The first time that I earned the title of “Master” was after Rappelmaster school, way back in 1987. The title of Jumpmaster followed a couple of years afterwards, in 89. One important of the Master’s responsibilities is the pre-operational inspection, known as JMPI, or RSI.
The “Seal of Approval” is described below from a 2011 from a Fort Richardson, Alaska news article:
“The ‘seal of approval” at the end of the JMPI (a slap on the buttocks) is the official way of saying that ‘you’ve been checked’ and none of their equipment needs to be changed from its current condition.” Newly trained jumpmasters forged in Alaska > Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson > Articles (jb.mil)
The history of the approving a jumper in this fashion goes back to the 40s. As the legend goes, the noise of the propellers is such that the spoken word could not be understood. In both jumpers and rapellers are positioned “bent forward at the waist”- it is a novel and opportunistic method to unequivocally inform the sky soldiers, that you are good.
In my role as both a rapellmaster and Jumpmaster, I stopped “approving” female soldiers in this fashion, in 1989. A soldier at the Air Assault School, a female West Point cadet, objected to being slapped on the buttocks, and the complaint resonated with me. So, I changed my behavior to accommodate female soldiers.
The old school object to this accommodation, did then, and did so for the rest of my career. If the attitude is a soldier is a soldier is a soldier, regardless of any accommodation, then any soldier outside of the norm did not have a right to object. If they are a paratrooper, they have to accept it. I inspected an old school, senior NCO/ female soldier for a jump in Fort Rich in 92, and she complained that I presented her with this special treatment. “Captain, You deprived me of the best part! I have over ten years in the harness, and this is part of being a paratrooper.” words to that effect. I blushed, but I did not change.
Stating the obvious arrogantly, females are different than males. They are easy to notice. In training to be a paratrooper, they had to soldier harder than I did- as when I was a paratrooper. I weighed 170-190 pounds, and the females that I jumped with, some just over 100 pounds, had to carry the same ruck sack, parachute, weapons, etc. and jump with it. They comparatively had to carry a heavier load then I did, of this I have no doubt.
Sparing one tradition, was my attempt to lighten that load, just a shade. When I JMPI’d the same unit a few months afterwards, the salty female NCO was not in my line, but the great majority of her young female soldiers were. I believe that even if they were quiet about it, they knew I had lightened their load, maybe just a bit.
Fast forward a few years, when I was with Counter-Drug. During my time with the Recon soldiers, I was in a position that I had the final authority on approving a mission, and my seal of approval was to tell the fellows, “Boys, be careful.” I did this literally every time- and the team knew that it was the seal of approval when they heard it.
I have thought about this in light of current social narrative, and I have to admit that I regret that this was used with the regularity that I do. There were soldiers in that unit where the term “boys” could be offensive, as some of those men were African American.
In my defense, the recon detachment was known informally as “The Boys” by the remainder of CD program. I am hopeful that when the video or historical journals are written about this superb unit (and it should be) that it is entitled “The Boys.” That my intention was both protective and familial, almost parental, as I did feel that way about those men and this unit. I was known as the “Old Man”, and in this context it is indeed a compliment to me. That I treated all of my soldiers the same was something that I believed they took comfort it- but today I am not sure.
My soldiers, black, white, or brown did not object to the seal of approval, at least in terms that I knew. If they did, I am sure that it was written off as just something that “the old man says.” I am hopeful that this is the case, I had and have immense respect for these men, went through selection with a pair, and think as highly of these soldiers than I do my own family. They should not have been subjected to another seal that was remarkably like a slap on the buttocks. I would rather knock out my own teeth with a hammer than to offend any soldiers that I served, especially that pair.
I think within this, is the lesson on institutional bias. The old notion of a man is a man is a man, is well meaning, well behaved, but not adequate. People are different, and normally those differences are obvious. Those that are different than the majority have had to carry a heavier weight, in the literal or subjective sense. Deciding that this weight does not exist, makes institutional bias a real thing, and nothing can convince me otherwise.
One thing which stands out a bit, is the difference between a truly genuine gesture, based upon legitimate goodwill, and those things that are done because of a shift in policy. Having never cared for a mandate, my opinion is that forcing someone to subscribe to an authority view as the right, denies the natural progression and realization of one’s own development. In a real sense, forcing someone to accept a new social stratagem could and likely will delay their normal evolution to the desired end.
I must admit that I am ambivalent that the current administration has made a change on those Army posts that had been named after Confederate Generals. I believe that I have mentioned before that I am descended from a Union man, Andersonville survivor, and as such I have little romanticism for the lost cause.
Still, it seems some strange to me, that it will disappear from the greater lexicon, and that old veterans and young soldiers will have this vehicle for misinterpretation, and as such a divide between them. Benning, Bragg, Mother Rucker- Fort Nasty freaking Polk…..now that it is Camp horse soldier or whatever it is- I won’t be able to cuss it with as much vigor as I used to. Most soldiers current or past have no idea who these men were to start with.
Other than that- I freely admit it has lightened the load from some soldiers, but added some to others, and I this is the part that needs to be thought about. If we are done with the civil war, let us be done with it- north and south- and rename Campbell, Richardson, Ord, etc. Otherwise, the Army is promoting some degree of spitefulness towards those fifteen states that at my last count provided 44% of their sons and daughters to serve in the armed forces. Do these 44 now feel the weight of institutional bias? Yes clearly- and if the answer is that “they deserve it”, then I think we have found the root of the problem.
Naming forts after people is one of those things that will likely be cyclical as time passes. Imagine Fort Hal Moore in fifty years, when it is discovered that General Moore did something in the 1970s that was acceptable at the time . and in the 2020s; but through the lens of the 2070s social narrative is a disqualifier? The political impetus of the day and such honorifics can be seen as operating outside of absolutes.
My last point and one that I am satisfied with. That the naming of these posts took place at a time when secular and divisive politics ruled the land, and the special interests that did romanticize the lost cause, was unified, held sway, and dictated terms throughout the political universe.
You know, like now.
As we know that politics is cyclical, it is not unheard of for the same group that named these forts in the 1900s, to again have this sway, and we are back to where we started. Our leadership again adding weight, and through so more direct and powerful bias, to an Army now bankrupt of tradition. No thank you.
Institutional bias is all about the weight. We Old Men need to help carry a bit of it, spread the rest around more proportional, and with consideration. Surely, small acts of kindness seem to me to be a great place to start, and in the long run, are a much better solution than forcible and political motivated accommodations of narrative.
Men, be careful.