Don't laugh. Before you read this please take a moment to clear your mind of the prejudice and 'OH MY GOD I HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHO!?' of younger people. If you can't read this and consider it without doing that, then sneering will commence beyond the Read More, and you'll never consider anything but your own thought.
First I want to start off by saying yes, I do know how younger people are. I was once one, as were you. I started my realism 'career' (such as it is) at the age of 14. I also, though, know for a fact that we have quite a few 16 year olds (and possibly 15, because we have discovered them before) hiding within our ranks. They, on the whole, don't cause issues aside from hiding their age.
But what if they didn't have to?
I recently made a post about a shift in focus on teaching. A bigger emphasis upon the principles of leadership, teamwork, and character. The discussion of that idea brought back a long sleeping thought (that believe it or not has been tried in other units before, those these were not strong units) of a possibility... why can't we have younger people?
We use the 17 age mark for a variety of reasons: The game is rated 'M' so you have to be 17 to buy it (this is the biggest reason, actually), we simulate the US military so we have the same age restriction, 17 is a good 'maturity' mark, etc. etc. But 17 isn't a specific indication of maturity, nor does it mean that we cannot have an influence of those who are younger.
So why can't we influence the younger generation? We can, actually. And we can even do it without interrupting our own unit. We don't have to lower our age limit (though that is something worth discussing). We can do what the military already does... a Junior Corps.
Let me clarify. This is NOT happening. This is merely the discussion of an idea.
I'm going to speak as if this is something we would do, so that I can cut the use of 'hypothetically' down. So let me begin by explaining...
This is not a group that would have anything to do with the rest of the unit. No S Section, Infantry, Supporting Asset, or ACE section would have to deal with unless they wanted to. I'll make a diagram of this below to further emphasize this, but I will begin with the upper echelon.
This Junior Corps would report directly to MEU CO, XO, and SgtMaj. No S-Section would have any work to do regarding them. They would be at the sole direction and supervision of the Top Three. Directly subordinate to the MEU CO/XO/SgtMaj would be the Senior Junior Corps Supervisor (SJCS), who would be a full-fledged 15th member, and an officer, SNCO, or NCO. They could fill this billet as a full time collateral duty, or as a secondary collateral duty (preferably the former, in fact it might even be a requirement). They might also have an assistant subordinate, a Junior Corps Supervisor (JCS), who would be a full-fledged 15th member, and an SNCO or NCO. These individuals would be responsible for the oversight, direction, and administration of the Junior Corps, similar to a company HQ.
The Junior Corps itself would have a strict, limited size. We're not looking to compete with ourselves, or strain our resources. The Junior Corps would be limited to a maximum of a full Rifle Platoon (Platoon Commander, Platoon Sergeant, Platoon Messenger, and three squads of three fire teams), complementary Weapons Platoon attachments (one MG squad and one Assault Squad), and one section of armored support (either two tanks or three AAVs), and complementary corpsmen. There would be no mortars or ACE assets due to their complexity of support call and training. All of these positions would be filled by the Junior Corps members.
Those wanting to join the Junior Corps would be filled on a first come-first serve basis between the ages of (possibly) 14 and 17. New applicant 17 year olds would be required to join the 15th MEU (SOC) Realism Unit, and would not have the option of the Junior Corps. Those who turn 17 while in the JC, however, would have the option of remaining with the JC for another year, or moving immediately to the main unit. Those who opt to remain would be required, without exception, to move to the main unit at the age of 18.
Operationally these members would be taught, and exercise, the same thing that the main unit does. They would perform exercises utilizing their attached assets as combined arms, however they would never 'deploy', and thus be in perpetual FTX and CAX cycles. Corporals and Sergeants Courses, and TBS, would not be applicable to the JC.
The rank structure would be similar to the main unit, however for purposes of designation and differentiation, they would all be prefixed with a J/ to represent Junior Corps (similar to how US JROTC ranks are prefixed with C/ to represent Cadet). For example a Junior Private First Class would be abbreviated J/PFC.
Moving from the Junior Corps to the main unit wouldn't make you qualified for anything, as that's an unfair advantage. Your time, commitment, and knowledge, however, would be rewarded with the possibilities of granted ranks of Private First Class or Lance Corporal (or naval equivalents for corpsmen), as well as a Junior Corps Cadet Ribbon to mark that service.
What's the point?
There's a couple points. The first is to provide a positive influence on younger players. We all know of the 'teeny bopper' units.. the super secret squirrel MARSOC Rangers that many try to do. We also know of the ones who copy us exactly, but last for a month. We also know of the toxic environments these have, wrongly bringing in the politics and ass kissing that we (mostly) manage to avoid as an institution. We have the ability to provide that positive influence on younger people and give them a proper institution for this hobby. How different could some of our lives have been if we had been able to be a part of something like the 15th at the age of 14 or 15? Not every school has a Junior ROTC, and not everyone is outgoing enough to get into those that do. Some are scared. That's why they're on the internet. But they often get into the wrong groups. They learn how to be vindictive and childish instead of learning the qualities that actually grow people into valuable young adults. Is it right? No. But that's the world today, and the culture we live in. And we have the ability to influence it for the better.
A second point would to be to give a taste of the military to those who are considering it. Let me be clear by stating WE ARE NOT THE MILITARY. But there is an undeniable feeling of it, and I have been told that by those that have been in the military (of course I've also been laughed at, or called a loser, but that is the minority and usually from those who have had a poor experience). Someone might be swayed one way or the other because of the experience we give them.
A third point would be that we would no longer have to worry (as much) about underage members in the main unit. They would now have a viable alternative to turn to. Those who can't stand to play with a number (age 16) would be relieved by this notion.
How would it work? Not immediately. And not if there isn't at least some interest. Though I've already begun the theorizing and there has been some ground work laid, there's no point if people aren't interested, if it wouldn't be a positive influence on our unit, and it's not close to a point of implementation. This post is merely to get the juices flowing about it for consideration. To get feedback on the idea and see if there is vehement opposition, or support and interest. So please reply in my Commander's Blog topic on the forum with your thoughts. Or if you're afraid to do so (some seem to thing that their opinions will be punished if their name is attached, which is absolutely not the case), feel free to use the Contact tab to the left and send an anonymous response.
Also please feel free to use that Contact page to submit ideas or requests for a post, as I'm running out of ideas all the time. Though my next post will be full answers to all the Ask Command Staff questions (unless they are thorough answers in the newsletter itself).
As promised, here is a diagram of how a Junior Corps would be structured.
But what if they didn't have to?
I recently made a post about a shift in focus on teaching. A bigger emphasis upon the principles of leadership, teamwork, and character. The discussion of that idea brought back a long sleeping thought (that believe it or not has been tried in other units before, those these were not strong units) of a possibility... why can't we have younger people?
We use the 17 age mark for a variety of reasons: The game is rated 'M' so you have to be 17 to buy it (this is the biggest reason, actually), we simulate the US military so we have the same age restriction, 17 is a good 'maturity' mark, etc. etc. But 17 isn't a specific indication of maturity, nor does it mean that we cannot have an influence of those who are younger.
So why can't we influence the younger generation? We can, actually. And we can even do it without interrupting our own unit. We don't have to lower our age limit (though that is something worth discussing). We can do what the military already does... a Junior Corps.
Let me clarify. This is NOT happening. This is merely the discussion of an idea.
I'm going to speak as if this is something we would do, so that I can cut the use of 'hypothetically' down. So let me begin by explaining...
This is not a group that would have anything to do with the rest of the unit. No S Section, Infantry, Supporting Asset, or ACE section would have to deal with unless they wanted to. I'll make a diagram of this below to further emphasize this, but I will begin with the upper echelon.
This Junior Corps would report directly to MEU CO, XO, and SgtMaj. No S-Section would have any work to do regarding them. They would be at the sole direction and supervision of the Top Three. Directly subordinate to the MEU CO/XO/SgtMaj would be the Senior Junior Corps Supervisor (SJCS), who would be a full-fledged 15th member, and an officer, SNCO, or NCO. They could fill this billet as a full time collateral duty, or as a secondary collateral duty (preferably the former, in fact it might even be a requirement). They might also have an assistant subordinate, a Junior Corps Supervisor (JCS), who would be a full-fledged 15th member, and an SNCO or NCO. These individuals would be responsible for the oversight, direction, and administration of the Junior Corps, similar to a company HQ.
The Junior Corps itself would have a strict, limited size. We're not looking to compete with ourselves, or strain our resources. The Junior Corps would be limited to a maximum of a full Rifle Platoon (Platoon Commander, Platoon Sergeant, Platoon Messenger, and three squads of three fire teams), complementary Weapons Platoon attachments (one MG squad and one Assault Squad), and one section of armored support (either two tanks or three AAVs), and complementary corpsmen. There would be no mortars or ACE assets due to their complexity of support call and training. All of these positions would be filled by the Junior Corps members.
Those wanting to join the Junior Corps would be filled on a first come-first serve basis between the ages of (possibly) 14 and 17. New applicant 17 year olds would be required to join the 15th MEU (SOC) Realism Unit, and would not have the option of the Junior Corps. Those who turn 17 while in the JC, however, would have the option of remaining with the JC for another year, or moving immediately to the main unit. Those who opt to remain would be required, without exception, to move to the main unit at the age of 18.
Operationally these members would be taught, and exercise, the same thing that the main unit does. They would perform exercises utilizing their attached assets as combined arms, however they would never 'deploy', and thus be in perpetual FTX and CAX cycles. Corporals and Sergeants Courses, and TBS, would not be applicable to the JC.
The rank structure would be similar to the main unit, however for purposes of designation and differentiation, they would all be prefixed with a J/ to represent Junior Corps (similar to how US JROTC ranks are prefixed with C/ to represent Cadet). For example a Junior Private First Class would be abbreviated J/PFC.
Moving from the Junior Corps to the main unit wouldn't make you qualified for anything, as that's an unfair advantage. Your time, commitment, and knowledge, however, would be rewarded with the possibilities of granted ranks of Private First Class or Lance Corporal (or naval equivalents for corpsmen), as well as a Junior Corps Cadet Ribbon to mark that service.
What's the point?
There's a couple points. The first is to provide a positive influence on younger players. We all know of the 'teeny bopper' units.. the super secret squirrel MARSOC Rangers that many try to do. We also know of the ones who copy us exactly, but last for a month. We also know of the toxic environments these have, wrongly bringing in the politics and ass kissing that we (mostly) manage to avoid as an institution. We have the ability to provide that positive influence on younger people and give them a proper institution for this hobby. How different could some of our lives have been if we had been able to be a part of something like the 15th at the age of 14 or 15? Not every school has a Junior ROTC, and not everyone is outgoing enough to get into those that do. Some are scared. That's why they're on the internet. But they often get into the wrong groups. They learn how to be vindictive and childish instead of learning the qualities that actually grow people into valuable young adults. Is it right? No. But that's the world today, and the culture we live in. And we have the ability to influence it for the better.
A second point would to be to give a taste of the military to those who are considering it. Let me be clear by stating WE ARE NOT THE MILITARY. But there is an undeniable feeling of it, and I have been told that by those that have been in the military (of course I've also been laughed at, or called a loser, but that is the minority and usually from those who have had a poor experience). Someone might be swayed one way or the other because of the experience we give them.
A third point would be that we would no longer have to worry (as much) about underage members in the main unit. They would now have a viable alternative to turn to. Those who can't stand to play with a number (age 16) would be relieved by this notion.
How would it work? Not immediately. And not if there isn't at least some interest. Though I've already begun the theorizing and there has been some ground work laid, there's no point if people aren't interested, if it wouldn't be a positive influence on our unit, and it's not close to a point of implementation. This post is merely to get the juices flowing about it for consideration. To get feedback on the idea and see if there is vehement opposition, or support and interest. So please reply in my Commander's Blog topic on the forum with your thoughts. Or if you're afraid to do so (some seem to thing that their opinions will be punished if their name is attached, which is absolutely not the case), feel free to use the Contact tab to the left and send an anonymous response.
Also please feel free to use that Contact page to submit ideas or requests for a post, as I'm running out of ideas all the time. Though my next post will be full answers to all the Ask Command Staff questions (unless they are thorough answers in the newsletter itself).
As promised, here is a diagram of how a Junior Corps would be structured.