CNN: Sikhs fight Army over bans on turbans, uncut hair

[Dannyboy]

The real question will be, what was in the contract.

Since I got out before my recruiting tour, I'm not entirely sure, but I would imagine they're all pretty much the same.  AFAIK, the only things you'll get in writing are things like Jump School, RIP, MOS, etc.  Things actually associated with your job.  I honestly can't imagine any military recruiter saying anything like what these 2 are alleging.     

[agricola]

At the risk of derailing the thread, it should be pointed out that Sikh troops were amongst the best, and amongst the most highly-decorated, of the pre-independence Indian Army (and indeed there was a serious offer to raise a Sikh regiment as late as 2007).  Of course we had to beat them first.

As for this, I wonder whether the Army is more afraid of the likely reaction of having visibly Sikh troops in the field (especially Afganistan), rather than convienient nonsense over beards and turbans being "against regulations" - certainly its nearly always bloody obvious when you meet a Sikh that he is a Sikh, and one would imagine that numerous recruiters throughout the recruitment process would know what the actual regulations were.  I dont buy the gas mask / helmet objection either, since that isnt a problem in other armies in which Sikhs serve.  

[Gewehr98]

We can relax the rules to have Sikhs with their headgear and funny knives, as long as we also allow Maori in native dress, and Ghurkas.  We must have Ghurkas w/Khukris. 

[agricola]

We can relax the rules to have Sikhs with their headgear and funny knives, as long as we also allow Maori in native dress, and Ghurkas.  We must have Ghurkas w/Khukris. 

Hey!  We conquered those nations, so we get to recruit from them. 

[MicroBalrog]

I dont buy the gas mask / helmet objection either, since that isnt a problem in other armies in which Sikhs serve.  

Sikhs are not the only guys whose religion requires beards.

[Jamisjockey]

Since I got out before my recruiting tour, I'm not entirely sure, but I would imagine they're all pretty much the same.  AFAIK, the only things you'll get in writing are things like Jump School, RIP, MOS, etc.  Things actually associated with your job.  I honestly can't imagine any military recruiter saying anything like what these 2 are alleging.     

Yep that's what I figured.  Unless some dumbass recruiter wrote his own clause for these two clowns, I think they don't have a leg to stand on.

[agricola]

Yep that's what I figured.  Unless some dumbass recruiter wrote his own clause for these two clowns, I think they don't have a leg to stand on.

Clowns? 

That sort of misses the point - if these two are practicing Sikhs (which it certainly appears they are) then they will have been very, very easy to spot and recognize as being Sikhs at first glance.  They have been through the entire recruitment process (indeed, one has been in it since at least 2001) and appear to have gone through most of, if not all of, training, judging by that letter.  Why did the Army only recently notice this? 

[Strings]

Might very well be a cultural issue: many in the west don't really "live" their religion, or understand how other faiths can have such restrictions. The recruiters probably saw the turbans and beards, and just thought "they probably know they'll have to loose those"...

[Firethorn]

Might very well be a cultural issue: many in the west don't really "live" their religion, or understand how other faiths can have such restrictions. The recruiters probably saw the turbans and beards, and just thought "they probably know they'll have to loose those"...

We had a guy who could have been a stand-in for all the pictures of Jesus.  He cried when they shaved him.

There are plenty of people who don't meet military appearance rules before they enter.  All that stuff should be covered during recruitment stuff.  I certainly got 'the list' before I entered, and the only thing I had was hair a tad long.

[Jamisjockey]

Clowns? 

That sort of misses the point - if these two are practicing Sikhs (which it certainly appears they are) then they will have been very, very easy to spot and recognize as being Sikhs at first glance.  They have been through the entire recruitment process (indeed, one has been in it since at least 2001) and appear to have gone through most of, if not all of, training, judging by that letter.  Why did the Army only recently notice this? 

Yeah, I said "clowns".  You weren't a Marine, were you?
 

Might very well be a cultural issue: many in the west don't really "live" their religion, or understand how other faiths can have such restrictions. The recruiters probably saw the turbans and beards, and just thought "they probably know they'll have to loose those"...

What he said.   
Also, these two clowns entered under some sort of medical training program.  I can't speak for how long into the program until one is expected to meet military regulations, but usually with other entry programs you can look and dress how you like until you enter Basic or Officer's training.  Most of the people they came in contact with in the screening process probably had no idea to the standards of grooming and dress of their religion.  Hell, I had very long hair when I went to Boot, and the fact it was going to be shaved didn't need to be spoken.
And an in uniform headshot is meaningless.....alot of entry programs have similar photographs taken.   
Likely they are already being made to conform to military physical fitness standards. 

I'm just not feeling very sympathetic on this one, unless its shown the Army screwed up. 

[Firethorn]

I didn't expect this to get as far as it did.   

I understand that the Sikh have a tradition of martial excellence.  I understand that in many ways they're very nice people, and their cultural traditions fit very nicely with APS beliefs.

I have absolutely no objection to them joining the military.  Matter of fact, I'd love for them to do so.  I would NOT be surprised if moderate/quiet Sikh are IN the military at this time, ones that are willing to sacrifice one of the tenants of their religion/culture in order to meet the standards of the US Armed Forces.

The military places a LARGE value on dress and appearance, especially today.  There is a heavy operational bias, the current operational tempo combined with cuts in uniformed personnel means that EVERYBODY has to be deployable.  Would the Sikh be willing to wear a helmet instead of a turban?  Shave his hair to obtain a proper fit with a gas mask?

In comparison, providing vegetarian/kosher MREs are a minor concession, many people like those meals anyways.  What does it say to everybody else if you allow somebody to totally avoid the grooming requirements, even if they keep neat and clean?

And it's not like the Military makes huge concessions to other religions - Most military members are at least occasionally asked to work during religious holidays and such.

If a Sikh, or anybody else, for any reason, isn't willing to give up that which conflicts with military needs/requirements, they shouldn't enter.

[MillCreek]

I live about 100 miles south of Vancouver, Canada, which has a very large Sikh population.  Sikhs are welcome in the Canadian Armed Forces, and are allowed to wear their traditional beards and turbans.  I have seen a number of Sikhs in Canadian Army and Navy uniforms, and they actually have issue turbans that match the uniforms.   I once heard a Sikh Canadian Army major talk about his experience in Afghanistan, and how his appearance was helpful in gaining the trust of the local population:  Maj. Harjit Sajjan, who finished a nine-month tour of duty in September and received his Canadian Forces service medal at Rexall Place yesterday, says he never doffed his turban in the Middle East [note to reporter: Afstan is not in the "Middle East"; Central Asia if anywhere]. "I can wear a helmet. I can wear a gas mask. There's nothing that my turban or my beard can prevent me from doing in the military at all," said the 36-year-old Sikh from Vancouver.  "To put a helmet on, you have to have an inner liner. My turban acts like an inner liner, so I just wear the kevlar shell over top."

The other day, I was watching a newsclip on CNN showing a Greek frigate capturing some pirates off the coast of Somalia.  I was interested to see a sailor identified as a "Greek Naval Commando" who had a full beard.   So it would seem that some military forces have been able to accommodate this, just as the US Navy allowed beards during the Zumwalt days.

[gunsmith]

I like the Sihks I have really talked to, a lot of them in the big cities are
tired of being called names and being mistaken for Muslim and have become kind of reserved.

I am against relaxing the rules for police and military

[agricola]

If a Sikh, or anybody else, for any reason, isn't willing to give up that which conflicts with military needs/requirements, they shouldn't enter.

True, but the point I and others are making is that having a beard and a turban doesnt necessarily conflict with military needs or requirements, and indeed there are plenty of armies that manage to get around it.

[Jamisjockey]

True, but the point I and others are making is that having a beard and a turban doesnt necessarily conflict with military needs or requirements, and indeed there are plenty of armies that manage to get around it.

Yes, it does.  It conflicts with conformity.
Lets go this way:
Is there any doubt that our military is the best trained and most disciplined in the world?  There's a reason for that.

[Stand_watie]

True, but the point I and others are making is that having a beard and a turban doesnt necessarily conflict with military needs or requirements, and indeed there are plenty of armies that manage to get around it.

Personally I don't see beards/turbans in the military as being nearly as disruptive as females in the military, and we've accomodated a far greater number of females in the military than we ever would have to accomodate Sikks. For that matter, long hair/beard prohibitions are only a 20th century circumstance, and that to address hygeine issues that modern hygeine has eliminated (lice).

[mtnbkr]

I understand that the Sikh have a tradition of martial excellence.  I understand that in many ways they're very nice people, and their cultural traditions fit very nicely with APS beliefs.

I don't know anything about their martial excellence other than what we've all read, but the Sikhs I've known (I've worked with several over the years...they all tend to be Oracle DBAs...) are all disgustingly nice people.  Very pleasant, accommodating, professional, etc. 

Chris

[agricola]

Yes, it does.  It conflicts with conformity.
Lets go this way:
Is there any doubt that our military is the best trained and most disciplined in the world?  There's a reason for that.

As stand_watie says below, that argument dies out when one considers that women are serving. 

Besides, I would even question whether conformity = best trained / most disciplined, especially when there are lots of armies (including, as microbalrog points out, the IDF) for whom this is not a problem - including nearly every allied army in Iraq and Afganistan, some of which are even holding competitions to find who has the best facial hair (won by the chap below).



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7158637.stm

[Jamisjockey]

Well its arguable. 
As to women, they are expect to conform to standards of hair and dress the same as the men.  IIRC, with female Marines, they either have to keep it short, or be able to put it into a bun that will fit under a helmet or issue cover (that's a hat).  No tourbons necessary.

Our military isn't the same as the other militaries around the world.  They are them, ours are ours.  We shouldn't bend and capitulate our standards to fit in, be global, whatever.  I'm sorry the idea of conformity is lost on you.  It makes perfect sense to me in maintaining military discipline and morale.

Oh, I've got an idea...if the Sikh's want to keep long hair and beards, they should go SF.  At least then they could grow beards in country.....
 

[Stand_watie]

...Besides, I would even question whether conformity = best trained / most disciplined, especially when there are lots of armies (including, as microbalrog points out, the IDF) for whom this is not a problem - including nearly every allied army in Iraq and Afganistan, some of which are even holding competitions to find who has the best facial hair (won by the chap below).



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7158637.stm

     I'd add to that thought to point out that American "special forces" working in Iraq/Afghanistan are frequently allowed to wear longer hair and beards than 35.10 would otherwise dictate and there's no argument that they're not well trained and disciplined. Likewise certain combat units in Vietnam, Korea and WWII.  

[Stand_watie]

Well its arguable. 
As to women, they are expect to conform to standards of hair and dress the same as the men.  IIRC, with female Marines, they either have to keep it short, or be able to put it into a bun that will fit under a helmet or issue cover (that's a hat)...

 Female armed services members aren't required to have their heads shaved during basic training. They aren't required to have the maximum length of their hair be off their ears and collar (except during duty hours) during regular service. They aren't required to pass the same standards of physical fitness as male service members. And they are permitted to wear different uniforms than male service members.

That's not "arguable".

[Stand_watie]

     Oh. And blacks, whites and browns fighting together doesn't exactly match the "conformity" ideal either.

[Jamisjockey]

Female armed services members aren't required to have their heads shaved during basic training. They aren't required to have the maximum length of their hair be off their ears and collar (except during duty hours) during regular service. They aren't required to pass the same standards of physical fitness as male service members. And they are permitted to wear different uniforms than male service members.

That's not "arguable".

And?  There is still a standard that they are expected to maintain, which also includes wearing the prescribed uniform, not a turbon or some other personal piece of religous gear.

     Oh. And blacks, whites and browns fighting together doesn't exactly match the "conformity" ideal either.

WTF?  What are you smoking?
I mean really?
We're talking about grooming and dress standards prescribed by the military to maintain discipline and morale.  Dragging race into this is just silly.

[Stand_watie]

And?  There is still a standard that they are expected to maintain, which also includes wearing the prescribed uniform, not a turbon or some other personal piece of religous gear.

We changed the American military uniform to include skirts for female members (and lots of other etceteras)

WTF?  What are you smoking?
I mean really?

    You know what? You're the moderator. I'm just a member. I'm sorry for politely debating your p.o.v. I'll back away from this topic now with hands raised. I give up.

[Perd Hapley]

If these two are practicing Sikhs (which it certainly appears they are) then they will have been very, very easy to spot and recognize as being Sikhs at first glance.  They have been through the entire recruitment process (indeed, one has been in it since at least 2001) and appear to have gone through most of, if not all of, training, judging by that letter.  Why did the Army only recently notice this?   

Maybe they only recently started dressing/grooming like Sikhs?