In the interest of full disclosure, I will say that I am no longer in the Army, and that this article is based on the policies of the Army such as they were throughout the 90s until I got out. As far as I know, these policies are still in place, but I don't know this for sure.
I remember going through the Primary Leadership Development Course, and learning about Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity. The Army had an active Affirmative Action program, as well as having a HUGE Equal Opportunity program throughout the Army, with EO representatives in every battalion, and often in every company. Now, I'm a HUGE supporter of Equal Opportunity, and I've had great leaders of every gender and race, and some total shitbags from every gender and race. I've learned that dirtbags are dirtbags, and they come in all shapes and sizes, and hard chargers are hard chargers, and they come in every race and gender as well.
What really ripped my ass though, was when I learned about going through a Non-Commissioned Officer Evaluation Report, and the fact that I would be evaluated based on my support for the Army's Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity programs. I was perplexed. I thought, "How on earth can somebody support both programs?" I mean, if you support Affirmative Action, then you are supporting a program that does not provide "equal opportunity" to every individual to be promoted or sent to a school based on merit. You are choosing people based on race or gender, as long as they meet at least the minimum standards necessary to be selected. That does not mean that those individuals chosen based on Affirmative Action are not qualified, because they have to be qualified. But, they aren't necessarily the "MOST" qualified. The definition of equal opportunity is the opportunity for any individual, regardless of race, religion, sex, etc. to be selected based solely on merit. So, if I support EO, with no consideration for race, religion, sex, etc., how on earth can I support selection based on religion, race, sex, etc? I personally think that the best, brightest, and hardest working should get the rewards, period.
Somehow, the Army managed to convince most of it's members that it was indeed possible to simultaneously support both programs, when by definition, the programs were opposed to each other. I guess they just hammered it into everybody's heads enough times that they actually began to believe that both could be accomplished simultaneously. Am I the only person that ever thought that this was just BS? I'd be interested to hear from some of the other former or active military types around Joe User to see if anybody else has considered this, or confronted it in the Army.