Worth getting them to post it in the Wing Shooting Officers Teams channel and having the TDT IM have a look.
1 Like
Unless anyone here (a) has found the same issue & (b) wants to beat the CoC. 
1 Like
If they want to get rid of Marksman to be gender specific then surely Im then not a woman, Im a wowo? Also my last name is gender specific with man at the end and my daughter and I aren’t bothered. I look forward with scepticism to someone suggesting “gender neutral accommodation” at camp and an update to the word “cockpit”.
2 Likes
“This problem doesn’t effect me or my family, so let’s ignore anyone else.”
That’s how that reads…
3 Likes
If one looks up the word ‘Marksman’ in the Oxford English Dictionary, it defines the shooter as a ‘person,’ so the word is already gender neutral and fit for purpose. Plus it sounds more aspirational than the term ‘Shot,’ which merely means a person who has reached a certain standard of shooting, rather than being skilled at it.
The word ‘Markswoman’ can be found there, which so far applies to women only. I quite like that term: it conjures up visions of Annie Oakley and Russian female snipers defending their motherland against the Fascists in WWII. Or even Sarah Palin shooting Grizzly bears in Alaska. I draw the line at hot pink AR-15 rifle stocks, tho’.
There is no word ‘Marksperson,’ and the RAFAC haven’t taken it upon themselves to create a new word for the English language. We service people have to use what words are in the OED and not invent our own, otherwise meaning could be lost. It is pretty obvious in the case of the above word, though.
English is a democratic language: the people speaking it decide what words they want to introduce into common usage, and most seem to end up in the ever-growing lexicon. So if enough people start using ‘Marksperson,’ in the same way they started using the word ‘Chairperson,’ it’ll eventually get into the OED.
But rifle shooting is a minority sport in the UK, so that won’t happen.
And this whole thread is a pointless argument, like all the others on this Forum, because there’s nothing any of us can do about anything we discuss here. I only write comments here because it’s the only chance I get of finding intellectual conversation mixed in amongst our ineffectual whinging. 
1 Like
Thing is, it’s less about the changing of the name, and more about the way that shooting is as a whole in the corps. Same with flying. I’ve been up in the air twice (one powered one gliding) in the nearly six years I’ve been in RAFAC, and shooting twice.
Where is the true issue? The name of the badge, or the state of the activities behind them.
You’re certainly correct to highlight the very real issue with lack of flying.
At this point you could compare it to joining a canoe club, but only hitting the water every now and then.
It becomes very difficult to justify picking this hobby over another when the only true USP is less accessible than gliding is to the air scouts.
2 Likes
only just doing IWT on the air rifle next month I’ve been in 2 years!
to be fair - flying and gliding opportunities our hands are tied on what AEF and VGS can provide us/decide they can allocate
Shooting opportunities, be that air rifle, L144, L98 or L81 can all be managed at a Squadron/Wing level by CFAVs and happen self-sufficiently providing the CFAVs have the quals and available time
Please - nobody tell HQAC that paeshooters are cheaper than air rifles !!
1 Like
Cockpit = Aircraft Control Centre
But you still had to rotste the bolt-head after pressing the catch !
1 Like
Indeed.