50 Comments

The big 'tell' was the remark that they needed to put the photos back into the promotion packets because since removing them, they weren't making enough POC picks

Expand full comment

Diversity among leadership dropped after photos were removed last year from Navy promotion packages, Vice Adm. John Nowell said during a panel discussion on diversity and inclusion at the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space conference

“I think we should consider reinstating photos in selection boards,” he said. “We look at, for instance, the one-star board over the last five years, and we can show you where, as you look at diversity, it went down with photos removed.”

Expand full comment

the people who care about diversity are the people who know who's gonna get stuck with inadequate, old, unreliable stuff the next time we do a war.

Expand full comment
founding

Not to mention inadequate...New...unreliable, and outrageously expensive, stuff the next time we go to war.

Expand full comment

I remember this one time we made some cool stuff and it made us like super heroes. Feel like DARPA exists solely so we can keep chasing that feeling.

Expand full comment
founding
Apr 27, 2023·edited Apr 27, 2023

"I remember this one time we made some cool stuff and it made us like super heroes"

Back when initiative and innovation were the important traits, as opposed to now.

Speaking of which, today is an anniversary for the first Operational use of such cool things...

(to be fair though, in a period when we started the slide to the cesspool we're in now...)

https://twitter.com/RealAirPower1/status/1651553674232057857?s=20

Expand full comment

As a Spanish-American, I'm technically a minority. Where's my 40 acres and a payout? Oh, and I need a promotion, too. What a great way to run the system. Instead of the current diversity system, we'd literally be better off just drawing names out of a hat for promotions.

Expand full comment

That's not a bad idea. Have some measurables to determine whether a candidate is good enough to be considered, then run a lottery to see what subset of qualified candidates get the nod. It's not like there's enough separation between competitive candidates to guarantee a committee would make the same choice if asked at different times. Ain't no one Babe Ruth anymore.

Expand full comment

Long ago, I learned that in America we are all equal. But the footnote is that some are more equal than others.

Expand full comment

Looks like they "forgot" the numbers for paleface people. A mere oversight, right?

Wonder if they have a breakout for LGBTQ+ vs. straight folks?

Expand full comment

Back in 1973 I was on an old WWII CVA contemplating my future in the Navy. Had about 8 years in, was an E-6. We were under the old point system for promotion to Chief. I calculated all the possible points I could get based on performance marks, awards, time in service and rank and my score on the test for RDC. Based on the past cut-off scores for RDC even if I scored 100% on the test for Chief Radarman I knew I would not make the cut-off. But I was a newly converted EW1, not and RD1. There was no historical data for predicting promotion in this new rating. Didn't bother me, I could wait my turn. I took the test and gave it no more thought. Two things happened. 1. Unbeknownst to me, 1974 was the first year selection boards were convened to pick Chief Petty Officers for promotion. 2. There was a one-time survey in that turbulent era of race relations wherein we were to state (confidentially) what our race was. I am told that I am of Okie/Appalachian/Welsh stock dating back to the 1700s here in the U.S. Figuring it was none of the Navy's business, I declared myself Black on that survey. Got picked for EWC first time up, #2 on the list. Go figure. Was a little miffed that a White man beat me out of the #1 slot and knocked me back to second increment to November 1974 instead of October. That same White guy did it to me for EWCS in 1981...second increment, a month later. Kinda proves the Navy was slow in equitizing me and mine. That same White Senior Chief relieved me when I promoted out of staff duty and got sent back to sea as a Zero. Turns out he was a very nice guy. He went on to make Master Chief. Something I never did. No regrets. Got a decent retirement and good memories. Damn glad I never had to compete with the LGBTQ+ crowd.

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/453x554q70/r/923/SWvUfR.jpg

Expand full comment

"Damn glad I never had to compete with the LGBTQ+ crowd."

Add some feathers around the rims of those glasses and identify as Sir Elton John. No problem 'mon.

Expand full comment

Ouch.

Expand full comment

Need a cold sirloin? Wagyu maybe? Bourbon? ;<)

https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/beef_bandage.jpg

Expand full comment

Liar Liar White works on fire!🤔😏

Expand full comment

Without a caucasian percentage those charts are useless.

(Unless the overall percentages are similar in which case.......)

Interesting that a couple of numbers also exceed 100%.

Expand full comment

you can swag it thus:

- a Navy of roughly 15-20% female identifying officers? guessing here

76% female rate

71% overall rate

yields roughly 70% male rate

puts away 'back of bar napkin

Expand full comment

I still feel like the data is incomplete.

Expand full comment

I dunno, Jetcal1. If those charts are hiding a systemic bias that favors Caucasians over everyone else then it mayn't be useless to the good ol' boys. The more likely explanation, is that the typesetter on the linotype was drunk.

Expand full comment

I'm suggesting nothing. There could be a bias in either direction, or there could be no bias at all.

But, the numbers by their absence raise questions.

Expand full comment
author

The denominator is based on those in zone. To be above 100% you have to be selecting a lot of people below zone (before they normally would) or above zone (late bloomer or bad FITREP timing last year). That tells you to dig deeper as to why. Also note that if all your "disadvantaged groups" have a selection average (women 86.84%, "minorities" 91.67%) than the overall average the includes the "advantaged group" 84.95% - then that tells you that the group that is not broken out (white males) as a separate category must have a below average selection rate. I'm not sure you can call a group "advantaged" when they select at a lower rate. Of course, the most important question here is, "why?"

Expand full comment

Thank you. I recognized the below or above zone. I couldn't suss the "advantaged" group numbers.

IMO? They're advantaged because they probably didn't grow up in union run blue city school system.

The why is obvious.

Expand full comment

And not just looking for a useless, pedantic answer like 'Simpson's paradox?'

Expand full comment

It would be helpful for those of us not in the know to get a primer on the headings for the rows and columns.

Expand full comment

1110 Officer qualified as a Surface Warfare Officer.

1120 Officer qualified as a Submarine Warfare Officer.

1130 Officer qualified as a Special Warfare Officer (SEAL).

1140 Officer qualified as an Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Officer.

1300 Officer previously qualified Naval Aviator or Naval Flight Officer whose operational flight rating has been terminated for aviation medical or flight performance reasons, or by the individual's personal resignation.

1310 Officer qualified as a Naval Aviator.

1320 Officer qualified as a Naval Flight Officer.

Expand full comment

Thank you Dale!

Expand full comment

The social reformers have always used the military to push whatever agenda was becoming popular at the time (i.e., whatever would gain the motes money and votes). This time, we simply have the Klan wearing different robes.

Expand full comment

My first ship - USS Francis Marion APA-249 - was illegally racially segregated when I reported to her - along with a Black Radioman. I truly was a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, which nominally meant I could go anywhere and do anything under the (unstated) "rules" - including crossing "the color line" - which was the main deck. The problem was that the Radioman had to cross that line to get to the Radio room. The "solution" was to get him to ask for a transfer (which would be approved, of course). Failing that, charge him with a crime and force him to work somewhere else - like the engine room (because "black guys are African and like it down in those hot spaces"). Except, to get him to ask for a transfer, or to get him convicted of a charge, he needed to be isolated. Turns out not to cooperate with "the way things are" made me "a traitor to the White race" - which was worse. Because to get away with non-cooperation threatened the de facto system. The "system" turned on us both - threatened us with death - but collapsed when we declared "you can kill us, but you cannot force us to cooperate with what is illegal - we swore to defend the Constitution from all enemies - foreign or domestic - you are just domestic enemies." We meant it - my father taught "you cannot fight city hall and win" - so I expected to die. But leading has nothing to do with your rank or position. You lead most of all by the example you set.

One of my neighbors was a Black enlisted man in USN at the same time, on land rather than at sea. His experience was comparable. Today he and I live in the most diverse city in the USA (and possibly the world). We have no majority population in any zip code. As a result, we have the highest rate of cross-cultural marriage in the USA. We have the highest rate of promotion of women and minorities in both government and in private businesses. Most churches are mixed - a sea change from "the most segregated hour in America is 11 am Sunday morning." I am active in Black, white, Asian and Hispanic communities, as a Gospel singer. I don't actually believe that most people know all of their ethnic heritage, or that anyone at all isn't of somewhat mixed ancestry. So long as you don't rub my nose in it, I don't care what you do in the bedroom - or with whom? I just don't want to hear about it in a work situation. I don't tolerate disrespectful language of any sort. Don't run down anyone in my presence. When a Jewish Hospital Corpsman (sort of a super medic in Navy talk) got transferred to my first ship, I escorted him to synagogue when we were in port at Norfolk. The era of segregation was not ideal, and we should not pretend otherwise. Inclusion is progress. To such an extent I assert opposing it is unpatriotic.

Expand full comment

was this in the 60's? nothing like that would have been tolerated at any command I served in the 80's 90's.

Expand full comment

Correct. I reported to the Marion in 1966. I suspect your experience is typical. I sang with the Chapel 2 Gospel Choir at Elmendorf AFB for nine years in the 1990s (its own white man) and saw no evidence of, nor heard any complaints about, such misconduct in that decade.

Expand full comment

Thanks for confirming:)

Expand full comment
founding
Apr 29, 2023·edited Apr 29, 2023Liked by CDR Salamander

I grew up on naval installations. Didn't confirm it until just a few years ago, but I am half black (or however one wants to parse it out...). As such, I was generally the darkest person in my world. Catching grief about "what" I was was generally meted out by the local kids (the worst in Middletown RI). Being on base was always a refuge from all of that.

Yes, I well remember when the race riots hit in 1972...the skipper of the Constellation was a good friend of dad's... but from my observation, racism was very much the exception than the norm in the navy of the 1960's.

I never once, not even in the early 70's...heard of a racist environment in any command as you describe.

"Today he and I live in the most diverse city in the USA"

Where do you live now? Have to wonder how much more 'Diverse' your burb is to mine (Uptown in Chicago). Sure hasn't led to any Utopia though. Here at least, racism...hard overt racism... is applied by blacks.

https://www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/10180/126764/Uptown.pdf

"Inclusion is progress."

Inclusion...as currently applied by Progressives... is an open Marxist and Racist construct Lawrence.

It is intentionally divisive, and has set back race relations in this country decades.

If you are here to defend it., then I suspect all of the historical perspective you have provided above is ...well... jaded to fit the narrative you are trying to sell.

Expand full comment

Jacobinism, same as it ever was. The point isn't doing what's right, it's doing what no one else can call wrong.

Expand full comment

Fun party trick: remind people that the Carlisle Residential School was the progressive, inclusive option when BG Richard Pratt was in charge at Fort Marion. Watch their skin melt like you just opened the Ark of the Covenant by making them realize "Kill the Indian, save the man" is the same type of woke as land acknowledgements.

Expand full comment
founding

Nice chat gpt non sequiturs!

Expand full comment

I wish I could get that to work for me. These are genuine, hand-shucked non sequiturs. Very traditional.

Expand full comment

"was illegally racially segregated when I reported to her."

Expand full comment

White folks are the reason white folks don't like to talk about race. Ask Rev. Reeb.

Expand full comment

I have no military background. Please explain the various designations and how the total statistics work. For example I see 112.5 of Black/African American which I cannot get to computer

Expand full comment

So, what have the Asians done to apparently be on the s*$/ list?

Expand full comment
founding

Evidently, their crime is that they take education seriously, as well as, acting in a socially acceptable manner so as not to bring and shame or loss of face on their families and community. Also, they are notorious for their overachieving ways.

Expand full comment

they heard us talking about examination systems and were like 'bet. say less'

Expand full comment

Ask SCOTUS

Expand full comment

Act too much like middle class whites to be promoted.

Expand full comment
founding

Gosh, you'd almost think there were quotas!!!

Expand full comment
founding
Apr 29, 2023·edited Apr 29, 2023

Watch how the Secretary of the Navy dissembles when asked about the application of racial criteria at USNA, and if he is ready to quickly cease it if SCOTUS orders it stopped...

https://www.youtube.com/live/qRQAECm6KD4?feature=share&t=7981

Not exactly related...but sorta (because of the invocation of SCIENCE in everything these Really Smart People do)...as he then goes on with an Orwellian take about sea level rise at NOB from the days when his ship berthed there...

Here the Secretary defends his statement about CLIMATE CHANGE! being a top USN priority. He uses the example of seeing how the water level compares against the piers at NOB Norfolk.

If anyone proclaims that apparent observation is caused by CO2 melting the ice caps, then they have no grasp of the ***ACTUAL*** Science at all, and are just blowing smoke up some nethers...

https://www.youtube.com/live/qRQAECm6KD4?feature=share&t=8201

In reality, it is subsidence that is the issue in Chesapeake Bay...

https://www.usgs.gov/centers/chesapeake-bay-activities/science/new-crowd-sourcing-will-contribute-study-land-subsidence?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects

So much for "SCIENCE! from the Secretary of the Navy.

Expand full comment

I always believed, and at least hope today, that the Francis Marion case was the last and worst of the example of retention of attitudes from the era of legal segregation in the Navy. I find your experience tends to confirm that may be a correct assessment. However, the experience of a close friend, who served in the same era on land, indicates it was not entirely unique to that one command.

Expand full comment
founding
Apr 30, 2023·edited Apr 30, 2023

"I always believed, and at least hope today, that the Francis Marion case was the last and worst of the example of retention of attitudes from the era of legal segregation in the Navy. "

That this existed in the mid 60's is amazing. Legal segregation ended in the USN in 1948.

By then, racial sensitivities were already very much front and center in the USN. Where was the ISIC? His career, along with the COs' (I looked, both USNA grads), were in immediate jeopardy for that kind of climate in 1966.

Why didn't someone aboard...yeah, I"ll pointedly ask: why didn't you...write a letter to a Congressman?

I can tell you, as I saw the impact of a Congressional firsthand when someone from Dad's squadron wrote one... they did not get ignored in those days. And they were taken -very- seriously.

Here is a small vignette of how racial sensitivities changed things in the USN in the 60's...

VAH-5... the squadron showcased in this video narrated by Walter Cronkite that I recently posted as an example of how the USN used to be able to effectively sell its Mission to the public...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwZUxJ4QdNo

...was called the "Savage Sons of Sanford", so named because they had been in the AJ Savage before the introduction of the A3D Skywarrior, and they had this emblem for the squadron:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/403973017097

The informal nickname for "Heavy 5" had been the "Mushmouths". Needless to say, by c. 1964 this was -NOT- acceptable, and the squadron emblem was immediately changed after someone wrote a "Congressional".

So, how the conditions you described aboard the Marion could exist 2 years later, is astounding.

Expand full comment

General comments don't apply to everyone universally. Some "white folks" are quite comfortable talking about race. The key is attitude. "Whiteness" is not really about race or ethnicity. Genetic evidence suggests we as a species have managed to acquire genes from several others. I submit most people do not know their actual racial heritage. As well as that it does not matter much. What matters is what they think about their heritage, and about people with a different one.

Expand full comment
founding
May 2, 2023·edited May 2, 2023

"What matters is what they think about their heritage..."

This is just great right here. She's going to have to pony up her own reparations!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hC7Gsr7PEFM

And Lawrence, by your logic, then Rachel Dolezal is owed a HUGE apology!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG9Q2_Hv83k

Expand full comment