Senior ABUs at the Winter Command Council

[jdh]

Two wrongs certainly don't make a right. But that said, as a member of the "Two Plus Benjamins" club,  I've given up on "calling people on it", as their response is always "respect!(tm)", whereas "integrity" seems to fall by the wayside. Those who wear it and shouldn't, know it. I'll leave it up to them to deal with it the next time they talk to my cadets about Integrity.

All of us have a responsibility to help each other wear the uniform properly.  Please reconsider your decision not to help other members by respectfully pointing out uniform discrepancies.  I know I appreciate it when others point out my errors to me.

"Duty is almost never the easiest path."


Thank you for all you do for CAP.

Ned Lee

Unfortunately I'm at the end of my rope on the issue. When a person whose uniform could serve me as an impromptu shelter for the night claims to weigh 20 pounds less than me, at the same height...there's just no "gentle" way to talk about it.

There are times that do to a digestive tract issue my gut can expand like you would expect to see from a starving kid on a give us money commercial without me gaining a single pound. Im not saying that is the case for most people but there are times when an increase in volume doesnt always equal an increase in mass. But that being during the times that happens I dont wear the AF style uniforms its just polos and grey slacks for me.

[NIN]

I am being honest.   Most people do follow 39-1 and para 1.2.2. specifically.   In those case where they do not.  It is up to us to challenge those members and report them to higher authority.

I'm sure you are. Personal observation and ubiquitous photographic evidence from all over the dang place gives me a different impression.

This:

isn't this:

[THRAWN]

Back to weigh ins are we?

[dwb]

Personal observation and ubiquitous photographic evidence from all over the dang place gives me a different impression.

I live within about an hour's drive (maybe 90 mins) of my entire chain of command. Right up to CAP/CC. As you can imagine, I see them out and about several times a year at various CAP goings-on.

I'm not running around with a bathroom scale, but just by eyeballing it, I think they're all good. None of them look like marathon runners (except my Sq CC, who can PT me into the ground without trying), but I would not put my reputation on the line to conduct a weigh in.

I'm just some guy on the Internet, and you're not under any obligation to believe me. I'm just seconding NIN's remark that a photo != seeing them in real life.

---

As for the problem in general of CAP folks not meeting weight standards, anecdotally I think we've gotten better. I remember even 10 years ago seeing more egregious violations than I see today. Part of that is commanders having tough conversations, and I think another big part is seeing senior leaders wearing blazers and aviator shirts even if they don't have to. That goes a long way towards removing the stigma of CAP distinctive uniforms.

[RiverAux]

[As for the problem in general of CAP folks not meeting weight standards, anecdotally I think we've gotten better. I remember even 10 years ago seeing more egregious violations than I see today. Part of that is commanders having tough conversations, and I think another big part is seeing senior leaders wearing blazers and aviator shirts even if they don't have to. That goes a long way towards removing the stigma of CAP distinctive uniforms.

I think its more that fewer senior members are wearing any of the military style uniforms whether or not they can. 

[Garibaldi]

[As for the problem in general of CAP folks not meeting weight standards, anecdotally I think we've gotten better. I remember even 10 years ago seeing more egregious violations than I see today. Part of that is commanders having tough conversations, and I think another big part is seeing senior leaders wearing blazers and aviator shirts even if they don't have to. That goes a long way towards removing the stigma of CAP distinctive uniforms.

I think its more that fewer senior members are wearing any of the military style uniforms whether or not they can.

Breaking my self-imposed exile to respond.

As a fat and fuzzy, I've been outside H/W for about 20 years or so, ever since I broke 200 (I'm 5'7) and could never get back below it for very long. I have always worn the AF style uniform. Various people who were above me and were grossly out of H/W themselves never said boo. So I kept wearing them, because reasons. Transferring in to my current unit, I mentioned that I no longer had any blues (sold them to various people here during the Great Purge of 2014) but was working on obtaining them. Spam gave me a look, rubbed his own belly and said "dude." All he had to say. I've not pursued wearing blues since, and have transitioned into the polo with tactical slacks for most all occasions. I only wear BDUs now for actual GT missions, and am really losing the battle of the bulge, so that may not even be an option anymore.

My point is, sometimes all it takes is a gentle word, or self-deprecating humor to make one realize that they need to think about other options.

We return you now to your regular programming.

*returns to lurking*

[NIN]

Back to weigh ins are we?

My point was: a photo isn't exactly the best way to ascertain someone's compliance with the rules.

Thankfully, we've (mostly) gotten away from that sort of thing on CAP-Talk, but we can look back in the deep dark recesses here and find whole threads literally eviscerating unsuspecting people for perceived slights seen in photos, things like the color of the material on a badge or the alignment of their insignia when it was likely some kind of trick of lighting or camera artifact caused by an angle or something.

But going to back to my original point (and pardon me for trotting out the "Respect™" card again, Capt Hat) that people are very, very quick to jump all over someone (especially anonymously.. *cough*) online in a way that they'd never do "IRL."  How does that even jibe with any of the core values?  Answer: it doesn't.

On more than one occasion in the past, I've PM'd a couple people who have been quick to make accusations and said "here's that officer's email address. If you're so fired up about this, why don't you shoot them an email about the subject instead of complaining about it here online anonymously?"

And you know what? In almost every instance not a single one has. (noted exception: one gentleman, I believe, actually did email Colonel Knowles following the WAA ABU wear test..)

I mean, honestly: Would you march right up to Colonel Knowles or Colonel Leclair at WAA or the Command Council meeting and say "Colonel, I think you're out of CAP weight standards!"? 

I seriously doubt it.  Then why do it online?

part of it is a theory postulated by a gent named John Gabriel that you take a normal person, add anonymity and an audience, and they become something else.. (you can Google it, there are "colorful" and "less colorful" versions of the theorem out there. I'm not responsible for your Internet search history)

Now, yes, on the other hand, we do have (and we have had, for many, many years) people who clearly do not fit within the published height & weight standards who somehow squeeze themselves into AF blue and do a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge" toward the standards. And I agree: that is wrong.  And thats an integrity issue they need to deal with (or their commander does). 

As I said earlier in this thread, I've heard twice people make oblique references to Colonel Leclair supposedly not being in the weight standards. And I will say again: the man came to my wing's change of command in January and stood three feet from me, and he didn't look like he was outside the published standards.  So you can make snide comments based on a photograph, or you can take the word of an officer who has actually been in the same room with the guy.  Your choice.

[NIN]

As for the problem in general of CAP folks not meeting weight standards, anecdotally I think we've gotten better. I remember even 10 years ago seeing more egregious violations than I see today. Part of that is commanders having tough conversations, and I think another big part is seeing senior leaders wearing blazers and aviator shirts even if they don't have to. That goes a long way towards removing the stigma of CAP distinctive uniforms.

^^THIS.

1993, then-C/Col Ed Phelka and I were trolling the halls of the GLR conference when we ran across BG Barry, the National Commander.  He stopped and chatted with us (he likely wanted to shoot the breeze with Ed, cuz I was just some dip-dunk captain.. dime a dozen) for like 20 minutes.  "General, I'm sure you have places to be"  "No, actually, I'd rather be right here chatting with you. It is much more interesting.."

At one point, Ed flat out asked him "General, I see you're in blazer combo, but you photo in CAP News is of you in blues.." and the general flat out said "Yep. That photo was taking some time ago when I was in the standards. I'm not now, and it doesn't present a very good leadership example if the top guy is flaunting the rules because he can, so I wear the blazer combo."

The takeaway was clear, and 23 years later I remember that conversation vividly as a *primo* example of the necessary leadership in CAP.

[vorteks]

I am being honest.   Most people do follow 39-1 and para 1.2.2. specifically.   In those case where they do not.  It is up to us to challenge those members and report them to higher authority.

I'm sure you are. Personal observation and ubiquitous photographic evidence from all over the dang place gives me a different impression.

That's a rather sweeping accusation that you are leveling against a large number of people.

If you have specific allegations make them.   If not, making such blanket accusations is highly disrespectful.

Oh don't be so dramatic, counselor.

And with all due respect for the other defensive peeps posting here, I didn't single out any individuals and I have no interest in doing so. Really, the faux indignation is a little much. People can look at the 2 dozen or so pictures linked in the OP and make up their own minds.

[LSThiker]

I would also like to point out, from a photography stand point, that the camera and the photographer have an influence on how the person looks.  While I am not a portrait photographer, the basics are simple:

1.  Barrel distortion:  less in a professional good quality lens and more in a point an shoot but still occurs in all quality of lenses.  This occurs in more noticeably in wide-angle lens, especially near the edges as wide-angle lens make items closer look larger.  Portrait photography is commonly done with telephoto lenses as this has the opposite effect in that it will help flatten out curves. 

2.  Angle of the photo:  A shot looking up has a tendency to make another person look "bigger" while a photo looking down has a tendency to make a person look smaller.  If a person is in excellent shape, this can help.  A shot from below of a man full of muscle will make him look bigger and more authoritative.  This is commonly used in commercial photography:  think of that slim man in a business suit looking like they are in charge.

3.  Pose:  The position of a body can either make a person look bigger or smaller.  How your body is angled towards the camera, and not just how the camera is angled towards the body, can make differences.  In addition, how a person has their arms, legs, head, torso, etc.  Clothes also play an important role in this.   

4.  Light:  Flashes and natural light can either accentuate curves, shadows, and other dark areas or it may flatten them out. 

5.  Other reasons.  There are other reasons, but I think you get the point.  I do not think I need to type a long explanation.


While neither will make a 200 lb person look 100 lbs or 300 lbs, but it does play an important trick on the mind. 

[FW]

I'm sure learning much about photography here...

And while pics do "lie", postings are apparent.  "Some two star" is inappropriate, when it is obvious to anyone familiar with CAP this would be the current or a former CAP\CC.   
Also, I will say all those in the pictures are within H&W limits for proper uniform wear.  ABU's do seem to add 20 lbs to a person though...

[NIN]

ABU's do seem to add 20 lbs to a person though...

Part of that is ABUs come in more specific sizes like coats/jackets (ie. "42L" or similar) where before BDUs were "Medium- Regular" and such and were cut a little more generously.

You know you wear a 42R coat (ie. service coat) and the you get 42R ABUs, figuring they're similar.  (its not like you go to the local ABU store to try some one).  They come in, you discover 'Hmmm, who are these cut for, an Olympic bobsledder?" 

Its pretty easy to be off one size and suddenly you're not quite as svelte as you though you should be (I'm 6', 185 and if I got the size 40R ABUs, my love handles might show.. LOL)

[Storm Chaser]

Plus even if you get the right size, all it takes is to gain a little weight and, even if you're still be within standards, your uniform will look a bit tight.

If you're weight tends to fluctuate a bit, I recommend getting a size larger.

[Nascar Jack]

In my defense, I only looked at the first picture of the photo album, in which MG Vasquez's name tape is hidden. I realized who he was looking through the rest of the pictures.

And goodness, I didn't meant to start up such a conversation, I just wondered about the status of CAP wearing ABUs.

[winterg]

In my defense, I only looked at the first picture of the photo album, in which MG Vasquez's name tape is hidden. I realized who he was looking through the rest of the pictures.

And goodness, I didn't meant to start up such a conversation, I just wondered about the status of CAP wearing ABUs.

You came to CAPTalk and posted a discussion about ABUs and didn't realize it would start a heated discussion? You must be new here!

Please take this post in the humorous manner it was intended for.

[vorteks]

Back to weigh ins are we?

My point was: a photo isn't exactly the best way to ascertain someone's compliance with the rules.

Thankfully, we've (mostly) gotten away from that sort of thing on CAP-Talk, but we can look back in the deep dark recesses here and find whole threads literally eviscerating unsuspecting people for perceived slights seen in photos, things like the color of the material on a badge or the alignment of their insignia when it was likely some kind of trick of lighting or camera artifact caused by an angle or something.

But going to back to my original point (and pardon me for trotting out the "Respect™" card again, Capt Hat) that people are very, very quick to jump all over someone (especially anonymously.. *cough*) online in a way that they'd never do "IRL."  How does that even jibe with any of the core values?  Answer: it doesn't.

On more than one occasion in the past, I've PM'd a couple people who have been quick to make accusations and said "here's that officer's email address. If you're so fired up about this, why don't you shoot them an email about the subject instead of complaining about it here online anonymously?"

And you know what? In almost every instance not a single one has. (noted exception: one gentleman, I believe, actually did email Colonel Knowles following the WAA ABU wear test..)

I mean, honestly: Would you march right up to Colonel Knowles or Colonel Leclair at WAA or the Command Council meeting and say "Colonel, I think you're out of CAP weight standards!"? 

I seriously doubt it.  Then why do it online?

part of it is a theory postulated by a gent named John Gabriel that you take a normal person, add anonymity and an audience, and they become something else.. (you can Google it, there are "colorful" and "less colorful" versions of the theorem out there. I'm not responsible for your Internet search history)

Now, yes, on the other hand, we do have (and we have had, for many, many years) people who clearly do not fit within the published height & weight standards who somehow squeeze themselves into AF blue and do a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge" toward the standards. And I agree: that is wrong.  And thats an integrity issue they need to deal with (or their commander does). 

As I said earlier in this thread, I've heard twice people make oblique references to Colonel Leclair supposedly not being in the weight standards. And I will say again: the man came to my wing's change of command in January and stood three feet from me, and he didn't look like he was outside the published standards.  So you can make snide comments based on a photograph, or you can take the word of an officer who has actually been in the same room with the guy.  Your choice.

All due respect Sir, you're making assumptions and jumping to conclusions. You have no idea which individuals I was thinking of from the many represented in the photos linked in the OP. The photos speak for themselves, and frankly this talk about photos not being reliable is a little disingenuous.

[THRAWN]

Your indignation is repeatedly noted. What's next?

[SMWOG]

So when will we get ABU's ? ,I am having a hard time finding green shoe polish for those sage boots!   

[vorteks]

Your indignation is repeatedly noted. What's next?

The indignation in this thread came from others, not me, but I agree that there's nothing more to be said. I'll only add that I claim credit for bringing Garibaldi out of his self-imposed exile to support my point. Now if we could only get Eclipse to come out of hiding...

[Майор Хаткевич]

Your indignation is repeatedly noted. What's next?

The indignation in this thread came from others, not me, but I agree that there's nothing more to be said. I'll only add that I claim credit for bringing Garibaldi out of his self-imposed exile to support my point. Now if we could only get Eclipse to come out of hiding...

He's not hiding - just doing bigger and better things. He does check in at times.