in cadets a habit of regular exercise.

We believe that the Active Cadet Fitness Program does exactly that, as part of a vigorous cadet program that also focusses on Leadership, Character, Stem, and activities.

And finally, to respond to the original topic of the thread, our data suggests that CAP has approximately the same percentage of TG members as are reflected in the population at large.  Of course, all cadets are to be encouraged and supported as they successfully engage in the program.  The actual number of TG members is relatively small, and we rely on CAP leaders to implement our program at the local level.  Based on the current ACFP assessment criteria, it appears that few, if any, TG cadets following our current procedures have had difficulty succeeding in the fitness assessment based on their legal gender.  If there is any indication that there is an actual (as opposed to a theoretical) problem, rest assured we will carefully review the situation and make adjustments as necessary.


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager

Currently I'm struggling to bring down a 9:45 mile to a 9:34. It's eleven seconds. It's not a fast mile, but I'm struggling.

Get your butt out there and start some serious running. I was running an 8 minute mile as a 40 yo (12 minute mile and a half) when I retired from the Navy.

[ETA] And 80 sit-ups in two minutes.

Currently I'm struggling to bring down a 9:45 mile to a 9:34. It's eleven seconds. It's not a fast mile, but I'm struggling.

Get your butt out there and start some serious running. I was running an 8 minute mile as a 40 yo (12 minute mile and a half) when I retired from the Navy.

[ETA] And 80 sit-ups in two minutes.

Honestly, sir, I don't think that 3 minutes (12 to 9) off my mile time over a period of 5 months (June through October) is too shabby although it is unremarkable. As I've spent six out of the last eight weeks bedridden, even missing school (hint: I love school), the extra 45s isn't awful. I expect to be running an 8-minute mile by the end of February, provided I don't get hospitalized or something.

Good for you. Med issues will get you some slack. Keep going. It really pained me, when I was in a cadet squadron, to be outrunning half the cadets in the mile run, when I was 45.

At least your time was respectable I outrun all but one of the males that don't pass PT, and I've never gotten below 9 minutes.

One of the reasons the standards get more stringent as grade/age change is because the intent, as Ned said, is to put cadets into an active lifestyle. The intent was to push cadets to stay active outside of the weekly meeting, not just once a month during a CPFT.

This is where the new PFC-based program is trying to fit in: focusing less on a score and more on activity and healthy lifestyles. To each their own on the actual graded portions; that's an entirely separate debate.

I'm not exactly seeing what your sidebar conversation about fitness has to do with the OP's question regarding uniform standards and the Commander giving the EO talk to the squadron.

And yes, I had an intentional tone in that post back there...

At least your time was respectable I outrun all but one of the males that don't pass PT, and I've never gotten below 9 minutes.

He had a reason to be able to run like that. He was in the Navy and needed to pass his physical fitness test!

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

There's millions of people with "regular" jobs that never do anything more then lift a coffee cup.

Walk to attached garage, drive through Dunkin, drive to work, walk to desk.

Rinse.  Repeat.

This is quite literally the American Way.

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

There's millions of people with "regular" jobs that never do anything more then lift a coffee cup.

Walk to attached garage, drive through Dunkin, drive to work, walk to desk.

Rinse.  Repeat.

This is quite literally the American Way.

Exactly my point.  Something to consider in CAP. Whether one can opt out of PT if the military isn't their goal, but cyber or math is.

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

There's millions of people with "regular" jobs that never do anything more then lift a coffee cup.

Walk to attached garage, drive through Dunkin, drive to work, walk to desk.

Rinse.  Repeat.

This is quite literally the American Way.

Exactly my point.  Something to consider in CAP. Whether one can opt out of PT if the military isn't their goal, but cyber or math is.

The CAP Cadet Program is a paramilitary-based organization, just as AFJROTC is. They both have a curriculum in STEM. They both have a curriculum in physical fitness. They both have a curriculum in drill.

An alternative organization may exist for those that want the Cyber side without the physical exertion. This is a military-structured program. Fitness standards, uniform standards, progression, discipline---all of it---that's this program. It's not a science club or hangout spot.

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

There's millions of people with "regular" jobs that never do anything more then lift a coffee cup.

Walk to attached garage, drive through Dunkin, drive to work, walk to desk.

Rinse.  Repeat.

This is quite literally the American Way.

Exactly my point.  Something to consider in CAP. Whether one can opt out of PT if the military isn't their goal, but cyber or math is.

The CAP Cadet Program is a paramilitary-based organization, just as AFJROTC is. They both have a curriculum in STEM. They both have a curriculum in physical fitness. They both have a curriculum in drill.

An alternative organization may exist for those that want the Cyber side without the physical exertion. This is a military-structured program. Fitness standards, uniform standards, progression, discipline---all of it---that's this program. It's not a science club or hangout spot.

 

So many of today's kids. Dreaming of making a living with no physical exertion.

There's millions of people with "regular" jobs that never do anything more then lift a coffee cup.

Walk to attached garage, drive through Dunkin, drive to work, walk to desk.

Rinse.  Repeat.

This is quite literally the American Way.

Exactly my point.  Something to consider in CAP. Whether one can opt out of PT if the military isn't their goal, but cyber or math is.

The CAP Cadet Program is a paramilitary-based organization, just as AFJROTC is. They both have a curriculum in STEM. They both have a curriculum in physical fitness. They both have a curriculum in drill.

An alternative organization may exist for those that want the Cyber side without the physical exertion. This is a military-structured program. Fitness standards, uniform standards, progression, discipline---all of it---that's this program. It's not a science club or hangout spot.

Well said!

At least your time was respectable I outrun all but one of the males that don't pass PT, and I've never gotten below 9 minutes.

He had a reason to be able to run like that. He was in the Navy and needed to pass his physical fitness test!

True dat, and my time was always well within the time limit for my age. 

The CAP Cadet Program is a paramilitary-based organization, just as AFJROTC is. They both have a curriculum in STEM. They both have a curriculum in physical fitness. They both have a curriculum in drill.

Yes. When it comes to attracting potential Cadets, can we compete well with AFJROTC? Are the benefits when it comes to college and or entering the military equal?  (I really have no idea) Just wondering if the AF needs to change anything so that we can be competitive with AFJROTC when it comes to recruitment?

The CAP Cadet Program is a paramilitary-based organization, just as AFJROTC is. They both have a curriculum in STEM. They both have a curriculum in physical fitness. They both have a curriculum in drill.

Yes. When it comes to attracting potential Cadets, can we compete well with AFJROTC? Are the benefits when it comes to college and or entering the military equal?  (I really have no idea) Just wondering if the AF needs to change anything so that we can be competitive with AFJROTC when it comes to recruitment?

I spent a great deal of yesterday working on a training outline, and in so doing, decided to do some research on AFJROTC. I was very surprised at virtually how mirrored most cadet units in CAP are to JROTC units. I see a majority of drill, PT, Color Guard (yes, also drill), and some STEM. It seems like the curriculum also includes a bit of land navigation/orienteering, which is often the extent of cadets' exposure to ES; though, there are some additional opportunities for CAP cadets that JROTC cadets do not seem to have access to.

So competition wise, I don't think CAP is all that far off. I do think that marketing plays a huge factor: "Air Force JROTC" vs. "Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program." Virtually everyone knows the former, and we often have to explain the latter, as discussed in other recent topics.

Okay, so let's get past the marketing aspect and focus on the mission. The CAP Cadet Program is a youth leadership program with a military structure to instill a certain level of discipline and professionalism with an aerospace and emergency services backdrop to provide additional training experiences and opportunities. When you start cutting fitness and appearance standards, you start losing that military/Air Force aspect. There's enough griping in the military these days about the performance of soldiers, airmen, sailors, marines, and their respective officers when it comes to these things. We're not doing our organization, to its intent, much justice to tone those down.

To get it out of the way: Everyone's unique; everyone's an individual; everyone is special in their own way. I don't think anyone really disagrees with that. But how far does it go? I happen to feel, and it's just me, that a certain level of conformity and standardization among the crowd instills a certain level of camaraderie and sense of team orientation. Yes, there's more to community than what you look like or how you dress. And there's more to individuality than just your unique, or even mastered, set of skills. When you combine those aspects together jointly, you see a greater team success and companionship than you do trying to find everyone with their niche. The Cadet Program isn't there to develop just individual leaders in their own way; it's to make cadets part of a much larger community. This requires some sacrifice of one's comfort areas and preferences, to include forfeiting what you choose to wear and how you present yourself to both the public and the internal collective.

Perhaps if we tried to do more to enforce the existing standards, including fitness and uniform wear, while we may not have the roster sizes we all long for, we may have a much greater success with those that do opt to stay in this organization for the long run, thus producing stronger, more disciplined, more resilient leaders in the future.

I spent a great deal of yesterday working on a training outline, and in so doing, decided to do some research on AFJROTC. I was very surprised at virtually how mirrored most cadet units in CAP are to JROTC units. I see a majority of drill, PT, Color Guard (yes, also drill), and some STEM. It seems like the curriculum also includes a bit of land navigation/orienteering, which is often the extent of cadets' exposure to ES; though, there are some additional opportunities for CAP cadets that JROTC cadets do not seem to have access to.

How does a CAP Cadet entering college and going AFROTC ... compare to a AFJROTC high schooler entering college and going AFROTC?

If I know of a 14 year old who is already thinking of college and an AF career .... which route is best of the two? I really don't think they could be totally equal. The AFROTC Commander (or whatever) at the college might prefer one over the other.

The questions being in regards to marketing to youth interested in military.

CAP does not, "compete" with JROTC, different goals, funding, and reasons for joining.

In my experience if is just as uneven, or worse in some cases, then CAP because many schools
allow it as either an elective, or in place of gym, and kids take it as seriously as they do one of those classes.

CAP does not, "compete" with JROTC, different goals, funding, and reasons for joining.

In my experience if is just as uneven, or worse in some cases, then CAP because many schools
allow it as either an elective, or in place of gym, and kids take it as seriously as they do one of those classes.

Well I've been a senior member for over 2 years now and the difference is still murky and nebulous as can be to me. If some kid asks me which is better if he has military goals, I don't have a clue ... so we can be assured the general public out there doesn't know either.

CAP does not, "compete" with JROTC, different goals, funding, and reasons for joining.

In my experience if is just as uneven, or worse in some cases, then CAP because many schools
allow it as either an elective, or in place of gym, and kids take it as seriously as they do one of those classes.

Well I've been a senior member for over 2 years now and the difference is still murky and nebulous as can be to me. If some kid asks me which is better if he has military goals, I don't have a clue ... so we can be assured the general public out there doesn't know either.

I think that's pretty accurate. And that's something that both organizations can help facilitate---pointing someone in the right direction. I do think, however, CAP can offer much more insight into non-military career paths.

Eclipse makes a good point about schools using AFJROTC as an elective, and I don't think their cadets necessarily take it as seriously as CAP, just in my own experiences, because a lot of them use it to get out of class or as an after-school activity and not a commitment. Sure, we'll always have cadets who don't take CAP seriously, and that's usually because they joined the wrong organization and really don't "get it." We had quite a bit of ROTC cadets who were prior CAP and JROTC. The former CAP cadets had a much greater interest in a military commitment in ROTC than the JROTC cadets did. There were a handful that stayed in to earn a commission, but the CAP cadets saw CAP as a tool to progress into a career. I don't know if that's a CAP-ism or just happened by chance. I kind of see CAP as a stronger component in the grand scheme of things because it really is a program where you make it your own to some degree. Although there are still some aspects I have my own reservations about, and maybe that's more of a Wing thing than a CAP thing.

I disagree, though, that CAP does not compete with JROTC. Absolutely, as well as other youth organizations. Most cadets don't join because they wanted to be in CAP more than anything; it was marketed to them at the local level as the better alternative than other options, if they even researched other options. We have a cadet whose brother is a Sea Cadet; mom is the VFW Commander and prior Air Force. She got her kids into both, but pushed them to the organization they leaned toward. I appreciate that entirely. But I see the majority of recruits that walk in the door with almost no exposure to any other similar organization. They just happened to "find it," and they generally meaning the parents.

...way strayed from the OP.

How does a CAP Cadet entering college and going AFROTC ... compare to a AFJROTC high schooler entering college and going AFROTC?

In my limited experience, I see little difference. The best course of action for either cadet is to participate, taking advantage of experience and knowledge, and keeping their mouth SHUT. Saying "when I was in [CAP|JROTC]" is a speedy way to generate a negative opinion from your peers and superiors. Don't tell them; show them quietly.

It doesn't always have to be either/or. Currently we have at least four cadets who are dual AFJROTC/CAP members, and often dual members who have time to devote to CAP are exceptionally sharp cadets.

Not sure how CAP v. JROTC is related to transgender accommodations, though.

This whole issue of transgenderism is going to open up a Pandora's box of issues that are going to have to be dealt with.  I see lawsuits a plenty in the future.  The issue of PT that Eclipse brings up is a valid one and just one of many that will arise.

MG

Care to provide evidence for said claim?  Or why your opinion has any validity?  Or provide examples of the “lawsuits a plenty”?

No lawsuits, just lost mbrship.  Call us narrow minded, but several families I recruited fm left the program, same with scouting (yes, these where church families).  Those who feel this is immoral i.e., sinful, will not try to change these programs, we’ll just leave; something that is going on.  Just like the active military (which has confiscated bibles and dictated to chaplains what parts of the Bible they can’t speak on (which are several regarding this issue), mbrship will drop.  No harm, no foul. No one will try to force their views on anyone, nor should they.  Just leave or don’t join, which is now happening.  No need for lawsuits since the military allows it.


Btw, the AMA reports that over 70 % of the transgendered revert to their birth identity within 10 years of their conversation.


Only time and common sense will straighten this out.  Ignoring this issue and pretend there is no issue will see in time will effect our cadet and senior mbrship.  Already the scouts have competing organizations but CAP can’t have competing organizations. So, I envision the organization just dying (I don’t wish for that but I see it coming),

Those who feel this is immoral i.e., sinful, will not try to change these programs, we’ll just leave;

That is their choice.  There are plenty of other organizations out there that are willing to take them.  CAP is also willing to "take them back" as well should they change their minds.

 

Just like the active military (which has confiscated bibles and dictated to chaplains what parts of the Bible they can’t speak on (which are several regarding this issue), mbrship will drop.

Got a real reference for this?  Never saw this, nor heard of any chaplains or military personnel confiscating personal bibles from Soldiers.  I doubt military membership dropped because "confiscated bibles and dictated chaplains". Or are you speaking of the 2009 "bible burning" at Bagram AB in which a church published bibles in Pashto and Dari and distributed them to Soldiers so that they could convert Afghan Muslims to Christianity?  If so, the military strictly forbids the proselytizing of religion by any of its Soldiers (to include Chaplains) as a duty.  Interestingly, it was the Chaplain Corps that confiscated the bibles and burned them, not the general Army.

Btw, the AMA reports that over 70 % of the transgendered revert to their birth identity within 10 years of their conversation.

Got a reference for this?  I cannot seem to recall any official statement by the AMA in recent years that suggests otherwise.  Nor was I able to find any on their website.  Of course, there are individual cases of "sex change regret", but I am unable to find any statement by the AMA.

So, I envision the organization just dying (I don’t wish for that but I see it coming),

I highly doubt that people leaving due to CAP accepting transgender members will cause the organization to die.  The organization is more at risk from over policying itself and under performing than people leaving due to transgenderism. 

Just like the active military (which has confiscated bibles and dictated to chaplains what parts of the Bible they can’t speak on (which are several regarding this issue), mbrship will drop.

What are you talking about? I was given a bible at least a dozen times by the military. I never heard of a Chaplain being restricted on what they could preach.

I find it strange that people are leaving over this (dont get me wrong, I am not mocking someones religious/social beliefs over the issue) This is different from the BSA in that there was an outright ban on homosexual membership.  Or other than adult leader positions you could not join a cub or boy scout troop as a female.  Its not like the organization just threw up a huge billboard national marketing campaign to recruit transgender membership.  More so they clarified that if you are, they are not going to make it difficult for you to be the you you feel you are. 
Sure there are going to be a handful of current members that are going to one day start showing up in a different uniform/appearance.  OK I get that, awkward for some people. But, for the average new cadet coming into the organization I dont know how you would really know.  If Kelly shows up to join and looks like and says she is a girl, I dont think anyone is going to argue and demand she come into the office and prove it.

mk

If Kelly shows up to join and looks like and says she is a girl, I dont think anyone is going to argue and demand she come into the office and prove it.

The potential cadet's membership documents have to match what they represent.

The world doesn't have to know, but a number of key people in the unit do.

Also, no one is quitting CAP over this.

No.

One.

If Kelly shows up to join and looks like and says she is a girl, I dont think anyone is going to argue and demand she come into the office and prove it.

The potential cadet's membership documents have to match what they represent.

The world doesn't have to know, but a number of key people in the unit do.

Also, no one is quitting CAP over this.

No.

One.

Eclipse, careful.  That may be true in your neck of the woods but not necessarily the case in other wings.  There very well could be people leaving because of it you just may/are not privy to it..

I knew that when I typed it.

That's not to say this situation doesn't pose potentially significant issues for some units, and
activities, but if it causes you angst in a CAP context, enough that would have you actually quit,
there's the door, you must have missed the Level 1 lessons and the EO and Non-D information.

Meanwhile, the adults in the room will take care of things.

I knew that when I typed it.

That's not to say this situation doesn't pose potentially significant issues for some units, and
activities, but if it causes you angst in a CAP context, enough that would have you actually quit,
there's the door, you must have missed the Level 1 lessons and the EO and Non-D information.

Meanwhile, the adults in the room will take care of things.

Eclipse, EO and Non-D are a moot point if having transgender members goes against one's values.  Then the member is under no obligation to stay.  If they stay they are under the obligation to apply those policies to the fullest extent regardless of their beliefs and values.  If someone chooses to leave CAP because allowing transgender members in is conflict with their values so be it.

No lawsuits, just lost mbrship.  Call us narrow minded, but several families I recruited fm left the program, same with scouting (yes, these where church families).  Those who feel this is immoral i.e., sinful, will not try to change these programs, we’ll just leave; something that is going on.  Just like the active military (which has confiscated bibles and dictated to chaplains what parts of the Bible they can’t speak on (which are several regarding this issue), mbrship will drop.  No harm, no foul. No one will try to force their views on anyone, nor should they.  Just leave or don’t join, which is now happening.  No need for lawsuits since the military allows it.
Btw, the AMA reports that over 70 % of the transgendered revert to their birth identity within 10 years of their conversation.
Only time and common sense will straighten this out.  Ignoring this issue and pretend there is no issue will see in time will effect our cadet and senior mbrship.  Already the scouts have competing organizations but CAP can’t have competing organizations. So, I envision the organization just dying (I don’t wish for that but I see it coming),

Well said.
Very well said.
“A civilization that can thus succumb to its vanquished enemy, must first have become so degenerate, that neither its appointed priests and teachers, nor anybody else, has the capacity, or will take the trouble, to stand up for it.”
— John Stuart Mill, On Liberty

No lawsuits, just lost mbrship.

We track membership stats pretty carefully, and based on what I've seen I doubt we will see a measureable drop based on our accommodating some of our membership.  But I suppose you could be right.  Undoubtedly some members quit as soon as a minority member joins their squadron.  Or a woman becomes the squadron commander.  Or an openly gay wing commander.  Or whatever they find so unacceptable that they can no longer volunteer to serve their community, state, and nation.

Btw, the AMA reports that over 70 % of the transgendered revert to their birth identity within 10 years of their conversation.

Again, you may be right.  It can't be easy to even attempt such a thing in a world of people who would judge an individual simply by the way they dress, rather than by who they are or what they do with their lives.

If Kelly shows up to join and looks like and says she is a girl, I dont think anyone is going to argue and demand she come into the office and prove it.

The potential cadet's membership documents have to match what they represent.

The world doesn't have to know, but a number of key people in the unit do.

...

School ID, School report card (column B) & Column C Social Security Card.  Neither of which may or have to have the gender on it.

mk

True - however a cadet is required to declare a gender, and if there is a question
would need to substantiate the declaration, which I will grant you may be getting
complicated in some states, which is why any issues I had to deal with would be
immediately kicked to NHQ (discreetly).

And once one's gender is declared on the membership application, and it shows in eServices, that's the gender that we're running with.

They will adhere to the uniform standards for that gender. They will meet the fitness standards for that gender. They will house/bunk and share hygiene facilities with that gender.

That last one is where I can see people having an issue. But accommodations can be made for those situations. You can talk morality all you want for either side of the coin with this subject, but the moment you have a cadet with male genitalia in a locker room with a cadet with female genitalia, your and my personal opinions regardless, you have to acknowledge that there may be a level of criticism by another cadet or parent that is beyond the control of their emotions/opinions on our part. We can't control how someone else feels.

That said, we can respectfully tell that individual to get over it, it is what it is, and if they don't like it they can leave; or we can try to make some level of accommodation that allows everyone to participate, and there will still be a certain level of awkwardness and even segregation because of it. There is no perfect scenario here unless everyone involved is 100% okay with it.

Unlike the matter of homosexuality, in which case nobody would ever know unless you said something or acted in a way expressive of same sex admiration (i.e., flirting with a member of the same sex), with transgenderism, there is a certain level of physical distinction that might make it obvious. I would bet in most cases there may be suspicions or uncertainty, but until formally declared by someone, you'd never know without seeing it for yourself.

In any case, back to the very beginning of my post here: Uniform and fitness standards must be adhered to. If your CAP ID says you are a male, then you need to meet the standards for a male. If your CAP ID says you are a female, then you need to meet the standards for a female. You cannot bounce back and forth between the two. Your gender, whether biological or self-identified---whatever your profile says---sets the standard that you will meet.

One can debate this topic forever but if you don't think this is going to result in a reduction in membership, you have to be living in an alternate universe.  It will and it has.

School ID, School report card (column B) & Column C Social Security Card.  Neither of which may or have to have the gender on it.

When signing up for Encampment, leadership has to know whether they are sleeping in the boys tent or the girls tent.

I think the horse is sufficiently beaten. We've started another circle, and I'm dizzy.

Click.