|
Post by blackhat on Oct 1, 2013 16:33:15 GMT -5
Basically just wanted to see how others felt about this(mainly fellow military airsofters). Past few years, I have noticed players wearing rank and unit insignia. Now I don't feel that it is my duty to tell people what not/ to wear, but I do sometimes feel that players shouldn't be wearing what soldiers have worked hard for. Don't want to start a huge argument just wanted to see what fellow players thought on this subject.
|
|
|
Post by Kir (3.14) on Oct 1, 2013 16:46:17 GMT -5
All your post will do is start a long debate. To me as a prior service member people can wear what they want. Its no different than kids at halloween. People dont get upset over re-enactments... and I find airsoft no more offensive then that. The world has bigger problems than worrying about what someone chooses to wear. If you arent doing it in public, and you arent claiming to be a soldier, who am I to say not to wear it on the field.
Sent from my VS910 4G using proboards
|
|
|
Post by blackhat on Oct 1, 2013 16:56:14 GMT -5
Totally agree with you kir, like I said just wanted to see how others felt about the subject, other opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Greekas (TehG3A3) on Oct 1, 2013 17:02:13 GMT -5
I can ~kinda~ accept both, depending on context. If your team has a rank system (which I consider really stupid in airsoft) then that's alright as long as people know that's what your team does. Unit patches I accept more, but only if they're used for an impression. I don't find unit patches offensive at all, but it really bugs me when someone has a patch on their shoulder that says AIRBORNE on it and they're wearing Tigerstripe or something.
|
|
|
Post by M.S.-ARC on Oct 2, 2013 7:26:38 GMT -5
You can't control what other people will wear on and off the field. As for me though, I have too much respect for the people who worked hard to EARN them to just casually buy one and wear it when I'm playing airsoft.
|
|
|
Post by slippy on Oct 3, 2013 0:05:16 GMT -5
Personally I hate it. I worked hard for everything I got in the service. And I find it disrespectful for people to go to a surplus store "Oh this would look so bad ass on my kit". I.e. jump wings, ranger tabs, rank, unit patches, service affiliation tags, ect ect.
I understand that everyone can do their own thing but it is simply my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by X on Oct 3, 2013 8:53:25 GMT -5
I want to respect our service members. If there are any service members that find it disrespectful when people where their insignia then I'm not going to wear it. Since I know of at least one (now two including slippy); I'm not going to. I've never given much thought about if it should be disrespectful or not because it doesn't matter.
Sent from my XT1080 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Tank on Oct 3, 2013 9:54:56 GMT -5
I would never wear them, because I've done nothing to earn them.
I, being an engineer, with an engineering degree, get a little miffed at times when I see more and more people given the title (fill in the blank) engineer. They didn't put in the time, struggle through the classes, or shell out the tuition. It gets a little old at times, and waters down the title. Almost always I just keep it to myself, but because of that I can understand someone from the military taking offense to such behavior.
|
|
|
Post by X on Oct 3, 2013 12:30:50 GMT -5
I'm going to disagree (and I think you know why). In my opinion someone doesn't have to go through the schooling to be an engineer. If they have the knowledge of an engineer no matter how they acquired it then they have earned the title. Look at Henry Ford for an example. He basically invented the assembly line. People who have gone through the traditional schooling and paid out the money and worked through the classes earned a title; Graduate. Now I'm assuming you're referring to the way our company uses the term in which in that case, I agree. Hell, I'm surprised we don't have Secretarial Engineers.
In your comparison I think it would be more akin to people faking a degree on their resume.
|
|
|
Post by M.S.-ARC on Oct 3, 2013 13:43:46 GMT -5
You have to earn the name (title). There are plenty of physically gifted people that can do the job an army ranger does or even a navy seal. Those people can do it and could possess the skill but it doesn't make them a ranger or a seal unless they actually go through the steps of being one.
I'm in the same boat as tank. As someone who is another year away from finally being an Architect, you have to earn it. When people ask me what I do, I say that I'm in Architecture or that I'm an Architect in training. I never say I'm an Architect. There are too many people using the Architect label now too. You may be practicing Architecture, Engineering, being a Ranger but if you haven't followed the steps that properly give you that title then you're not one.
|
|
|
Post by Kir (3.14) on Oct 3, 2013 13:56:35 GMT -5
I agree and understand all of the above statements, and I think this arguement has two different sections.
1) Wearing something.
2) Claiming something.
Everyone will vary on #1, as far as what they think is suitable or not, some will say nothing can be worn, some will say some things are fine, and some will say all things are fine. #2 is where I think most all of us draw the line in the sand, which is claiming. Don't tell me you are a soldier, an engineer, an architect, a doctor, etc. Unless you actually are one. At the end of the day #1 will always be up for debate, and #2 never should be, but sometimes is due to society.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Oct 3, 2013 16:16:26 GMT -5
As for wearing insigias and using ranks in airsoft, well I think anyone that's been on MIA for a while knows how I feel about it. But I'm too old and wise to argue about it anymore....
In regards to professional titles, I can understand how Tank, X, and ARC feel. My position technically does not have a specific college degree or training that you have to undertake in order to earn the title of the position that I occupy, but it certainly requires specific skills, talents, training and experience that not everyone has who occupies the title.
Hell, even on the IT side a programmer or developer is called a software engineer at my company. Although there is computer engineering so it makes sense I suppose. Back at my previous employer, the software developers wanted to be called software craftsman and took offense to any other title that you addressed them as.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Oct 3, 2013 17:16:11 GMT -5
Yeah I hear all the time Devs being referred to as engineers, it really doesn't make much difference IMO. Anymore you see lot of people with IT and Computer Science jobs who have liberal arts degrees. I think many things are trainable so really they just wan to see you spent four years doing something worthwhile.
Edit. Tank, just to clarify, I certainly don't think people should refer to themselves as something without a degree to back it up or the proper skills to actually say they do it. I think with software engineers that can fall into a grey area because there's so many people whom are self taught or never finished school. I don't think your going to be seeing a self taught electrical/mechanic engineer getting very far..
|
|
|
Post by Tank on Oct 3, 2013 22:39:31 GMT -5
See that's just the thing I was talking about. There is no such thing as a software engineer. It's a made up title. The closest you get to that is computer engineering, which Gunny mentioned. Which is usually a dual degree between electrical engineer and computer science. It's not near as bad as other made up titles, such as sanitary engineer or domestic engineer.
Engineering is one of the recognized professions, amongst doctors, architects, lawyers, nurses, clergymen, and a short list of others. It's the reason it is offensive when the title is thrown around loosely.
I didn't really mean to stray this topic this far off course. I was only trying to say that I can understand military, and former military personnel's objection to the wearing of rank. I wasn't trying to sound all holier than thou, even though this post may come off as that. Honestly anyone that knows me personally knows that I'm not that way. I only followed up with this post since it was being talked about more and I just wanted to make my stance on it, and my reasons, a little more clear.
|
|
|
Post by Thor on Oct 4, 2013 0:16:30 GMT -5
Yeah I hear all the time Devs being referred to as engineers, it really doesn't make much difference IMO. Anymore you see lot of people with IT and Computer Science jobs who have liberal arts degrees. I think many things are trainable so really they just wan to see you spent four years doing something worthwhile. I'm one of those people in IT who has a liberal arts degree (political science). Everything about my job, I learned on the job. And I've seen more than one person come and go that had a degree or had "experience in the field" who couldn't do what they were tasked to do to save their life. I monitor millions of dollars worth of network equipment and mainframe systems. There is a lot I don't know, but it's not my job to know it right now either. Given a fair chance, I don't believe there isn't anything in IT I couldn't learn how to do. It's all about whether you can get someone to take a chance on you.
|
|