First off, Laura, it’s the United States Military Academy at West Point. Not “West Point Military Academy”. (Incidentally, this may be why all the moms and dads you saw today are wearing “Proud USMA Mom/Dad” shirts and not “Proud WPMA Mom/Dad” shirts.) Please try doing a modicum of research – say, keeping your eyes open when you’re walking around Highland Falls or on the Academy’s grounds – before tossing some electrons out for public consumption. It just makes you look more than a bit foolish when you feign concern for people mis-represented at an institution for which you don’t know the proper name. As to changing the words of the song? Sure…why not? Frankly, it sounds like the women you interviewed don’t really care…but I’m sure there are some liberals out there who feel this is an excellent solution for a problem that doesn’t really exist. But what do I know? I’m just a 1996 graduate; had several close friends and colleagues that were female; discussed gender issues with them frequently; and NEVER ONCE had any of them say to me, “You know, when we sing the Alma Mater, or recite The Corps, it makes me feel excluded, repressed or [insert your favorite PC phrase here]…” I’m getting ready to turn all my cash/coin money in so it can be re-labelled “In some higher being we may (or may not) trust.” Oh…and BEAT NAVY!

America’s Pulse at Fox News,

This is in response to your query of 27 May on the above subject.

I an a West Point graduate, Class of 1959, and know a lot about this pending tragedy.

There was an article about this matter in the 26 May issue of “The Army Times.” It clearly stated that the Superintendent, a Lieutenant General Franklin “Buster” Hagenbeck, intends to change the words to “The Corps” and the “Alma Mater” in the near future. I found this odd as the Association of Graduates has been canvassing all graduates as to whether or not they agree to the proposed change.

I sent the article with comments to the President and CEO of the Association of Graduates. He responded that in so many words he agreed that the words should be changed.

Faced with this duplicity, I sent these to my classmates. I have received many responses. All, save for one, oppose changing the words. Moreover, I learned that the women graduates have been canvassed on this and the vast majority do not want the words changed.

Current information says that 75% of the graduates do not want the words changed.

This is a hot button issue that will have significant repercussions. The Superintendent has not legal nor moral authority to change the words to these historical songs that carry so much meaning to West Point graduates.

We need to remember that a nation that forgets its history nor honors its traditions is as nothing.

Thanks for airing this matter.

William A. Luther, Jr. (334) 749-3660

Hello All!

The more I hear of things like this the more I am inclined to wonder why they don’t they just cut it off when a man is born and get it over with. Better to be neutered young and early than spend an entire lifetime being emasculated in small increments.

Pax,

InFides

After reading the article, looks like the decision has already been made. The Supt.’Buster’ wants it, the committee has unanimously voted to back ‘whatever decision’ ‘Buster’ makes (I know I’m on pins & needles wondering just which way will ‘Buster’ go???)

I hope these graduating cadets of 2008 can show more leadership than this rubber-stamping committee when their time comes to step up.

I salute these women cadets & all cadets for their service, patriotism, discipline & rigor to survive 4 yrs of Westpoint. Here’s the catch, some of the women cadets don’t want the change. Is it really ‘a catch’ Laura? Doesn’t seem to be in ‘Buster’s’ world. Or the rubber-stamping committee that stands solidly behind him, way behind him.

I don’t have an opinion on the specific issue, but the fact these young women aren’t clamoring for change makes me respect them all the more.

All in all it seems like Laura likes the change as she has written a glowing puff piece (I recognized that in the 1st paragraph).

Well, one thing is for certain, nothing stays the same.

How ridiculous. Really, it’s just, disappointing

I think it’s wonderful that they are changing the words. It is reality, women serve and should be recognised plain and simple.

My father and sister are West Point alumni, and they are opposed to changing the words because tradition is such an important part of the school. They want the cadets to continue singing the same words that the cadets before them have sung. West Point was only made up of male cadets when the song was written; why can’t we appreciate that part of history? Disregarding history and tradition at a place like West Point is more offensive than using the words “men” and “sons” when everyone knows the spirit of the alma mater includes all cadets, regardless of gender.

Meh times change, traditions change

They did this years ago in the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault). The final line of the The 101st Airborne Division song originally was “We are the men of the 101st, we’ll fight ’til the battle’s won” now it is “we are the soldiers of the 101st…” It made a lot of people mad back then. Now I bet most of the soldiers have no idea or really even care. They are just words in a song.

You got to be kidding me

One man wants to change a tradition thats been going on for nearly 100 years….UNREAL!

Tradition is more important than political correctness.

Since when did the West Point Alma Mater belong to the Superintendent? It belongs to the Corp, both old and new, not one man who thinks he knows what is best for the Long Gray Line. I don’t recall getting requests from the Superintendent or the AOG asking my opinion. Yes, I am a grad and I disagree with this play by the Superintendent to leave his ‘mark’ on this great institution. He can leave his mark by not trying to be politicially correct. As for the Board of Visitors–go visit some other place and leave your mark there.

I’m going to the West Point graduation this weekend. My nephew Cadet Max Wunderlich is graduating. We are so proud of him. I’ll participate in any song and celebration, gender-neutral or not.

What ever happened to tradition and leaving a song the way it was written? Why do we have to “revise” everything to make someone feel better. If someone doesn’t like th way the song is, leave West Point or don’t enroll.

For Pete’s sake, can’t we just leave things the way they are for the sake of honoring history and the people that came before and setup West Point?

What is this country coming too?

An end is what I fear we are coming too!

To wit, it is the United States Military Academy at West Point and not West Point Academy. USMA is not a campus but a rather a US Army Garrison and Fort (I guess you got the idea as you were entering). And, while the lyrics may change slightly, the mission remains the same as it has for over 205 years.

RE ARMY – WEST POINT – IT IS CALLED TRANSFORMATION – FPM -RETIRED ARMY.

Changing beloved 100 year old songs because of it’s not politically correct?

There is exactly ONE “male” reference in the Alma Mater….”Guide us, thy sons, aright.” Hardly “all through.”

The Corps has 4 “male” references. The superintendent include the “bareheaded” reference as well Only the male cadets have their heads shaved.

While they’re at it, why not change the football song Gridiron Grenadiers as it includes: “We’re the boys who make the noise.” Female cadets cheer on the football team as well.

Yet another football song Slum and Gravy is rife with sexism: “Sons of slum and gravy”

Focus on the contributions and sacrifices West Point graduates both male and female make to this country.

I hope common sense prevails.

Dave USMA 1996

THIS IS A REPEAT WEST POINT SONG – IT IS CALLED TRANSFORMATION. THE FORMER DEFENSE CHEIF STARTED IT – FPM RETIRED ARMY.

As a grad of USMA, I am extremely upset over the proposed / future changes to these to pieces of history. There comes a point and time that the impact from a changing society require changes to the culture of an institute, but this is not one of them. These two pieces are historical documents that represent much more than words that have been sung and internalized over the years by both current and past cadets. I would much rather see them kept intact and unchanged while new pieces are written and adopted by the Academy that more accurately reflect the political correctness of the time if changes must occur. While I while continue to support the men and women who attend and graduate from “The Point” my financial contributions will stop if history is so easily discarded by this Superintendent. Afterall, nobody is calling for the words in the Declaration of Independence to be changed so that every reference to “Men” becomes “Persons” or “People” or demanding that in Section II of the Constitution all male gender references to the Presidential position become gender neutral.

Thats one of the main problems today…we are tossing traditions out the window like the weekend trash. Maybe good ol’ “Buster” ought to just go and retire and take his liberal inclinations with him. I am a taxer payer and some of my taxes go to support the Academy…and even pay this cowboys salary, and retirement…I feel I ought to have alittle say as well. These guys that don’t make 4-star tickle me…they feel they have to make their mark somehow…so to heck with some traditions.

I’m an old man, seventy six years, and probably one of the most traditionalist individuals you’ll ever encounter; however, I must concur with General “Buster” Hagenbeck, the changing of words in the song does not diminish the integrity nor valor of the persons receiving their commissions in the Army, and every individual who has attained this arduous feat must be recognized.

Respectfully submitted,
A cantankerous old traditionalist

I am the daughter of a Philippine Military Academy Class 44 graduate.
I think it is a good gesture for women in the academy regarding the WORD changes in the Academy song. It is an honor that women finally are recognized.

As a female cadet I understand the importance of West Point traditions to cadets and old graduates.

By changing the lyrics I feel that we’re forcing a change in the traditions which will enevitablly separate us from the songs sung by so many before us, (including the females who have “live[d], serve[d] and die[d]” wearing their West Point rings).

However the only counter-arguement I can see would be that the old graduates WANT the change in order to integrate us into their great heritage. Otherwise I think that cadet females will feel alienated from the Long Gray Line and the Old grads will just think that the Corps has.

For the lack of a better word, the idea is totally insane. Who in their right mind can even image a non gender military fighting a war to protect women and children in a free society. Does this mean that every houshold must be non gender in order not to offend the women and children under the husband responsibility. Buster must need a fairy godmother to protect his pension. Real men work everyday to provide for a family.
Real men should be recognized for their role in real life.

Hagenbeck is an idiot that is doing harm to an institution known for its tradition. They should take a vote of all the living grads and then put him out on the street. The women don’t even favor it. Why must he be the one to decide??

I am a woman that attended West Point from 1986-1988. I sang in the Cadet Chapel Choir where we sang the Alma Mater at concerts and of course I sang it at football games. I can tell you that back then, women at the academy could have cared less that we were singing “the men” and “we sons”, we were just VERY PROUD to be there! I can’t speak for women there today, but I can’t imagine their ideas concerning the Alma Mater have changed.

It’s sad that such a bleeding heart superintendent feels like he needs to make his mark by changing such an important song. I guess he doesn’t get it because he never attended West Point as a cadet. Teaching there and being a cadet there are two different experiences. My father taught there, so I have seen life at the Point from both sides. He’s probably in the group that would like to change the Bible to be gender neutral too. I guess the saying is true “The Corp has….”

My husband and I come from a long line of West Point grads and we would like to see our sons there some day, but not if it’s going to turn out to be a liberal, touchy-feely, don’t hurt anyone’s feelings university like most out there.

Why do this? There are no howling demands for such a change, only a manufactured need to change something that is a sacred tradition of the Academy. Whomever manufactured this issue has created a palpable chasm between being politically correct and respecting the traditions of the Academy. While all should and do recognize the important contribution women make to our military as well as to the makeup of the Corps of Cadets as well as the long grey line, those of us who went to the Academy including all of the fine women I graduated with over two decades ago, went there out of a desire to serve, not for recognition.

Our Alma Mater and songs like “The Corps” are sacred to our history and noone reasonably construes their words as applying only to the male graduates, no more than anyone interprets the protections of the constitution as applying only to men. As such, I can only hope that the winds of political correctness will not be permitted blow down the oaks that form our traditions.

We should respect our traditions in the face of political correctness because in doing so, we respect our graduates.

Ya know………

The PC Police screwed up our crap loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time ago. It NEVER bothered me personally when these whine-arsses complained about crap. HELLS BELLS GUYS….. I served and attained E-5/SP5/SGT during the VERY POLITICALLY INCORRECT late 70’s-80’s.

When we were authorized to wear the GARRISON CAP (for the first time) the group of females in my squad couldn’t figure out what the new headgear was.

Our First Sergeant looked at us and yelled……..

Gentlemen….. Help the LADIES Out” !!!

One of the guys yelled……

“It’s A C$%T Cap”.

Bout time you “Pointy-Heads” get your crap screwed up like we did.

ABOUT TIME!!!!!

SGT MG
U.S. Active Duty Army 1978-1984
U.S. Army Reserves 1986-1989

Now a 100% Service-Connected Disabled Army Veteran

The Academy got rid of the Fourth Class System in the 1990s. Then Cadets had locks installed on their doors (so much for the Honor System) and the “Absence Card” became a thing of the past. The Academy also eliminated “Recognition” which was one of West Point’s most honored traditions marking the end of the Plebe Year experience and has replaced it with “Promotion”. There are no more table duties; uniforms seem to optional in the mess hall – as is the dinner meal; and, demerits with consquences have bee replaced by the “Article 10″ (whatever that is). I could list more changes (the proliferation of privileges, no more acknowledgment statements, no public posting of demerits, etc., etc., etc.). These are all changes which the Administration routinely defends during class reunions while, at same time, asking Graduates to give more money to the Alumni Association.

So it comes as no surprise to read and hear that LTG Hagenbeck wants to change one of the last great traditions of the Academy — the lyrics to “The Corps” and the “Alma Mater” — not because of political correctness or outside pressure (his words), but because he thinks “singing “sons of today” is a half truth” (a line from “The Cadet Prayer”). If LTC Hagenbeck gets his way, then the Long Gray Line of an earlier time, living or dead, – men and women alike – will shed a tear while our Board of Visitors stands idly by.

I guess the only thing left will be to change the “Slum and Gravy” lyrics to reflect a more appropriate tone. In its current version the battle cheer goes: “Sons of Slum and Gravy, will you let the navy take from us a victory?………Sons of Mars and Thunder, Rip that line asunder, Carry on to victory!” Perhaps we should consider: “Ladies and Gentlemen of repeated deployments and contractor supplied food, will you let the navy take from us a victory?………Persons of Mars and Thunder, gently move aside the line, carry on to victory.”

Signed, “An Old Grad”

Hi- Thanks for attending today’s ceremony. Why don’t you report what the top ranking female cadet in the corps said when you interviewed her? I think your viewers/bloggers would like to know. You also interviewed the First Captain and a retired General Officer. Give us some details so we have more to think about – Mom

I’m not for changing tradition. But, if you’re looking to change the words in a few songs to be more gender-neutral, then the title of the song Alma Mater must be changed too. Alma Mater is derived from Latin and means “nurturing mother”. Over the past few centuries it has basically had two meanings (outside of the church). Those are 1) where a person attends school, and 2) the anthem of that school. So, while you’re at it, come up with a gender-neutral title for the song. Knock yourself out and go again with something in Latin if you like.

I am continuously amazed by this country’s zeal and determination to emasculate men at every possible junction where tradition and history meet. I realize that women are in the service and are in Iraq. God forbid when we go to real war and women soldiers are caught in droves by the enemy, then we will see just how “gender neutral” the world really is.

This act by the superintended is absurd and ridiculous. The fact is that such a proffered word change reflects more about our society then it does on West Point in general. West Point forges officers to defend the United States against all enemies, but people look at what we are creating in this country. We are starting to go down that dubious road of make believe. That’s nice that women are in West Point but does any individual ever consider the reality of life and human history? Men, for thousands of years, have died for their families and for WOMEN and children. We are told now that women are “just like men”, this is an absurdity. It is not true and no amount of social engineering can change a reality that is reflected in fact through the course of human events.

I remember being at Ft. Benning and my drill sgt was in a fit to be tied when the Jessica Lynch story broke. Thanks be to God that when I went to Ft. Benning it was all men in my basic training(2002). The inclusion of females in military fighting is barbaric and irresponsible at all levels. It seems to be working now because Iraq is more of a police operation with females being given special treatment at all possible junctions. I myself almost got in trouble several times when questioning the reasoning of female officers and soldiers. In war, when women are caught, I believe that we will see the errors of our ways. The sad part is that most men agree with this but it only takes a few of the pampered pensioned academic and government PC types to totally alter reality and set a course for oblivion.

The song change at West Point MUST be stopped. I do not agree with the premise or reasoning behind the supe’s decision to change the words. Further, we as Americans need to look at the broader picture here: men are slowly being emasculated here, whether through suit or law, men are becoming subjugated to women. This is unacceptable. Anybody who has ever been in college has seen the sorry state of young men and women. It is sad. The Army and the military in general may view gender neutrality now as a goal worthy of pursuit. This view totally diminishes the role of men in a free society. If women want to be like men and men like women then we must start treating women as men and holding them to the same levels of accountability that men are still held to. When I was in the service I saw some of the greatest unequal treatment between men and women. It was unreal but it was never contested because of the threat of punishment for questioning conduct that bordered on complete inappropriateness. Women have a decidedly unfair advantage in the service. The inclusion of women in military training reduces the clarity of vision and training that young men must have to effectively learn how to destroy the enemy. We must see this! I saw it and I was 22! What is wrong with Americans? Why do we live in a liberal fantasy world all the time?

I am continuously amazed by this country’s zeal and determination to emasculate men at every possible junction where tradition and history meet. I realize that women are in the service and are in Iraq. God forbid when we go to real war and women soldiers are caught in droves by the enemy, then we will see just how “gender neutral” the world really is.

This act by the superintended is absurd and ridiculous. The fact is that such a proffered word change reflects more about our society then it does on West Point in general. West Point forges officers to defend the United States against all enemies, but people look at what we are creating in this country. We are starting to go down that dubious road of make believe. That’s nice that women are in West Point but does any individual ever consider the reality of life and human history? Men, for thousands of years, have died for their families and for WOMEN and children. We are told now that women are “just like men”, this is an absurdity. It is not true and no amount of social engineering can change a reality that is reflected in fact through the course of human events.

I remember being at Ft. Benning and my drill sgt was in a fit to be tied when the Jessica Lynch story broke. Thanks be to God that when I went to Ft. Benning it was all men in my basic training(2002). The inclusion of females in military fighting is barbaric and irresponsible at all levels. It seems to be working now because Iraq is more of a police operation with females being given special treatment at all possible junctions. I myself almost got in trouble several times when questioning the reasoning of female officers and soldiers. In war, when women are caught, I believe that we will see the errors of our ways. The sad part is that most men agree with this but it only takes a few of the pampered pensioned academic and government PC types to totally alter reality and set a course for oblivion.

The song change at West Point MUST be stopped. I do not agree with the premise or reasoning behind the supe’s decision to change the words. Further, we as Americans need to look at the broader picture here: men are slowly being emasculated here, whether through suit or law, men are becoming subjugated to women. This is unacceptable. Anybody who has ever been in college has seen the sorry state of young men and women. It is sad. The Army and the military in general may view gender neutrality now as a goal worthy of pursuit. This view totally diminishes the role of men in a free society. If women want to be like men and men like women then we must start treating women as men and holding them to the same levels of accountability that men are still held to. When I was in the service I saw some of the greatest unequal treatment between men and women. It was unreal but it was never contested because of the threat of punishment for questioning conduct that bordered on complete inappropriateness. Women have a decidedly unfair advantage in the service. The inclusion of women in military training reduces the clarity of vision and training that young men must have to effectively learn how to destroy the enemy. We must see this! I saw it and I was 22! What is wrong with Americans? Why do we live in a liberal fantasy world all the time? v

Buster Hagenbeck is like most of the End of the line Lieutenant Generals-Ignorant and self serving.He has NO right to change the words.The school that I went to and graduated from in 1960 is a disgrace compared to our times.The curriculum includes such majors as Spanish,Chinese,and Sports Management.Im sorry this is not the institution that was founded to produce military engineering officers.
The end result of this idiotic act by Buster who I call Mister Bluster will only alienate the old grads and result in significant reductions in Alumni giving.
Ernest A Remus class of 1960

i am getting tired of all the political correctness in this country. The women there should not go there or get their own military school. We have too many femenist in this country.

There is no more Honor in old traditions. There are there for a reason and some in this Generation are just to darn weak to stand up to Political Correctness.

Sorry Gen. Mcarthur, We have let the Greatest generation down.

P.S I don’t care if you don’t like it.

It’s about the time that sexist paternalism STOPS being a tradition! Go West Point

Don’t try to sugar-coat this, it is all about being politically correct. LTG Hagenbeck doesn’t care what Cadets think, if he did the whole issue would have been dropped because an overwhelming majority of us are vehemently opposed to these changes. You do gross injustice to the women of West Point when you say that they don’t support the change because “they don’t want to come off as whiners.” That makes it sound like they secretly support the change but they fear reprisal. This is not the case. All of the female Cadets whom I have talked to don’t want it to change for the same reasons that the male Cadets don’t want it to change. We don’t want it to change because it represents our tie to those sons of an earlier day. It is part of the cord with which we are bound to the rest of the Long Grey Line. LTG Hagenbeck stated that one of the big groups that is in favor of the change is the mothers of female Cadets. They are certainly entitled to their opinions, but at the end of the day the Alma Mater and The Corps belong to the Corps, its graduates, and no one else. I don’t ask you to understand why we want it to remain as it is, I simply ask that you don’t interfere with what you cannot possibly understand.

These changes are past due – several female graduates have been killed in action and to have the lyrics change seems entirely appropriate – they are extremely minor changes and in no way diminish the songs. Maintaining the current lyrics does diminish them in light of the contributions and sacrifices of our female members of the Long Gray Line.

Make the changes and move on.

Mike Tatu Class of 1976

Whats next sensitivity training toward the Taliban? Liberals have dumbed-down our education system to the point of the rest of the world passing us by educationally and and now they are out to destroy the military institutions that protect this country.
West Point, and the Naval Academy are in existence for one purpose to produce the best military officer possible to protect this country’s, values, traditions and freedoms.
If Liberals remove the traditions that mold men and women to become future officers the Academies will produce sub-standard military officers the way the government run schools produce sub-standard students.
Apparently General Hagenbeck has forgotten the first rule of being an military officer, “If it isn’t broke don’t fix it.”

I have a daughter going into her last year at one of the academies. Not saying which because some of you dinosaurs still think the women need to be in shackles and chains. Many of you are still upset that they let the women in the academies. She would not want anything changed at the academy, much less a word in a hundred year old song. Women at these academies have to put up with more BS than any of the men do. This is not so much about the tradition of one word in a song, as much as it is finally given them some respect for their sacrifice and service.

Go ahead and blow back at me – dinosaurs.

I have a daughter going into her final year at one of the academies. Not saying which because some of you are dinasaurs who still think the women should be in shackles and chains. She would not want anything changed other than just a little more liberty in her final year. Certainly not a word in a song that’s been sung for over 100 years.

It’s not so much about a word in a song as much as it is finally giving the women some respect for their service and sacrifice. They put up with more BS at the academies than the men do in most cases. The world will not end with this change of one word to give them some respect. The academies will still be great. Take a deep breath, it’ll be ok.

Ms Ingle should do her homework before she puts her words to print. It is the United States Military Academy on the West Point Military Reservation. I am a USMA graduate, Class of 1978. I was a “Cow” here (otherwise known as a junior at other institutions of higher learning) when the first women arrived. That was the beginning of many changes to come at USMA. Some changes were for the better, others, like this proposed (or is it already approved?) change to the two most sacred and traditional songs of the Academy, make no sense. Change can be good, but change for the sake of change is not. Most grads, including women, are against this change. It will alienate many, infuriate more and appease few. Leave it alone Buster, and get on with more important business!

I am ashamed of this general! West Point cadets of both genders are proud of the West Point traditon it is a reason that many of them seek to matriculate at the academy, they want to be a part of something bigger then themselves. I see this as yet another example of political correctness run amuck! This general should be at the very least reprimanded for seeking to destroy an integrel and historic part of academy life in the name of suppossed equality. I would be willing to bet if you were to ask the female cadets what their choice regarding the songs would be you would hear a resounding cheer for Tradition and not correctness!

I don’t buy the feminist argument that “men” and “sons” have only one meaning; otherwise we would say “personhole” rather than “manhole”. For centuries English speakers had to choose a gender neutral term to describe groups of many people (i.e. “mankind”). Male versions of words have filled this void; it is otherwise in other languages. Men and sons easily refer to all graduates of West Point, women and men, without somehow marginalizing women. Buster and proponents of this change have neglected their history and accepted the faulty premise that our language is inherently sexist. It is not. And we should not rush to reform our language and traditions under the misguided perception that it is.

Yep, the Political Correctness continues on.

I am an Old Grad – Class of 1950. Two all male wars, and tour instructing cadets. 80 years old.

I have several points to make.

1. One poster above objects to the change for the perfectly valid reason that it will divide grads of the past, before women were permitted into West Point, from those present and future. Instead of the Long Gray Line stretching back to 1802, might as well cleave the Grads in half. BW and AW – Before Women and After Women. You won’t catch me mouthing the CHANGED words at football games, or at other occasioins. If they are changed I will change MY will to insure the CHANGED verses will NOT be sung, or the music played at MY military burial. They will hold no meaning for my family, or Army wife of 55 years in their altered state.

2. Why did women want to go to West Point in the first place? Wear its uniforms, march in its ranks? A huge reason was for drawing strength from ITS 200 years of traditions. They came to join IT, not it to join them.

3. Women have been cadets for 30 years now, and two have died in combat. Many more have served in our recent wars. So where are THEIR songs, THEIR traditions? They have had plenty of time to develop and sing their own, just as the Airbone, and the different branches of service within the same Army, have their OWN songs and traditions. Even when West Pointers joined the Air Force before it had its own Academy in 1959, and started singing Wild Blue Yonder. Many West Point songs have many versus. Where are the ones women cadets have come up with?

You CAN’T manufacture traditions from the top. And those custodians of those that exist – and any Superintendent is just a temporary custodian of West Point and its meanings – had better tread lightly on those that the Corps itself created and perpetuated.

Don’t change the words.

Col (Ret) Dave Hughes, USMA Class of 1950, 2004 Association of Graduates Distinguished Graduate

When an old suit no longer fits, alterations are the order of the day. Where is it said that a school’s alma mater is anything more than a school song? As such it should reflect the student body in such a manner as to be inclusive without being obtrusive. References to both genders would fit that requirement nicely. Graduates who truly love their alma mater should love the school as it was before their matriculation, as it was when they matriculated, and as it is after matricualtion. That is true allegiance to an alma mater. Where is it said that all change must be born of subordinate complaint or inquiry? Why must there be a requirement for a cadet (of either gender) change request before the Academy leadership dare amend the alma mater to reflect the current cadet membership? Based on some of the posts I’ve read cadets (most certainly female)would be crazy to subject themselves to such ridicule by requesting or supporting the change. Have we not grown as people, as officers, so that we can see immediately that there is value beyond our personal perspectives? This reminds me of a not so distant past when teeth were gnashed, hands were wrung, and the death knell of our Army was sounded over such a heinous act as wearing berets.

Finally, my response to all those who would ridicule The Supe — you may cast your aspersions, you may label him using the negatively charged term “bleeding heart” but if you do, the only thing you are showing is that you don’t know The Supe.

As a cadet currently at the Academy (Class of 2010), I most definitely DO NOT support LTG Hagenbeck’s proposed changes to the Alma Mater and the Corps. The Supe is ignoring the overwhelming majority of old grads and cadets alike who do not want the words to be changed. He is dishonoring Emily Perez and Laura Walker (the two female grads that have been killed in OEF/OIF) by bringing them into the debate. The Supe needs to get off his power trip and listen to the advice of his subordinates and peers…even a three-star doesn’t have all the right answers all of the time. His personal motives need to be laid aside. These songs are the songs of all of the members of the Long Gray Line, not just the Supe. Bowing to presumed notions of political correctness will only serve to further emasculate the Army. Besides, no one is seriously proposing we change the words of the Declaration of Independence, which currently read “All men are created equal.” If the term “men” is appropriate for a documnet of that importance, it is more than suitable for our songs.
No matter what the final wording is, I will always proudly sing those songs as they stand now.

Once again, political correctness rules over common sense. Ridiculous! I hope all of the alumni will speak with their pocketbooks and stop donating…that will get the Superintendent’s attention! Stop the insanity!!! (I am a woman and am SICK AND TIRED of people demanding things on my behalf that I don’t want! Women are are treated fairly. To require history to be re-written does a disservice to the very women it’s supposed to “help”.)

Every supe wants to leave a legacy. It’s pathetic, however, that this kind of stunt is all LTG Hagenbeck could come up with. And, by the by, his letter to the Association of Graduates addressing the matter can be described as little better than insulting.

This graduate will never sing his new lyrics.

Women have been forcing their way in to men’s universities and organizations for the last 30 years. What do you expect from them. The Supt. is nuts. Let a man try to attend a woman’s university and become a member of a womens organization and see what happens. The women don’t want things to be equal that want to have everything their way. THAT IS THE TRUTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First order of Business, to RH, the academy has not gotten rid of its fourth class system. (especially not this coming summer when I have a hand in it) I did table duties my entire plebe year, I have walked plenty of dreaded hours on beautiful days I could have been enjoying a warm sunny day, for showing up 30 seconds late to a class when my teacher the hour before did not release me, and recognition is still there, and about to occur yet again in a few days, before the plebes get promoted. I have the utmost respect for Old Grads, but visiting West Point, sitting on tiger teams, polling cadets, whatever the source may be, cannot truly give anyone a picture of what West Points standards have become. I also think the fact that I’m preparing for war takes some of the focus away from yelling at a plebe because he said good morning Corporal instead of *insert appropriate company greeting* Corporal. To any Old Grad who questions the discipline the Corps has, I would challenge you to view the way that we conduct training at buckner or beast. It is not a game. That being said, I imagine it is different, times change, some things have gotten harder some things have ceased to exist. I can understand why you would want to take a vested interest in our conduct, because if we do not uphold some standards, the West Point that was formed would cease to exist, but how many Old Grads got to their first unit, only to be overshadowed by joes with 2 or 3 years of combat experience at the very least? I look at the big picture at West Point. How can I make sure I am prepared for my Lt. years?

On the matter of the changing traditional songs, I ask simply why? If it’s just to satisfy some miniscule whim of a superintendent, than no it should not be changed. IF however it is a serious issue than yes it should be changed. But it’s not a serious issue. There are much more serious issues. There are much deeper problems with male female relations that should be addressed, army wide, and changing 3 or 4 words is not going to fix any of that. The songs as they are now have meaning for the long gray line now and forever. It’s like dissecting a frog, you can cut it open, look at how its built, but you’ve still killed the frog at the end of the experiement. If you dissect the songs the corps of cadets holds so dear to their hearts, you kill the meaning in them, and for what? I don’t know though, I’m just a Cadet, I guess I cannot begin to love the Corps as much as my senior leaders. I’ve heard the phrase many times that West Point is 200 years of tradition unimpeded by progress. That is not true, West Point has changed now faster than ever to suit a nation at war yet again. I signed up for it knowing full well that I was going to war, and I can’t say I haven’t loved west point on a grand scale. (Nobody loves plebe year) Changing 3 or 4 words is not progress, and it contradicts tradition, therefore I think their is no point to changing them. Women in the army are important, and I scoff at anyone who ever challenges that. I have respect for anybody who joins the army regardless of their duties while in the army. I think people need to grow up and realize tradition for what it is. Anyways, good night, I have 0545 haircut inspection and drill all day tommorow. Time to hydrate and get some sleep.

TRADITION cannot be used as an excuse to resist change. Too many negative outcomes have been the result of resistance to change, all in the name of tradition and the ‘way it has always been.’

USMA must do as they preach, lead from the front. This change is seamingly meaningless, but it symbolizes one less brick in the wall that stands between total equality.

Its time we stop being PC with the military we have co-ed’d the basic training for the Army which degraded the standards that were taught prior to the change of allowing men and women to train together in BCT. I went Active duty in 1987 in the US Army and it was male only BCT and if we looked at a female we got corrected on the spot. The drill sergent would PT any sexual urges out of us! Now males and females sleep in the same barracks, seperate bays, so I know that didn’t stop them from having sex anytime they wanted. The PC cost us everyday in Iraq due to the always changing rules of engagment which allows the insurgents and advantage over our military because they are allowed to shoot first before we can return fire. Alot of traditions have changed in the military which some have been a positive but mostly a negative effect on units. Now this LG wants to change the words because it just doesn’t sound right saying sons when there is females present. Well soon we will just change things to suit every little whim of some leader, president, superintendent just because they think they know better than the majority. If any change to the alma mater or the Corps is choosen it should be up to the alumni and current members of the Long Gray Line not one individual. I am certain that if that group of people were polled they would vote down any change to the alma mater or the Corps. In my lowly opinion leave the tradition alone!

If women weren’t in the academy, there wouldn’t be any reason to change the song. As a matter of fact, they could close the academy for all I care.

First, if the Corps wants to change the words of the songs, then it is ok; they are only songs. It is not as if they were trying to change the honor code. Second, if you are not a current member of the Corps or did not graduate from West Point, it makes no difference what you think; you do not get a vote.

I’ve been to West Point a number of times being that my son is finishing up his 3rd year, aka “COW” for those that understand West Point.

When I asked my son a while back what the Corp of Cadets honestly felt about having women attend West Point, he responded by quoting a high ranking officer who said: “If you truly understand West Point, you’d understand that there are NO women attending West Point….CADETS attend West Point” Interesting enough, the top Commanding Cadet ( sorry, I know there’s a name for it but can’t recall at this time) his freshman year was a woman that stood no more than 5 foot tall and couldn’t have weighed any more than 100 pounds soaking wet. West Point is about tradition, and this traditional song offends NO ONE through out the West Point community

It should be up to the current Corp of Cadets, and the Association of Graduates, if a change should be made, not only a few top brass–even if they too were USMA graduates.

I may just be a stickler, but I think some things are just tradition. Some things do not need to be changed. Why can we not appreciate what was then without having to accomidate everyone’s egos now? I am a single mother, and all for personal rights, but why change something that is not hurting anyone and is steeped in the tradition of our country? I do not think that we as women need to be catered to by the men of society and have things like this changed to make us feel like we fit into this world. Leave our traditions and history alone.

As one of many “Old Grads” to post on this board, I do not support the change. I guess the questions I have are “Why now?” and “For whom?” Female Cadets don’t seem to want it. Female members of the Old Grey Line don’t seem to want it either. If either of these groups felt that the songs left them feeling excluded, I would reluctantly agree to the changes. I, and the rest of the Long Grey Line, have ownership of the traditions associated with USMA. If a significant portion of the Long Grey Line, past, present and future, felt that the words within the traditional songs of the Academy left them excluded and outsiders, we should consent to changes. That is not the case here. In fact, I haven’t heard a single member of the supposedly excluded class that supports the change. This seems to be more of the case of a leader wanting to make their mark on history. Why not focus on “building leaders of character who serve the common defense”?

What is so sad about change? Change happens every day. Sure, these women are not against the change nor are they upfront about truly wanting it. I bet these female cadets want what every other cadet at West Point wants, respect, dignity, and a chance to serve their country. And let’s face it, there is nothing emasculating about changing the songs words from men and sons to something neutral. It doesnt chance the meaning of the song, it only accounts for the changing times. It takes a man and a woman to birth a child, we need both of them in this world. One is not superior to the other. We are put here with different abilities and strengths. Why not use what women have to offer. And if so, then include them, even if it means starting a new tradition. Its those people that refuse to accept the fact that times have already changed and wont be going back, so we must deal with it and any and all ways we can. Why is everyone so afraid of change?

It is without a doubt that women are misrepresented in the songs, cheers and ballads of West Point lore; but to cut and paste words from these songs is an assault on the last few remaining bastions of tradition this 200 year old academy has to offer. It is a travesty and does not in any way lend pride to the female graduates and cadets but very well may burden these fine ladies because of this mass substitution of words on their behalf. Instead of starting a new tradition by actually composing a song about our women of the Long Gray Line and the manner in which they have served our country, we are instead to squash traditions to “appease” the PC “Gods” by hacking away at these songs. And in doing so, exacting pride from our precious few traditions West Point has to offer. Preserving traditions is what this academy does worst. Traditions require time and nurturing to stand the test of time, and sadly enough can be extinguished forever by the stroke of a pen. It appears this will happen once again at our beloved alma mater for the benefit of no one person in particular but the expense of thousands of old grads that loved this school for its tradition and lore. Way to go Supe! May Sylvanus Thayer and his entourage of distinguished graduates rip you in half at the pearly gates of Heaven.

The Corps has! The Long Gray Line will turn over in its grave. Yet another excuse to remove tradition from one of America’s most storied institutions. Doesn’t the Superintendent have more important issues to address at the academy? I thought as taxpayers we paid him to make critical decisions that helped to shape and mold leaders of character. Words to traditional songs don’t make leaders. One man is just going to decide to change history and rewrite the past…..and the Board is going to stand by and let him?

I hope a future FEMALE Superintendent has the b@((s to recognize tradition and change it back!

You’ll never catch me singing the new words at a class reunion.

USMA ‘95

When political correctness changes traditions, it is no wonder that the “core” of strength and integrity changes. USMA, Texas A&M, VMI, Culver….all of the old style traditions have been slowly taken away or allowed to “sunset”. Some people call it progression…. There is an old movie called “Soylent Green” (think I spelled that correctly) that should make people think as it makes people not think. All are equal despite the obvious inequality….brains and drive not gender.

Anyway, as Veteran of 39 years 2 months going for 40 and then retiring, and an officer that came through the ranks and not a USMA graduate, I still beleive that there are steep traditions that should be preserved. I have served with many fine female soldiers and 90% did not want special treatment and pulled their weight along with everyone else. There were “slugs” on both sides of the gender gap. That is human nature.

Why change tradition? Tradition is as important, if not more important, than being politically correct. As an officer and a former Senior Tac Officer of OCS (Officer Candidate School), the women that went through combat training and summer camps were shown NO deference whatever. They carried the M60 machine gun or the GSR equipment just as any male did. They were required to climb the same obstacles and crawl through the same mud. There were no men’s and women’s port o potties out in the bush. The only thing that I saw that was different was that most did not have the physical strength to perform some duties that they would not be required to perform anyway. Any leader would recognize those qualities and adjust………………..ALL OF THIS TO SAY………….do not mess with tradition…simply adapt and overcome to new situations. GO ARMY…….BEAT NAVY….in football, but as a combat team, undeniable.

Maybe the supe should do something of real substance rather than using this non-issue to create his legacy.

Maybe the supe should do something of real substance. Does he really want a legacy created over this fabricated issue?

Things in general began a rapid decent when most schools decided to abolish dress codes. This is one more brick in the road to oblivion.

Vince

As a 1983 graduate, I am disappointed on several fronts. Tradition should trump political correctness, especially that NOT desired by the alleged victims of sexual discrimination. The female graduates, as a whole, are not clamoring for this change. Most, like Sheri above, recognize the value of tradition at the Academy.

Second, why stop there? There are numerous references to Pallas Athena as the Goddess of Wisdom at West Point (and it is the US Military Academy at West Point, as others noted). Should we male graduates beat our breasts (is that PC?) over the fact that a woman, and not a man, has been the traditional source of wisdom at the Academy? After all, we men attended under Pallas Athena’s guidance for much longer than women (and Buster, I guess) have had to suffer under the slings and arrows of singing single-sex lyrics. Buster alleges that the motivation for a change came while attending one of the funerals of a female graduate killed in battle. I wonder whether than graduate ever asked Buster to change the lyrics for her. It is the height of hubris to assume what someone else wants.

Finally, as noted above, the Association of Graduates (and non-graduates, faculty, people assigned to West Point, and anyone who can pony up the admission fee to the Association) had a survey for graduates to determine their support of the proposal to change the lyrics. After the results overwhelmingly showed no support, the Association tried again to get results it wanted, supporting the changes. However, again the graduates failed to conform to the party line and again voted overwhelmingly not to support the changes. We were then told that the Superintendent did not need our approval and could change the lyrics on his own. This statement came shortly after the Academy began cracking down on trademark infringement against entitles that had used the words “West Point” for years before the Academy ever registered the term as a trademark. Although it appears that the Academy and Buster do not own the copyrights to the songs, this hypocrisy will evidently not stop the politically correct desires of a single individual who sees himself as a commander of a military installation who can act via fiat rather than as the equivalent of the president of a university who must consult and acquiesce to the desires of the alumni.

Regardless of Buster’s decision (gee, guess what that will be), I will forever sing the songs as they were written and maintained for longer that BUster has been alive.

As a retired Army Officer I find many of the responses on here far more offensive than changing a few words to make a song more inclusive.

When I was active, it was mostly the “ring knockers” clamoring for respect. “What’s your date-of-rank?” or “hey you better salute me” etc. Yet here they are showing utter disrespect to a Senior Officer. You should be able to make your point without being disrespectful. It is ironic that the very officers who DEMAND to be respected have absolutely none for a superior officer. But in my experience that is what I have come to expect from “pointers”. My guess is, if you were standing in front of LTG Hagenbeck, you would not be so bold!

I say again – the changes are minor and appropriate. I think it is sad that some grads think that the changes are burying tradition. These dinosaurs probably complained when we switched from slide rules to calculators(I was a plebe when that happened).

Let’s bring back the stables and ride horses again – we didn’t have tanks when the Academy was founded, why should we use them now? Night Vision devices? – bring back torches! Let’s bring back muskets and black powder while we are at it. New cadets should arrive by train or horse drawn carriages or be sent home.

As a taxpayer I am upset that so much money was spent on an education that apparently does not give graduates the wisdom to see these changes – (what is it, one word in one song and four in the other?) – for what they are – trivial updates that more accurately depict the Corps as it is now.

The Military we have today is far better than the one I entered 30 plus years ago – one of the main reasons it is better is the young men and women are far better at adapting to change.

I’m a 99 Grad and an personally opposed to the changes, based on the traditions mentioned above. But here’s my two cents. When I was in junior high, multiple English teachers taught me to use the masculine to include both genders, or when gender wasn’t specified. Ignoring the “political correct doctrine” and using proper English, the words to the song are still technically correct. I think most educated people, and certainly those cadets possessing the academic rigor to survive four years at USMA, are smart enough to understand this simple explanation. Every female grad I’ve talked to is also opposed to the changes, many more so that myself.

However, this isn’t about being correct. It’s about being “politically correct,” a concept that has done far more harm than good, to both our military, government, and country. Respect those who deserve respect, and leave tradition alone.

Several weeks ago, I went to the Association of Graduates website and voted NO in their survey on changing the lyrics of West Point’s traditional songs to make them “gender neutral.” The site only allows people to vote YES or NO, and I feel strongly about this issue, so I wanted to provide my thoughts.

This proposal is just plain wrong. It has been floated several times before, and was rejected every time. As much as I hate to say it, I would rather have West Point stop singing these songs altogether than rewrite them and sacrifice yet another West Point tradition on the altar of political correctness. These songs belong to the academy and to history; they are not the sole possession of people today to do with as they please. In this regard, I am gratified that the Supe has apparently decided to ask the AOG for input from Old Grads, and I hope he will listen to it. I am even more gratified to see that, as of this writing, roughly three-quarters of graduates who have taken the survey oppose this idea.

Certainly Paul Reinecke and Bishop Shipman intended to write their verses as they did, and we ought to respect the snapshot of West Point’s history their stirring lyrics provide. These songs were written by men, about men, and at a time when West Point was exclusively male. Feminizing or neutering selected words will decontextualize these songs and can only bring diminishment to their poetry, rhyme and meter. If anyone is really so anxious to hear song lyrics that specifically mention West Point women, he should write a new song to capture the imagination of the current generation of cadets and set it to music the way Reinecke and Shipman did. If the song becomes popular, it could easily earn a well deserved place in the canon of traditional West Point music, but that requires two virtues currentl lacking in the discusion — creativity and time. Short-circuiting this process using the poetic and musical equivalent of affirmative action would benefit neither those who want to recognize women’s service, nor the women they seek to honor. Taking such a step would only serve to obscure West Point’s real history, damage the aesthetic quality of these songs, and ignore the sensibilities of thousands of graduates and an even larger number of other Americans who look back fondly and with deserved pride on West Point’s 174 all-male years.

While it is understandable that some people want to recognize the accomplishments and sacrifices of West Point’s women in song, this is not the way to do it. I sincerely hope that West Point’s leadership is not simply looking for the AOG to provide top-cover for a decision that has already been made. If that is the case, it would be just one more reason for many Old Grads to seriously reexamine their future support for the “new” academy. Choose the harder right over the easier wrong: Reject this proposal.

Respectfully,
Mark B. Elfendahl
Class of 1989

For those trying to equate technology changes to traditional changes…..there is no comparison.

we convert to calculators from slide rulers and tanks from horses because they make the West Point officers (and the Army) more efficient on the battlefield…..in what way does changing tradition make WP more efficient? It doesn’t! You are comparing apples and oranges.

I am a female cadet who absolutely supports the proposed changes but would not, as the article states, say that publicly because of the backlash going on here (which to me is just another sign of how far we haven’t come and residual resentment).

Women are not “sons”, and they are not “the men of the Corps.” Although I love both the Corps and the Alma Mater, and sing them happily with everybody else, they do serve as artifacts of the institution that reinforce military service and life at USMA as the domain of men. While I know that some people believe that “men” and “sons” in this case are generic, inclusive terms–they are not as they are applied to our culture. They very much recall mythology of the past that excludes women and point to military service as something shared between men and a way a man becomes a man. While I have no issue with men feeling they become men here (I indeed believe I have become a woman here), I don’t think it needs to be in our official songs as it reinforces exclusionary biases.

Words have power. They matter. USMA knows this. If, given the chance, we can make our words more inclusive, and better the climate here, why shouldn’t we? What are we really giving up in changing a few words?

It is worth noting that the Naval Academy made similar changes regarding gender to its official songs a few years back. There was similar talk, but in the end, the Brigade adjusted to the changes, accepted them, and life continued on normally.

This both saddens and angers me. I am a female grad from 2001 and I am appalled that someone (the Supe) feels, on my behalf, that I’m excluded from the songs because they’re “gender biased”. Why must we erase/rewrite history and tradition because someone “thinks” another is offended? I’ve never been offended by the words in the Corps or the Alma Mater. In fact, I sing both those songs, in their true form, to my children at night for their bedtime songs. Why do I sing them those songs?? Because their grandfather went to West Point, their father went to West Point, and their mother went to West Point. Because my family has a history at West Point. I sang the same songs my father sang. It burns my heart that my sons may not be given the right to tradition and sing the same songs that have been sung for well over one hundred years.

As the mom of a past USMA graduate, I believe that changes to any tradition should be made only after the voice of each and every living member of the Long Gray Line–including current cadets is allowed the opportunity to vote yes or no to the change, not just a discussion by the superintendent, in this case Superintendent Hagenbeck, with people who may or not have attended USMA.

The difference between changing words in a song and allowing women to attend a military academy is tradition versus policy. They are not the same thing. People change policy, not traditions. Have new songs written with politically correct labels and retire the current songs with offensive words if you must. The song writers and lyricists are dead and can’t defend their traditional songs. The Star Spangled Banner doesn’t reflect the American citizen’s way of life today, but we haven’t changed that! Allowing women to attend the academies was a change of policy.

I don’t believe in liberalizing anything related to any of the military academies. We know the cost to the military in Vietnam because of liberals and intrusion by our politicians. Nobody makes it through the ranks to a superintendent position without support of people–some with agendas. Is the introduction of a subject such as this meant to deflect or overshadow something else with a serious consequence going on? Maybe…or not.

Naval Academy, Air Force Academy and Coast Guard Academy Superintendents, be aware. Someone reading the article will think about your institutions and wonder about your traditions.

I vote no to changing traditions. After one tradition is changed, it gets easier to change the next one and the next one. I hope to never hear or see the academies in “uniforms by Versace.”

I sang the Alma Mater and The Corps as a member of the Protestant Chapel Choir for all of my four years at the Academy (2003-2007.) As a female graduate of the Academy, I never felt the need for the words of the songs to be changed. However, I am not saying I’m opposed to the changes, either. What bothers me the most is that everyone has an opinion, but the only opinions that matter (those of current cadets and former cadets) are not being taken into account. Maybe there will be a time for the change a few more decades down the road, but if the Long Gray Line is saying no, then listen to it.

Hail, Alma Mater dear,
To us be ever near,
Help us thy motto bear
Through all the years.
Let duty be well performed,
Honor be e’er untarned,
Country be ever armed,
West Point, by thee.

Guide us, thy sons, aright,
Teach us by day, by night,
To keep thine honor bright,
For thee to fight.
When we depart from thee,
Serving on land or sea,
May we still loyal be,
West Point, to thee.

And when our work is done,
Our course on earth is run,
May it be said, ‘Well Done;
Be Thou At Peace.’
E’er may that line of gray
Increase from day to day,
Live, serve, and die, we pray,
West Point, for thee.

This is admitedly a bit of a stretch comparison, but nonetheless…

The original 1938 lyrics to “Hail to the Redskins” ended with the line “Fight for ‘ol Dixie”. Later those lyrics were changed, for obvious reasons, to “Fight for ‘ol DC”. Anyone who ever saw a game at RFK knows there’s as much passion around that song to some, as there is around our Alma Mater to us. But the world didn’t end, the Skins won three Super Bowls, and most fans don’t even know the original lyrics – even if they are familiar with the controversy around the team name itself.

The same thing will happen as the years go by after this overdue change. Both sides make compelling points, but personally I landed here: I don’t know if my daughter will attend USMA, but if she does, I certainly hope the lyrics of her Alma Mater clearly reflect the fact that she’s there.

Mark A. Johnson
USMA ‘85

That’s a great comparison, Mark. Thanks for weighing in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o84PE871BE

Obama Sopeaks about the future of American Defense.
Pretty soon the military won’t have to worry about sacrificing
their lifes. They will soon be out looking for jobs. There will
be no more war, so the ex-military will have to adjust getting
along and praying for hope and change!

What will be the fall out of jobs when he makes all these cuts?
Burger King can only employ so many people, especially after
20 million illegals magically become Americans!

Question for female Cadet X.

Where are YOUR added verses to both songs? After all you have had 30 years and 3,000 female graduates to develop your OWN gender-specific versus and tradtiions?

I hate to burst your bubble Dave but you are not that important and that is why you were not consulted in this decision. Dave, did you add any verses to the song when you were there? Yeah, I thought not!

As was pointed so eloquently further up in this thread, the USMA is a military garrison not a campus, and that is why the Cadets don’t get a say in what is done by the brass. Which one of you complainers here will tell your commander that they cannot make a decision without first consulting with all members of the unit past and present?
To you USMA grads whining on here, what would you have done if one of the soldiers under your supervision approached you and said we can’t “take that hill” until you get a vote from everyone in the unit?
And therein lies the problem. Far too many of today’s military officers are supervisors and not commanders!

I am a male 1997 graduate of USMA. Thanks for changing the songs. We have thousands of women serving our country every day, and they deserve to be included. Not a big deal, and the right thing to do. More important to me is figuring out a way to beat Navy, as a member of the class of 1997, and as prep school graduate, we beat Navy a total of 6 times with no losses (USMAPS beat USNAPS, and we Army beat Navy that year.) Although I don’t know what it is like to lose to them as a cadet, it sure sucked this year when I went to the game and we get our asses kicked. I was pissed, and the highlight was when that cadet ran out and killed the Navy flag. It’s about time they got pissed, and I sure hope that kid got recognized on the poop deck and not a reg board. Let’s focus on what’s important and not worry about the songs. I guarantee most of the no longer living members of the corps are proud of our women in uniform, and don’t turn over in their graves when we say the “Corps of Today Salutes You” instead of “We Sons of Today Salute You.” Anyone who feels otherwise is probably just a misogynistic, under-performer, that got hazed to death. Oh well, your torture continues.

Just read the entire thread AFTER I posted my comment. Now I am pretty disgusted with the mentality of a lot of my fellow alumni. You sound like a bunch of antebellum southerners protecting your class system that excludes black people. Gross! Get over your tradition and respect the sacrifices of our women soldiers. One of the things that makes America great is that we tap into our talent regardless of race or gender, which we didn’t really do until the 20th century. I am sick of everyone talking about how female cadets are against this change. They just aren’t publicly against it, because of the reprisals that they get from 85% of the corps. They are secretly sleeping better at night because they finally have official recognition. Got to agree with Mark above, you don’t consult the troops when you issue an order, you just do it because you think it is right. “Buster” got it right, and I commend for having the balls to issue this order. If you are a grad and withhold donations because of this, then you are truly a pathetic little man.

On another note, I have a classmate that is a teacher at WP (Could easily be a general someday), and he constantly tells me how tough cadets have it now. Even though they have TV’s and locks and get to eat whatever they want, WP still finds a way to make their lives suck. I love WP, and even though changes are not always welcomed, they are usually right. As far as the constitution comments, lets change that too, all men and women are created equal.

Pull the Stars and Bars off your trucks, and get on board with a needed change.

My daughter is a West Point graduate who has served two tours in Iraq. She was disgusted at the thought of changing the words to the Alma Mater and “The Corps”. Tradition is tradition! She expressed her thoughts, but evidently was one of the 75% who were ignored when she told the Superintendent he was way off base!

For those who haven’t heard, the person in charge of USMA (I won’t dishonor the people who served before him with their title Supe) opted to ignore the advice of his subordinates and fellow graduates and still made the change.
This is not the case of the General ordering us to take the hill but “lets vote first” as some have hinted. In fact, this is the case of a leader lacking the moral courage to do what he feels is right because it is right. Few may realize that instead of issuing the order to change the songs and then saying “I did this because it was the right thing to do.” The General first commissioned a survey (ie he asked for the vote) on the feelings of the Long Gray Line on the changes. When he failed to get the answer he wanted, he commissioned a second survey written and geared to give him the statistics to support the change. Only when people overwhelmingly failed to support his line of thinking did he decide that he would just do it because it was right.
I might have actually supported this if he had come out and said “I’m making this change because it’s the right thing to do.” I wouldn’t have liked it but I would have supported it. But, that isn’t the case here. He solicited opinions. When they didn’t fall in line with his opinion, he attempted to manipulate the opinion poll to produce a survey to support him. Only to fail again. Only then did our misguided leader opt to take as he stated “the harder right over the easier wrong.” If it was always the morally correct decision, why solicit opinions on it?
As a former commander, I knew that if I solicited opinions and then opted to ignore that advice that was given, I risked alienating my command. There were times that I made decisions based on overwhelming advice that I would not have made prior to soliciting advice. There were also times I made decisions without soliciting advice because it was the “harder right.”
So congratulations General. You have secured your place in the history books and given yourself an OER bullet. You also managed to alienate the core group of supporters for an institution, unlike a military command, that can not survive without financial support of it supporters and assured that the people who follow you will have a harder time raising money to support an institution, especially the Superintendent’s Fund. I hope your pace in history was worth it.

In my 22 years as an Army Officer and 4 years as a Cadet I was often surprised at who stood up and assumed leadership. Some were outgoing and seemed natural leaders, others were quietly competent, some were brilliant, and others not so brilliant. But the things they always had in common were “giblets” and savvy. Alas, this decision displays neither. It is not about women at the Academy, it’s about caving in to political correctness.

This dinosaur thinks the decision is atrocious and unecessary. I laugh at the 3 or 4 of you who use that term to brand the 97% or so of the Grads who have responded with negative comments about this decision. Proud to be among the dinosaurs.

But here’s a little secret. You see, Buster can’t change it. Only the cadets can change it. Buster can have new words printed, but no one has to sing it that way. I believe in our day, there would have been the quiet revolt. Like removing the sugar bowls from the mess hall when the brass wouldn’t accept the invitation to the Sugar Bowl, back in ‘67–unbelievably, a PC decision before its time. A word of advice to the cadets–if you truly don’t like the change, just don’t do it, and make sure that Plebes learn the correct words each year. Eventually, someone with giblets will get it and republish the correct words.

USMA ‘67