What’s the point of changing the name of the badges if the word we are deleting is retained elsewhere in the syllabus.
Cards on the table, I’m not a fan of this change. I have no issue with going gender neutral with gendered terms, (fireman to fire fighter for example) but Marksmanship isn’t a gendered term, it’s just a word with man in it.
Have we changed airmanship yet?
The first class ‘Principles of Airmanship’ was changed to Flying Operations in Jan 2022…
But its still Airmanship in the Leading Cadet syllabus.
But it was a tounge in cheek comment not meant to derail the thread, but i too agree with @daws1159
@pEp changing one word, shouldn’t be the factor that determines if a cadet or adult feels accepted, it is how their peers, leaders and followers treat them on a day to day basis.
You mean like Human?
This discussion really is focusing on one thing now. I suggest looking at this thread, as we’ve been here before:
Maybe reopen that thread?
Or woman?
Originally man was gender neutral meaning a human, with wifman meaning a female human and wereman being a male human.
Then man became used for humans in general and males specifically depending on the context and it’s only relatively recently that this has changed. Many of these words that we’re now changing (often because of white knights) are actually derived from the gender neutral version of man.
But we are where we are. Our education system fails to teach this aspect of English so people just assume the worst and jump on it until things are changed. But if they’re not being taught properly then maybe the offence taken is justified, even if technically unwarranted. From a linguistic history point of view the change is unneeded, but I accept from the current usage it may be needed. And frankly the change doesn’t affect my daily life so I’ll roll with it.
You mean like the solid purpose of making the world a more inclusive place?
Female
Commandant
Manchester
The list goes on
No, by itself it won’t, it’s part of a package of things. Some of the responses here clearly show how far we have to go in helping people accept a tiny, insignificant change for them which for other people could be massive. It’s not the be all and end all, but it is a small start that literally doesn’t impact the majority of people in any discernible way.
Far from it, if Bloggs learns the RAFAC terminology for “X” as “Y” for circa-5yrs, how are they going to react when they go into the real world after they leave cadets and are told “what are you on about you muppet”
I’m unsure what’s been changed that would have an affect on anything in the civvy world?
All words we have no say in. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do what we can within our sphere of influence.
Moreover, language is officially changing (so this is not merely a case of poor education). For example, ‘they’ has been used (officially, according to the OED) with reference to a person whose sense of personal identity does not correspond to conventional sex and gender distinctions since 2009. That said, maybe education has failed those who believe ‘they’ can only be plural as ‘they’ has been used with singular antecedents in an attempt to avoid a reference to gender since 1450.
The real world where Marksmanship is discussed regularly you mean? 
It is quite funny watching people get into such a flap over something that literally doesn’t impact them at all.
I do agree if we’re changing the badge we should change the terminology and move to sharpshooting, but if we don’t own that we can’t.
This. People appear to be criticising something which hasn’t happened.
It’s change for change sake rather than a realistic appraisal of who might be affected.
We are going down the route of some NHS trusts, people who chest feed, etc.
Anyway, for social media posts, Cdt Bloggs applied the principles of marksmanship very well & was awarded his bronze shooting badge. 
Not really sure what the devil emoji is for; that would be an entirely appropriate post. Well, except we don’t award badges for applying principles, rather for achieving a standard in a specified CLF. It’s a small detail I’m sure nobody cares about but feel free to conduct a realistic appraisal of who might be adversely affected.
Besides, it’s not change for the sake of change (I have better things to do with my life). Else, why would others be bothering?
The same can be said if making.the change.
I can fully understand how a female (or anyone else who identifies as other than male) could have an issue with “Airman”. But Marksmanship is in no way the same and to pretend as such is quite frankly an insult to those who have real issues that they need to fight.
If there’s an issue I can help you with, please submit a change request.