New CPP Codified - Updated 52-10

[Luis R. Ramos]

So now we cannot express our views here? Why are you so like a bully?

[Eclipse]

For CAP, recruiting women is no different than recruiting men.

This needs to stand on its own.

This is either disingenuous, or woefully misinformed about the state of diversity in the military, Aerospace, GA,
and society as a whole. 

We have a verifiable shrinking membership, a churn that would kill most similar organizations,
and a total female membership which is at or less then 20% total (after you remove 000, and patrons).
and you say that recruiting females is no different then recruiting males?

How many female national commanders have we had?  Oh yes. One.
In 70+ years.

I am honestly surprised you would think an assertion like that would actually fly. Reality vehemently disagrees.

[PA Guy]

Bob,

Why do you think recruiting women is some mysterious exotic skill that only NHQ can help you with?

When you need mission pilots, you go out and recruit mission pilots.  Need a chaplain?  Go out and get a chaplain.  Both requirements have existed for decades and yet we have managed to survive without specialized recruitment programs run out of NHQ.

We do, REALLY? The CAP I am in has been steadily shrinking for a decade.



Just tell where to get these people and I'll make some calls, otherwise, we'd all be better off accepting reality and working
within it then trying to insinuate that an unfunded, unnecessary mandate is somehow going to work itself out "because".

You just need to make sure there is coed supervision on overnight activities.

No more, no less.

Or simply not have overnight activities.  Mission accomplished.

Talk about passive aggressive attitude!

[Eclipse]

Talk about passive aggressive attitude!

That is the reality of an unfunded mandate in a volunteer organization.

Accept it or don't, but that won't change the fact of the matter.

[Tim Day]

When you need mission pilots, you go out and recruit mission pilots.  Need a chaplain?  Go out and get a chaplain.  Both requirements have existed for decades and yet we have managed to survive without specialized recruitment programs run out of NHQ.

Ned, mission pilots come to us because we offer them something they want (to fly). Chaplains are motivated to serve others and while it's ideal to have a chaplain, we also have mitigating policies that allow us to designated Character Development Instructors. If no Chaplain or CDI is available, the Commander can facilitate CD.

There is no such mitigation for the coed adult supervision requirement. What I think would be helpful here is to help members understand why coed adult supervision is so critical to abuse prevention that we will not hold overnight activities without it.

[lordmonar]

Okay....here is a hint.    Parents.......when child x comes to your meeting you have both the child and the parent there.    You make your pitch and convince them to join.

Sure it's not going to be easy.

But it has got to be done.

It is that simple.

End of message.

[PA Guy]

So now we cannot express our views here? Why are you so like a bully?

Who said anything about not being able to express your view here? Your reply doesn't make any sense to me. Since you are so unhappy with Ned's responses I offered you an alternative person to contact. How is that being a bully? Disagreeing with you does not a bully make.

[PA Guy]

Okay....here is a hint.    Parents.......when child x comes to your meeting you have both the child and the parent there.    You make your pitch and convince them to join.

Sure it's not going to be easy.

But it has got to be done.

It is that simple.

End of message.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[LSThiker]

I am a teacher in New York City. I hear girls and women all the time. In general they are not interested in aviation or camping.

Perhaps ask the girl scouts how they are able to get girls interested in camping?  They have been doing that for a while now.

Oh and by the way, Ned has walked in plenty of shoes for plenty of years in this organization.  So he is not just some joe blow off the street person.  Just a hint.

[Tim Day]

Okay....here is a hint.    Parents.......when child x comes to your meeting you have both the child and the parent there.    You make your pitch and convince them to join.

Sure it's not going to be easy.

But it has got to be done.

It is that simple.

End of message.

MSgt, if it were simple, perhaps your squadron would have a lot of female SM. That fact that you don't (as you've previously stated) indicates you are not yet qualified to assert that it's simple.

Besides, the issue isn't recruiting female SM. The main issue is increased scheduling complexity (cost) without empirical evidence or supporting arguments that the coed requirement will increase the safety of cadets (value). This is as true for units that have predominantly female SM involved in their squadron's CP as it is for units like yours that have not been able to recruit sufficient female SM to provide coed supervision.

[NC Hokie]

Let me take this discussion in another direction.

Ned (and others) say, "recruit more women," and point to the cadet sponsor membership as a way to do so.  My biggest concern with the CSM option is that we (CAP) are asking non-involved parents to pay US to help run OUR program.  I suspect that CSM recruitment might creep upwards if we didn't make parents pay for the privilege of helping CAP.

Thoughts?  Do other organizations do this as well?  I'd really like to know.

[Eclipse]

I am a teacher in New York City. I hear girls and women all the time. In general they are not interested in aviation or camping.

Perhaps ask the girl scouts how they are able to get girls interested in camping?  They have been doing that for a while now.

First, the majority of CAP overnights are not necessarily "camping".

Second, irrelevant, since the GIRL scouts, just like the BOY scouts do not have a gender issue in regards to supervision, since
you know their NAME defines their membership, and as we've already shown, the Ventures can opt out of coed units.

Relevant examples will help the discussion more then irrelevant examples that appear on the surface to
look like CAP but in fact are >not<.

Based on comments and verbiage from the CPT white papers, our borrowing too heavily from the BSA model, without
understanding the nuances and differences in the organization, is probably why we are here to begin with.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Honestly, the cheerleading has to stop.

Will I do my best? Of course. Can I voice my issues? I'm pretty sure I can. If NHQ doesn't like that, they can block my renewal. I'm sure that will benefit the cadets I work with, at my unit, and at encampment. I get enough complaining from my wife to push the needle in the "why do I bother" turf without the cheerleaders. MSgt Harris is a product of the military - salute and execute. Great. It works for them. We're a volunteer organization. Things get tough, loose their rewarding feeling, and members leave. We don't have contracts, just a lesser of $60 bucks on the line year after year.

I'm quite honestly disappointed in Ned. Talk about getting emotional. Eclipse pointed out that as a matter of fact women are less inclined for aviation, military, roughing it in the woods, and gets labeled a sexist? Really? We're all products of our culture. I've know cadets from Alabama who can't wear pants. Their faith prohibits it from the ladies. Didn't hear anyone bashing their culture because of it, though I'm sure most of us disagree with it. War has been for a long time, in the majority of cultures a male endevour. Flight has been, for the majority of its history. Forget the Earhart's of the world, they were the exception not the rule. Women couldn't even vote in this country until a century ago! Of all our named awards achievements...by my quick recollection, 13, only 2 are named for women! That's our culture. Is it right? Depends. Do I think women are less capable? Nope, my wife reminds me of that every day. Less interested? Definitely. I've had this talk with my wife. We have things she can help with, at the unit, at an encampment. She can't commit to overnight, because if I'm there, who is taking care of the dogs and other pets we have? Eventually, who's taking care of the kids when I'm gone doing CAP stuff? But you know what else? She thinks our uniforms suck. She wouldn't join because she would need to wear one. Double up for a polo/grey pants. She's simply not interested in what we have to offer. But on multiple occasions she's offered to help in plain clothes, which of course isn't an option. So there you have it. She could be testing officer, freeing me up to do "cadeting" stuff. She could be a finance officer. She could be a PAO at encampment. But she won't. Because while those things get her interested, she doesn't care for the uniforms. So most will say CAP isn't for her. I'd agree. But she's representative of the majority of women her age and lifestyle. And she lives with a member for over 5 years!

[Eclipse]

Let me take this discussion in another direction.

Ned (and others) say, "recruit more women," and point to the cadet sponsor membership as a way to do so.  My biggest concern with the CSM option is that we (CAP) are asking non-involved parents to pay US to help run OUR program.  I suspect that CSM recruitment might creep upwards if we didn't make parents pay for the privilege of helping CAP.

Thoughts?  Do other organizations do this as well?  I'd really like to know.

A very bad idea.  The BSA does this - you have to go through specific training, including some camping, to be a
scout leader, etc. but anyone who watched the video can go as a chaperon on campouts and other activities.

We already have enough issues with poorly informed full members, the last thing we need are a cadre of
totally uninformed, and disinvested members telling our cadets "what for".

Anyone who believes CSMs are the savior here really has no idea.

[LSThiker]

I am a teacher in New York City. I hear girls and women all the time. In general they are not interested in aviation or camping.

Perhaps ask the girl scouts how they are able to get girls interested in camping?  They have been doing that for a while now.

First, the majority of CAP overnights are not necessarily "camping".

I did not imply they were.  He stated camping, thus camping I used.

Second, irrelevant, since the GIRL scouts, just like the BOY scouts do not have a gender issue in regards to supervision, since
you know their NAME defines their membership, and as we've already shown, the Ventures can opt out of coed units.

Nor did I imply that either.  He said interested in camping.  So obviously, the girl scouts are able to get girls interested in camping as he said that girls are not interested in camping.

[Eclipse]

OK, fair enough.

For the record, being in the Girl Scouts doesn't mean you care a lick for camping, Boy Scouts, either.

Plenty of Scouts never see a tent or campfire, though I will grant from a public perspective camping
appears to be a significant part of Scouting.

[Luis R. Ramos]

So I said "camping." When I meant "overnight." My other posts have stated "overnights."

But in reality those overnights would involve a certain amount of sleeping away from homes, in conditions that may be comparable to "camping." For instance, a SAREX or airshow. If personnel sleep onsite, where are you going to sleep? On a sleeping bag on the floor or on cots. What will you use as a bathroom? A portapotty, maybe. Maybe a bathroom if on an airport.

If my fingers miss the keys, I apologize but be aware I mean "overnights."

[Eclipse]

And for the record.

CAP is unable to effectively recruit Mission Pilots.
If we were, there would be not be constant rhetoric to that effect, nor pressure to
put hours on the airframes.  My wing has something like 29. How many are there nationally? A few hundred?  Maybe 1000?

Also, you don't recruit "mission pilots" you recruit pilots, and in 6-months to a year, minimum, they might be an MP, though it's usually
more like 2+ years.  And due to the retention issues caused by other corners of the organization, many never even get to an F5, let alone MP.

CAP is unable to effectively recruit Chaplains.
How many units actually have one?

CAP is unable to effectively recruit AEMs, despite many wings offering these memberships for free and their
being constant rhetoric about their importance.

And despite considerable rhetoric and smoke, CAP has been unable to effectively
recruit female members, either cadet or senior, for 70 years.  Those that do join have a poor
retention rate, and those who succeed are considered "exceptional" beyond their male
peers specifically because the societal trend is against them.

That won't change because of a paragraph in 52-10.

[FW]

 By the time this "mandate" goes into effect, Gen Carr will be happily retired and enjoying life again.  Gen Vazquez will be enjoying the many voices going his way, and dealing with them as he sees fit.  Good luck to both!

[Eclipse]

Patrick is right. Commanders need to "start recruiting" ASAP

What have they been doing up until now?