Col Mary Feik Scholarship only for females?

[Garibaldi]

Lock, please. This is getting ridiculous.

[Nuke52]

Tick, tock......  This thread either needs to either given a "Time Out" or just plain locked.
The civil discourse ended a couple of pages ago.

I disagree that the thread needs a lock, but I do agree that the civil discourse ended--the moment Ned, Hatkevich, Pat, and others began willfully misrepresenting our completely valid points and began taking the route of knowingly fallacious arguments and ad hominem cheap shots...

[Nuke52]

As long as I'm on a roll...  And before someone locks this thread...

Come on, CAPTALKers!  Where's your money? 

I've already pledged $11,000 to (targeted) CAP cadet flight scholarships.  Where's your pledge?

Who's in?

[JayT]

For some of you to pretend that their opposition to a female only scholarship is more than simple misogyny is absolutely stunning.

For some of you to pretend to not understand the simplest of words written here and to libel us as misogynists is absolutely... expected.

Unless you have a reading-related learning disability, NO ONE, repeat NO ONE, has said a female-only scholarship is improper or wrong.  Only that a gender-restricted scholarship (and I repeat, again, for the reading impaired) administered by CAP NHQ is improper and wrong. 

ETA:  If the scholarship in question were simply linked to by NHQ (as is the Ninety-Nines' and other scholarships) and not administered by NHQ (was that clear enough for you, JayT?), I would be among its biggest fans.  In fact, I will again put my money where my mouth is.  (Unlike you JayT, where's your donation?)  If NHQ stops administering the Feik scholarship and treats it the same way as it does the Ninety-Nines, AOPA, Spaatz Association, and other scholarships (advertising and linking to, but NOT administering), I hereby pledge my $100 per year for the next 10 years to the Feik scholarship.  Is that enough "misogyny" for you JayT?  Man up!  Where's your $1000???

Wow, we got an Internet tough guy here! Some "lieutenant colonel" you must be.

Do your parents know you're offering to threw this much money out? That's a lot of money!

[Nuke52]

For some of you to pretend that their opposition to a female only scholarship is more than simple misogyny is absolutely stunning.

For some of you to pretend to not understand the simplest of words written here and to libel us as misogynists is absolutely... expected.

Unless you have a reading-related learning disability, NO ONE, repeat NO ONE, has said a female-only scholarship is improper or wrong.  Only that a gender-restricted scholarship (and I repeat, again, for the reading impaired) administered by CAP NHQ is improper and wrong. 

ETA:  If the scholarship in question were simply linked to by NHQ (as is the Ninety-Nines' and other scholarships) and not administered by NHQ (was that clear enough for you, JayT?), I would be among its biggest fans.  In fact, I will again put my money where my mouth is.  (Unlike you JayT, where's your donation?)  If NHQ stops administering the Feik scholarship and treats it the same way as it does the Ninety-Nines, AOPA, Spaatz Association, and other scholarships (advertising and linking to, but NOT administering), I hereby pledge my $100 per year for the next 10 years to the Feik scholarship.  Is that enough "misogyny" for you JayT?  Man up!  Where's your $1000???

Wow, we got an Internet tough guy here! Some "lieutenant colonel" you must be.

Do your parents know you're offering to threw this much money out? That's a lot of money!

Hmmm, so donating $1000 to the Feik scholarship is "threwing [sic] money out"?  So in your mind, donating money to a female-only CAP flight scholarship is "threwing money out"?  And you call me the misogynist...

"Internet tough guy"--yeah, ad hominem, that's about all anyone could expect from a misogynist like you.

I guess we should put you down as a "no" then, huh?  Too bad, you do know that means you're depriving some deserving female cadet a chance to learn to fly, right?

[Spam]

Nuke, JayT, everyone... I think a pause for air would be good here, teammates.

How about we return to this tomorrow, after a bit of voluntary down time to regain perspective.

V/R,
Spam

[THRAWN]

This is a simple fix, but it needs to come from National. The only scholarship fund that CAP should be administering is its own. All other scholarships can be advertised and promoted, but the donors themselves need to be responsible for the application process and the awarding of the money.

[Nuke52]

Nuke, JayT, everyone... I think a pause for air would be good here, teammates.

How about we return to this tomorrow, after a bit of voluntary down time to regain perspective.

V/R,
Spam

Spam, that's a very reasonable request--thank you for posting it.  I will cease from posting here further until tomorrow.

And in the meantime, once he's calmed down, JayT can apologize to the rest of the senior membership on CAP Talk for inferring that the typical CAP officer would need his parents' permission to donate money, as though a CAP SM were, by default, some sort of loser living in his parents' basement.

Cheers.

[Ned]

I thought we were making progress, but it appears that I was incorrect.

Since it appears that we cannot agree on the basic facts of the issue, but perhaps even more importantly since it appears that for many of the participants the particular facts are less important than the issues involved (restated, the facts don't matter - the principle is what it is), then I can only agree that we are done here.

The CAP leadership and I continue to believe that CAP's role in accepting and administering the Feik Scholarship fully complies with our regulations and polices (Specifically including CAPR 36-1), and results in a measurable benefit for our cadets.

Some of you vehemently disagree.  We have exchanged views.  I continue to believe that this is a dispute about the meaning of the words "discrimination" and "program" as they are used in the 36-1.  (See my reply #113 above.)  Some of you disagree with me about what we disagree about.

I will continue to watch the thread when I can and will try to respond to any new points or comments. 

But as usual here on CT, the longer an argument goes on, the more personal and polarized it becomes and ultimately no one ever convinces anyone else of their respective positions.

But I do think it is important for us to be able to discuss it, as long as we can do so respectfully.

Ned Lee

[Storm Chaser]

I don't see what the big fuss is. If a donor wants to provide a scholarship for a specific group (in this case female cadets), then what's the problem? Some female cadets will benefit from these scholarships, while other cadets, both male and female, can apply to one or more of the other many scholarships available.

Why are we playing the discrimination card here? Scholarships sponsored by other institutions and organizations have criteria that make some people eligible and others not. Should a student with a great academic record feel discriminated because he or she doesn't qualify for a sports scholarship? Institutions, both public and private, for profit and non-profit, have scholarships targeted towards minorities or under represented groups. Even the military have such programs. Why is it suddenly wrong for CAP to do the same, especially when it's at the request of the donor?

If someone offers a donation, but states it can only be used for cadet activities and programs, wouldn't that be age discrimination if we apply the same argument about gender discrimination being discussed on this thread? No, it's not discrimination; it's a criteria.

The fact is that females are under represented in aviation. According to the FAA Airman Database, only 5.12% of airline or commercial pilots are women in the U.S. The U.S. Department of Labor reports that only 7.2% of those employed as pilots or flight engineers are female as of 2014. The Col Mary Feik Cadet Flight Scholarship is there to encourage female cadets to learn how to fly, give them an opportunity to earn a private pilot certificate, and perhaps spark an interest in a future aviation career. How is encouraging and supporting more females in aviation a bad thing? I really don't see anything wrong with this scholarship and I'm very surprised that many here do.

[THRAWN]

I don't see what the big fuss is. If a donor wants to provide a scholarship for a specific group (in this case female cadets), then what's the problem? Some female cadets will benefit from these scholarships, while other cadets, both male and female, can apply to one or more of the other many scholarships available.

Why are we playing the discrimination card here? Scholarships sponsored by other institutions and organizations have criteria that make some people eligible and others not. Should a student with a great academic record feel discriminated because he or she doesn't qualify for a sports scholarship? Institutions, both public and private, for profit and non-profit, have scholarships targeted towards minorities or under represented groups. Even the military have such programs. Why is it suddenly wrong for CAP to do the same, especially when it's at the request of the donor?

If someone offers a donation, but states it can only be used for cadet activities and programs, wouldn't that be age discrimination if we apply the same argument about gender discrimination being discussed on this thread? No, it's not discrimination; it's a criteria.

The fact is that females are under represented in aviation. According to the FAA Airman Database, only 5.12% of airline or commercial pilots are women in the U.S. The U.S. Department of Labor reports that only 7.2% of those employed as pilots or flight engineers are female as of 2014. The Col Mary Feik Cadet Flight Scholarship is there to encourage female cadets to learn how to fly, give them an opportunity to earn a private pilot certificate, and perhaps spark an interest in a future aviation career. How is encouraging and supporting more females in aviation a bad thing? I really don't see anything wrong with this scholarship and I'm very surprised that many here do.

Great gravy. There is nothing wrong with the scholarship. There is something wrong with CAP ADMINISTERING the scholarship. This has been beaten to death, but if the donors want to give to women, great. Keep CAP out of the application and administration process. Handle it like the AOPA and EAA scholarships. Post 'em, let cadets know they exist and that ends CAP's participation.

[lordmonar]

Great gravy. There is nothing wrong with the scholarship. There is something wrong with CAP ADMINISTERING the scholarship. This has been beaten to death, but if the donors want to give to women, great. Keep CAP out of the application and administration process. Handle it like the AOPA and EAA scholarships. Post 'em, let cadets know they exist and that ends CAP's participation.

Again.....there is nothing wrong with the scholarship....then why can CAP administer it?

That is where your position fails.

If the scholarship is good....it's good.   If it is not good for CAP to administer....then the scholarship is bad.

You all can't have it both ways.....and us the "principle" card to justify the position.

My personal position is........The scholarship is a form a discrimination but the good out weights the bad....so we go with it.
We do it all the time and will continue to do it.

And with that....I'm out.....you all have fun.

[THRAWN]

Great gravy. There is nothing wrong with the scholarship. There is something wrong with CAP ADMINISTERING the scholarship. This has been beaten to death, but if the donors want to give to women, great. Keep CAP out of the application and administration process. Handle it like the AOPA and EAA scholarships. Post 'em, let cadets know they exist and that ends CAP's participation.

Again.....there is nothing wrong with the scholarship....then why can CAP administer it?

That is where your position fails.

If the scholarship is good....it's good.   If it is not good for CAP to administer....then the scholarship is bad.

You all can't have it both ways.....and us the "principle" card to justify the position.

My personal position is........The scholarship is a form a discrimination but the good out weights the bad....so we go with it.
We do it all the time and will continue to do it.

And with that....I'm out.....you all have fun.

A more appropriate question is "Why SHOULD CAP administer it?" The organization should not. The issue is not with specific donors earmarking their dollars for a specific demographic. It has to do with CAP's involvement. There are plenty of funds that are directed toward specific demographics. The donors manage those funds and the administration of them. This fund should be no different.

[Pace]

Everyone, please consider this your first and last warning. No more personal attacks. Stay on topic. Any posts from here on out need to advance the topic, i.e. new and relevant comments/questions only.

To those who have made personal attacks, this is a direct violation of the membership code of conduct. Consider this a mass warning. In 10 years, I have never banned anyone until a few weeks ago. I don't want to pull that trigger again, but civil discourse is required here. If you can't argue constructively with people of differing views, leave this site and don't return.

Edit: grammatical error fixed

[FW]

I feel uneasy with CAP offering a scholarship for a restricted segment of the membership (females, in this case). Historically, we've allowed donors to earmark contributions for a program, however restricting a donation to this magnitude was not allowed. Something about accepting federal funds comes to play when someone decides to take issue; maybe it isn't a problem.
If the donors saw fit to contribute to CAP, as Col Lee stated, the funds are now "Corporate". I'm probably missing something here, but how do we allow the use of Corporate funds to be restricted by sex?  How is an Organization, which depends on federal funds, able to use Corpoate funds for this type of restricted use? 
(It must be allowed, because we're doing it.)
Note: as this thread gets longer, I just end up with more questions... 

[Alaric]

I feel uneasy with CAP offering a scholarship for a restricted segment of the membership (females, in this case). Historically, we've allowed donors to earmark contributions for a program, however restricting a donation to this magnitude was not allowed. Something about accepting federal funds comes to play when someone decides to take issue; maybe it isn't a problem.
If the donors saw fit to contribute to CAP, as Col Lee stated, the funds are now "Corporate". I'm probably missing something here, but how do we allow the use of Corporate funds to be restricted by sex?  How is an Organization, which depends on federal funds, able to use Corpoate funds for this type of restricted use? 
(It must be allowed, because we're doing it.)
Note: as this thread gets longer, I just end up with more questions... 

The same way public universities are able to offer focused scholarships and the US Government is allowed to give preferential hiring treatment for veterans.

[FW]

^Nope. Public institutions work within "title 9" when sexual preference is involved.  Government (local, state, and federal) gives preferences to veterans regardless of sex, race, or creed.  Nice try though... :angel:

[Alaric]

^Nope. Public institutions work within "title 9" when sexual preference is involved.  Government (local, state, and federal) gives preferences to veterans regardless of sex, race, or creed.  Nice try though... :angel:

Not a try, using the same argument that has been made here giving veterans preferential treatment in hiring is discriminatory (note that I have no issue with preferential treatment for those who have served our country) but the argument can be made that since many cannot serve in the military through no fault of their own (chronic illness, etc) why should they be at a disadvantage applying for jobs with our government, which is supported by everyone's taxes

Public institutions do offer scholarships to traditionally under served populations such as http://www.albany.edu/studyabroad/diversity-scholarship.php http://www.albany.edu/studyabroad/world-within-reach-scholarship.php

http://www.scholarshipsforwomen.net/government/

Nice try on your part though

[FW]

^ Excellent illustrations of programs which are open to all... 

Your first link starts with this:
"Diversity Abroad Honors Scholarship Program (SUNY)
The Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (ODEI) has announced the Diversity Abroad Honors Scholarship Program. This scholarship is intended to support candidates with exceptional academic merit. Any UAlbany student is eligible for this scholarship, regardless of what study abroad program they are attending. "

Your second link describes this when describing funds "just for women":

"Funding Just for Women

Of course, there are many scholarships and grants which are aimed specifically at women and helping them achieve their goal of higher education.

The AAUW (formerly the American Association of University Women) offers several different grants, fellowship and financial awards to help females:

    Change careers
    Advance in the workplace
    Re-enter the workforce
    Enter a degree program in which participation by women has traditionally been low, such as architecture, computer science and engineering.
    Other fellowships are further restricted to women of a specific age group and economic background.

The Jeannette Rankin Women's Scholarship Fund offers a scholarship to women who are accepted at or enrolled at a regionally or ACICS-accredited institution earning a "technical or vocational education, an associate's degree, or a first bachelor's degree." Scholarship recipients must be at least 35 years old and demonstrate financial need."

There are more examples in the article, however ALL RESTRICTED scholarships are from private foundations or institutions.  The public options go to all qualified applicants based on merit or need.

The rest of the link describes possible funding for all who qualify.  This is, IMHO, not what we're discussing.  I'm sure there is a good explanation for what CAP is doing with Corporate funds, I just don't see the connection with the above.   

As veteran preferences go; one could argue it is a continued "thanks" for services rendered.  All veterans may take advantage. Those who "cannot serve", can find other "preferences", they just need know where to look. 

Thanks for engaging... :angel:

[RiverAux]

A more appropriate question is "Why SHOULD CAP administer it?"

I would think that CAP NHQ has plenty of other things to spend their time on than administering a scholarship program that is not our own.

For example, they could spend any time that is currently going towards the Feik scholarship (which I do suspect isn't a huge amount of time, but it takes something) towards raising outside money for our own CAP scholarships that are open to ALL cadets.