Female Army soldier petitions White House on ‘racially biased’ grooming regulations

A member of the Georgia National Guard is petitioning the White House to have the U.S. Army reconsider “racially biased” changes to regulations on grooming and uniforms.

Sgt. Jasmine Jacobs‘ petition charges that Army Regulation 670-1, which was released Monday, offers “little to no options” for minority female soldiers.

POLL: Do you anticipate a collapse of the US dollar?

The petition, which has 7,000 signatures, states: “More than 30 percent of females serving in the military are of a race other than white. […] In the proposed changes [to Army Regulation 670-1], unauthorized hairstyles include twists, both flat twists as well as two strand twists; as well as dreadlocks, which are defined as ‘any matted or locked coils or ropes of hair.’ These new changes are racially biased and the lack of regard for ethnic hair is apparent. This policy needs to be reviewed prior to publishing to allow for neat and maintained natural hairstyles.”


Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/2/female-army-soldier-... 

Views: 959

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Discipline is the "Bed-Rock" of an effective Unit...

The Military have no Discipline in their ranks anymore because of Racists like this idiot...

Definition of Uniform: a prescribed identifying set of clothes for the members of an organization, such as soldiers or schoolchildren. Always the same, as in character or degree; unvarying. 2. Conforming to one principle, standard, or rule; consistent.

That's right. There is a reason we, in the military should all be the same. The rule where the Islamic religious should not be able to wear head garbs. If I were to be out in the war zone, and I was accompanied by Islamic religious soldiers with head gear unlike mine, who do you think the enemy would be trying to shoot at, me or them? This rule should be non-existent. We military should all be consistently the same. Otherwise we can be singled out and targeted by diversity. Diversity belongs to the soldier when not on duty, not on the battlefield.

Braids, weaves and wigs commonly worn by minority females are NOT natural hairstyles! The military is NOT a fashion show!! This challenge to our new regulation is crap...have you seen the new female cut uniform? It "outlines" the curves of the female form...the uniform is designed to be loose fitting so that we can move better in combat...its not made to show off a females butt and breast!! How does long wigs and weaves along with a uniform that rids up the crack of a female soldiers butt have anything to do with a combat related job? It's liberal crap that is hurting our military! If your hair is not naturally grown and can be kept neat and well groomed than it needs to be made so to maintain a professional look...THE MILITARY IS NOT A BEAUTY CONTEST! This argument is B.S!!!

This is yet another example of something happening in today’s military that NEVER would have happened when I served. If a NCO during my service had started a petition directly to the CINC every one that signed it would have been called as a witness to that NCO’s courts martial. Everyone that does something like this can be counted on to be reservist or guardsmen too.

Really??  Petition over hair regulations?  How petty are you?  Thousands of lives have been lost on the battlefield, families stricken with grief, and children that have lost a parent.  If your staring down the barrel of a rifle with an army of pissed off Taliban members in front of you, your hair is the last thing you will be worried about.  Let's put this in perspective.  The Army is meant to defend our country, not to be a forum of political corruption, i mean correctness.  Thank your lucky stars you live in this country and that you are in fact alive.  So Sgt. Jacobs, I still do admire the fact that you are in the national guard because I have the utmost respect for any man or woman who wears that uniform honorably, but the next time you want to complain about hair regulations, think about those who have lost so much and ask yourself, is it really that important?  This is not about race, its about staying alive and caring for your fellow soldiers!

NO ONE GETS LEFT BEHIND!!!

Well said.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

OMG!!! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Voted Best Real-Life Hero At MTV Awards

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday was crowned the best real-life hero at the MTV Movie & TV Awards.

The 86-year old judge — whose 2015 biopic The Notorious RBG help cement her as a cultural icon among Liberals — beat out tennis star Serena Williams, WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, and comedian Hannah Gadsby to take him the award.

Though it wasn’t a clean sweep for Ginsburg last night.

The RGB documentary lost the “Best Fight” category for “Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Inequality” to “Captain Marvel vs. Minn-Erva.”

The justice was absent from the ceremony in Santa Monica, California.

Last December, Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous growths on her left lung. She was released from the hospital in New York four days later and recuperated at home.

Earlier this year, Ginsburg missed three days of arguments, the first time that’s happened since she joined the court in 1993. Still, she was allowed to participate using court briefs and transcripts.

Ginsburg has had two previous bouts with cancer, in 1999 and 10 years later.

Flashback: Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Pregnant Woman Is Not A ‘Mother’

Celebrated liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in an opinion released Tuesday that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.”

“[A] woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’,” Ginsburg wrote in a footnote, which in turn responded to another footnote in the 20-page concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. case.

As Breitbart News’ legal editor Ken Klukowski reported, the case concerned a law signed by then-Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence of Indiana in 2016, which required that the remains of an aborted fetus (or baby) be disposed of by cremation or burial. The law also prohibited abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability alone.

The Court upheld the first part of the law, but declined to consider the selective-abortion ban until more appellate courts had ruled on it.

In his lengthy opinion — which delighted pro-life advocates, and distressed pro-choice activists — Thomas wrote that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” He traced the racist and eugenicist beliefs of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and warned that the Court would one day need to wrestle with abortion as form of racial discrimination.

In a footnote, Thomas attacked Ginsberg’s dissenting opinion, which argued the Court should not have deferred to the legal standard used by the litigants in the lower courts, but should have subjected the Indiana law to a more difficult standard instead, since it impacted “the right of [a] woman” to an abortion.

Ginsburg cited no legal authority for her claim that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.” The claim that a fetus is not a child is central to pro-choice arguments.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service