• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

DIRECTED AT SERVING-MEMBER HUSBANDS.

warpig

New Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
10
DIRECTED AT SERVING-MEMBER HUSBANDS.

Please, if your wife is fully briefed as to the CURRENT BMQ standards and you have done both your homework and due diligence to insure your wife will have the best chances of passing her course, this is NOT directed at you. Thanks to roughly 25% who used your head and had a wife successfully pass their BMQ course on the first try.

To the other 75% of husbands too lazy or to malicious to actually get off your butt and research what your wife is getting into, or too arrogant to think you could ever be mistaken as to what goes on at CFLRS St Jean, congratulations in your divorce proceedings.

Because anyone sending a wife as ill-prepared as you lot seem to must be looking to ditch your dearly beloved. I simply have no other explanation as to why current serving members would subject their wives to such failure and pain.

My Name is Sgt Lorne Warawa and I have worked as a recruit instructor at CFLRS now for just over 3 years. It’s been my experience that if a recruit is an English female who is a service-member’s spouse, she has only a 1 in 4 chance of passing her first BMQ course. The reason is fitness, pure and simple. I have no official stats to back me up in this assessment, but be thankful that the CF isn’t officially keeping these stats as it would probably paint you husbands as more a group of fools than I do. I am using my own experience in training over 17 courses to date. I am using my assessment of the other 17 sister platoon’s Admin PRB rates. That represents over 2000 recruits that I have had direct contact with, and if you add the corporate news regarding courses staffed by colleagues and friends then I do indeed feel qualified to give a general assessment of the passing rate of Service Member’s wives.

The impetus for speaking on this forum now is the fact that out of the 6 Service member’s wives that started the current course I am working on, we only have two left, and one is recently divorced. We have just finished week 2. Yes, week 2 has just passed and only two out of six have not been sent to RFT or VR’d. Fitness has been the crucial factor. This is a typical of course results overall. And it is extremely frustrating to the Staff.

Things have changed since you husbands went through Cornwallis. We do 3 full weeks in the field now, in full fighting order, at a relentless pace that taxes 19-year-old former football players. Recruits do at least two full periods of physical training a day, and that doesn’t include drill or moving in a formed body, every day for the 10 other weeks the course is in Garrison. If her course is above the 7th floor of the Mega, she’s lifting all her kit up and down over 60 flights of stairs a day, minimum. More if she smokes. Every recruit will attempt a 13 kilometre ruck march with weapon on the course. Every recruit will have marched on average 18 kilometres each day of the final exercise in full fighting order, no matter the weather, regardless of blisters. No matter if her trade is RMS clerk or cook. No matter if her element is Air or Sea. Am I getting your attention yet?

I have to ask, why is it so hard for you to use the CF intranet and find a current Staff member at the School who could tell you what criteria your wife needs to fulfill before she shows up? What is stopping you from researching the current course standards and finding out from recent graduates just how hard the School has become physically? Is it a lack of common sense, or is it something else entirely? The fact there are ample resources to access is painting you husbands as a group as less than stellar, and this crosses nearly all ranks from Corporal to MWO to Captain. Wake up.

I am placing the blame for this waste of time, effort and money squarely on the shoulders of those Service Members who’s wives have failed our courses. Thank you for blind-siding your wife and reducing her moral and self-worth to near zero. I am sure she would love to thank you for the pain and suffering your ignorance or indifference has caused. Way to go.

I point out that because you work at a CF base you have easy access to the PSP staff running the CF Express tests on a regular basis. For those of you who have a wife thinking of joining or in the process of joining, it is not too late. Get her on a test as soon as possible, and if she fails any portion, or just limps in at the bare minimums, curtail any further enrolment until she can make at least 20 % above the minimum. There is ample aid within this site and on any base to find the pre-course physical training program and expertise needed to last the 14 weeks. If she comes here below the minimums I have described, chances are the pounding and the relentless pace will find her unable to keep up. She will get injured, or she will waste months on RFT, or both, and likely quit. Or be prepared in the event your wife has the mental toughness we admire to stick it out, to be alone with the kids for an additional three to 7 months beyond what you thought she would be gone. I hope the experience chastises you, robs you of future deployments and leaves you a quivering shadow of a man. You deserve it, though its got to be hell on your family.

I place myself at the disposal of all considering wives and their considerate husbands who would like guidance in this matter. I can be reached at Warawa.LG@forces.gc.ca If your wife has already been re-coursed, or VR’d or is in the process of leaving you, don’t embarrass yourself further by commenting.
 
Feel better now  ?

Your little rants applies to every single demographic that sends it family members to CFLRS so point the finger in multiple directions or go whine at the mess.

BTW, my spouse ( ex-wife now) passed her BMQ and i had f-all to do with it.

Edited because i lost my temper for a minute
 
I have to ask why is it so hard for these "wives" who want careers to get off their own duffs and:

Get in shape.

And why would the husband need to research this stuff on the intranet or DWAN to enable his wife to pass?

A civvy husband can't do that. Is his wife passing at a higher rate? I'd guess so by your post.

A single civvy female can't do that. Is she passing at a higher rate? I'd guess so by your post.

Hmmmm. With no DIN access too.

Seems to me, that some chicks need to pick up their own socks and get a grip on themselves ... and need to be start being held accountable for "their own" actions.

And, if they're whining that "hubby didn't tell me this ..." then I suggest the best COA is to tell them to STFU, they joined the CF as an adult and to start acting like them. They are indeed responsible for themselves.

I can just imagine what my response would be if one of the service-husbands came into my shop to exchange all his wife's kit for her. It simply is not going to fly.

Should their service-husbands be required to sit at their wive's desks and do their jobs for them too once they're QL qualified?

My advice -- stop making excuses for the wives going through who "happen to be married to CF members" -- their husband isn't at fault. They are. I'd call that personal accountability.

That's just my opinion, of course, having never been an instructor at CFLRS.

Your advice is much better directed towards ANY and ALL people who would proceed to BMQ/BOTP and hope to pass. Find out what they are in for. Research it ... and get ready for it. It's not limited to servicemen's wives by any stretch.



 
What a load of poo... people have nobody but themselves to blame for their inability to pass BMQ.

 
Directed at CDN Aviator.

No, SIR, you DID loose your temper. Without being qualified to speak to the facts, by the way. I was going to reply that it isn't my female genitalia that needed to be checked for sand, but you clarified that for us. Congratulations for being one of the 25% who helped insure his wife was ready, or did you meet your wife while at CFLRS, when you were both 21 years old?

To be honest, we do get lots of Service Member kids here, and they usually pass. As they are generally between the ages of 18 and 21, no-body's surprised. It's my opinion that most Svc Mbr's wives are between the age of 28 to 40. Would that be a factor negating your commentary on which family member is at risk for failing the courses? I am ready to debate any factual evidence you may offer that I am off-base on this assessment. If you care to offer any.

BTW, if we ask your ex her opinion of your assessment, would it be the same as yours? Just asking.
 
CDN Aviator said:
Edited because i lost my temper for a minute

Have you found mine yet?  I'm pretty sure it went the same direction as yours.

Just a girl ... said:
My advice -- stop making excuses for the wives going through who "happen to be married to CF members" -- their husband isn't at fault. They are. I'd call that personal accountability.

What about an instructor cadre that's willing to provide fair and equal treatment for all recruits and hold them all equally responsible for their individual failings regardless of sex, marital status, or partner's profession?
 
warpig said:
Directed at CDN Aviator.

No, SIR, you DID loose your temper. Without being qualified to speak to the facts, by the way. I was going to reply that it isn't my female genitalia that needed to be checked for sand, but you clarified that for us. Congratulations for being one of the 25% who helped insure his wife was ready, or did you meet your wife while at CFLRS, when you were both 21 years old?

To be honest, we do get lots of Service Member kids here, and they usually pass. As they are generally between the ages of 18 and 21, no-body's surprised. It's my opinion that most Svc Mbr's wives are between the age of 28 to 40. Would that be a factor negating your commentary on which family member is at risk for failing the courses? I am ready to debate any factual evidence you may offer that I am off-base on this assessment. If you care to offer any.

BTW, if we ask your ex her opinion of your assessment, would it be the same as yours? Just asking.

Congratulate his ex-wife.

SHE's the one who did the course and passed it. SHE deserves the credit for that. Just as those who fail, can credit themselves for their own lack of inititiative, insight, and preparation.

There are medical exceptions to this, of course.
 
warpig said:
Directed at CDN Aviator.

No, SIR, you DID loose your temper.

I'm a SGT so you can quit calling me sir, thanks



Without being qualified to speak to the facts, by the way.

Having spent my time as an instructor at CFSME with QL3s, of which a few were female spouses of serving members, i think i'm more than qualified.

or did you meet your wife while at CFLRS, when you were both 21 years old?

Far from it, we had been married for 8 years, had 2 kids and i was 27, she was 29 when she went to your fine institution.

  If you care to offer any.

Tell me what it is you want.........i'm game !

BTW, if we ask your ex her opinion of your assessment, would it be the same as yours? Just asking.

I dont know what she thinks and to be frank, i dont care either. She has her opinions, i have mine....thats why shes my ex.
 
Shamrock said:
...

What about an instructor cadre that's willing to provide fair and equal treatment for all recruits and hold them all equally responsible for their individual failings regardless of sex, marital status, or partner's profession?

I was actually thinking that when I read the inititial post ...

Wouldn't I love to be a wife of a serving member going through basic and overhearing any talk/comments about "their husbands should have taught them this" coming from instructors or "didn't your husband explain to you that ..."; I'd take it as a clear signal that I could perhaps get away with being a 'lil lazier myself, perhaps even putting in an 80% effort when 110 was required, while he took the blame for it from the instructors. That 80% sure ain't going to help me pass that fitness testing though ...
 
I have no idea what triggered this thread or where it's going.  But there's not much on TV tonight and there's beer in the fridge next to the computer, so I think I'll hang out online for a while.

:brickwall:
 
Sgt Warpig

So you are just as equally responsible for all of your spouse's/Life partner's successes and failures, no matter what endeavour she/he may have embarked upon?


(Please don't be insulted, as I know nothing of you; but I do know that this is now acceptable in the CF.)
 
Haggis said:
I have no idea what triggered this thread or where it's going.  But there's not much on TV tonight and there's beer in the fridge next to the computer, so I think I'll hang out online for a while.

:brickwall:

Tequila works so much better; the sipping type.  ;)
 
Shamrock said:
What about an instructor cadre that's willing to provide fair and equal treatment for all recruits and hold them all equally responsible for their individual failings regardless of sex, marital status, or partner's profession?

Well, I can't speak about A and C Div, but in B Div and more specifically, 18 Platoon, that is the treatment I saw the recruits get when I was at CFLRS.  Having worked with and watched Warpig with recruits, he treated the troops the same, fairly and firmly.  Maybe we should be careful with wide brushes.

Not all the folks in the Div Instr bullpen are bad apples.  Sure I saw a few I thought needed a kick in the nuts, but you could say that about any place.
 
Just a point if I may:

Happy Hour in the Mess, copious quantities of booze and the Internet don't mix well.
 
Vodka & Red Bull here.......

I dont go to the mess here..........it sucks. I'm one of the resons why we get lectured by the WCWO every chance he gets.
 
George Wallace said:
Just a point if I may:

Happy Hour in the Mess, copious quantities of booze and the Internet don't mix well.

If you're referring to me, George, I'm on leave.  And, so far, I'm content to sip beer (sorry Vern, no tequila in the house) and watch this train wreck of a thread develop until my DVR finishes recording "Flashpoint".
 
Back
Top