Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
civil service.

Science fiction has used future mixed gender armed forces at
least since 1943 that I know of, and I am interested in job titles
that writers have used that might be useful now, preferably
without incorporating the word "person".

One particular non-gender-neutral title was mentioned in an article.
The United States Marine Corps slogan, "Every Marine a rifleman",
is modified from a statement by General Alfred M. Gray:

“Every Marine is, first and foremost, a rifleman. All other conditions
are secondary.”

I haven't found a precise date for this quote, but Wikipedia implies
that it was in the late 1970s to mid 1980s when General Gray
was involved in implementing the doctrine of maneuver warfare
in the Marine Corps. General Gray finished his career as 29th
Commandant of the Marine Corps, from 1987 to 1991.

In this context "Rifleman" means not just the ability to shoot
effectively, but to execute ground combat tactics, make use of
terrain, cover, and concealment, co-ordinate with other units,
make effective use of supporting fire from artillery or tactical
aircraft, and other basic skills of modern ground combat. Most
Marines have a MOS other than rifleman, in artillery, aviation,
logistics, intelligence, equipment maintenance, communications
and a myriad of other necessary tasks, but they can also serve
effectively as infantry when needed.

A ramification of this is that a Marine tactical fighter pilot is also
trained and qualified as an infantry squad leader, and the Marines
regard this as vital to the effectiveness of their close air support.

If anything, this is more important now than it was forty years ago. Deployments of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq developed into
counter insurgencies with no real front lines or safe rear areas.
Something like two thirds of those killed in action in Iraq were
truck drivers. To supply forward bases, the Marines have partly
replaced trucks with remotely piloted helicopters, which delivered
over 1,500 tons of supplies in Afghanistan.

Also in Afghanistan, U.S. forces often made long patrols on foot
without access to their normal vehicle mounted support weapons.
In the middle east the typical house is built of stone, virtually
impervious to small arms fire. An assault rifle is thought of as a
short to medium range weapon, about 400 meters maximum.
Based on experience in Afghanistan, the United States Army
and Marines now have a requirement that infantry rifles be
capable of providing suppressive fire by putting bullets through
a house window at 600 meters. Needless to say, a firefight with
modern small arms is LOUD. If the people firing from a house
cannot see and hear the bullet strikes of suppressive fire into
their position they won't even know that someone is shooting
at them. This is achievable: a house window is probably two
or three feet wide, whereas the 10-ring on the targets used in
American service rifle matches at 600 yards is only twelve inches
wide, but it takes a good shooter. This was mentioned tangentially
in Robert Heinlein's novel _Glory Road_. When Oscar is checking
out the arsenal that Star has provided he picks up a model
1903 Springfield rifle and notes with appreciation the star-shaped
stamp on the muzzle that denotes it as a match weapon.
National Match Springfields had barrels precision gauged for
uniformity and other parts carefully fitted. On average they
could fire five shots into a two-inch group at 220 yards from a
machine rest. The select M-16 rifles used by most modern
National Match shooters do even better.

The British army has recently replaced "rifleman" with
"infantry soldier" in their usage. This is not bad, and perfectly
acceptable to me, but there is a pre-existing, time honored
job title, "musketeer". I realize that this term is not likely to
be revived, but I have assembled some evidence that
"musketeer" is not as archaic as it might first appear.

We commonly think of a musket as a flintlock smoothbore
such as we used in the Revolutionary War, but technically
a musket is a military shoulder arm light enough to be
fired from a standing offhand position, which distinguishes
it from the arquebus, an earlier and heavier weapon which
was fired from a rest in the standing position. Not that a
rest is necessarily impractical: hunters on the African
savannah often carry light weight "shooting sticks" to
steady their aim on longer shots where tall grass prevents
the use of a kneeling or prone position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_sticks_(weapon_mount)

Almost always, ever since bayonets were invented, a musket
will have a bayonet mount; before that, musketeers were fielded
in combined arms teams with pikemen (another non gender
neutral term) to defend against cavalry.

In the United States rifles played a significant role in the
Revolutionary War, and other countries used them in sniper
and other special units, but they did not become practical for
general infantry use until the development of the hollow-base
bullet by Claude-Etienne Minie and James Burton, which
expanded as it was fired to engage the rifling and allowed
a rifle to be loaded and fired as rapidly as a smoothbore.
Infantry tactics at that time required that each shooter be able
to fire three or four shots per minute. In addition to being much
more accurate than spherical bullets fired from smoothbores,
minie balls, as they came to be known, had half or less of the
aerodynamic drag in relation to their mass as spherical bullets,
and so had an effective range of six hundred yards and more.
These general-purpose military rifles fitted with bayonet mounts
were known as rifled muskets in their day and gave infantry an unprecedented capability to hit opposing forces at long range.
The British Army realized that, to make full use of these weapons,
ordinary soldiers would need a previously specialist skill set
including ballistics, range estimation, the effects of weather,
etc. To this end, in 1853 they set up the School of Musketry
in Hythe. Each line regiment would send twelve people, including
one officer and one non-com, to the school for two months of
training, after which they would return to their units to pass
on their knowledge under the direction of the regimental
"Officer Instructor of Musketry". The school is still in operation,
having been renamed the Small Arms School in 1919 and
moving to Warburton in 1969.

The Winchester corporation referred to military versions of
its rifles as muskets at least as late as World War One. The
classic Winchester lever action model 1866, 1873, 1876, and
later rifles typically had a stock with a fore-end extending
about half the length of the barrel and magazine tube.
The musket version had a full-length stock and a bayonet
mount and other special features. The bayonet mount would
of course be specific to the purchasing country's existing
bayonets.

Further, they sold a lot of muskets during World War One.
The last Winchester rifle designed by John Browning was the
model 1895. This was a lever action but had a box magazine
and was suitable for cartridges with spitzer bullets such as the
30-06 Springfield. At the start of the war Russia had inadequate
numbers of their Mosin Nagant bolt action rifles, and purchased
294,000 Winchester model 1895 muskets chambered for the
standard Russian 7.62x54mmR cartridge, some 70 percent of
total model 1895 production. These had bayonet mounts and
were also equipped with charger guides so that the magazine
could be reloaded from the same five-round charger clips used
for the Mosin Nagant rifle.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/this-old-gun-winchester-model-1895-russian-musket/m

Our 1982 _American Heritage Dictionary_ has "the technique of
using small arms" as one definition of "musketry".

From Dictionary.com: musketry, noun:

"Military. the technique of bringing fire from a group of rifle and
automatic weapons to bear on specified targets."

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

There seems to have been a mistake copying the second link. Hopefully this one is correct:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/this-old-gun-winchester-model-1895-russian-musket/

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

Among the things peterwezeman wrote:
> Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
> armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
> are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
> similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
> civil service.
>
> Science fiction has used future mixed gender armed forces at
> least since 1943 that I know of, and I am interested in job titles
> that writers have used that might be useful now, preferably
> without incorporating the word "person".
>
> One particular non-gender-neutral title was mentioned in an article.
> The United States Marine Corps slogan, "Every Marine a rifleman",
> is modified from a statement by General Alfred M. Gray:
>
> “Every Marine is, first and foremost, a rifleman. All other conditions
> are secondary.”
....
> In this context "Rifleman" means not just the ability to shoot
> effectively, but to execute ground combat tactics, make use of
> terrain, cover, and concealment, co-ordinate with other units,
> make effective use of supporting fire from artillery or tactical
> aircraft, and other basic skills of modern ground combat. Most
> Marines have a MOS other than rifleman, in artillery, aviation,
> logistics, intelligence, equipment maintenance, communications
> and a myriad of other necessary tasks, but they can also serve
> effectively as infantry when needed.
>
> A ramification of this is that a Marine tactical fighter pilot is also
> trained and qualified as an infantry squad leader, and the Marines
> regard this as vital to the effectiveness of their close air support.
....
> The British army has recently replaced "rifleman" with
> "infantry soldier" in their usage. This is not bad, and perfectly
> acceptable to me, but there is a pre-existing, time honored
> job title, "musketeer". I realize that this term is not likely to
> be revived, but I have assembled some evidence that
> "musketeer" is not as archaic as it might first appear.

As I like to say to annoy people in discussions about who should get in halls of fame: If you have to make an argument for it, you've already lost the argument.
This is especially the case due to the paradox that "musketeer" raises thoughts of swordplay in the popular imagination.

"Every Marine is infantry." sounds succinct enough. Or does "infantry" raise some connotation I'm not aware of?
(Trying to think of a navy equivalent: "Every sailor also a paint-chipper"?)

--
-Jack

"peterwezeman@hotmail.com" <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> writes:
>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or

<SNIP>

What does this have to do with Science Fiction?

In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2-9b71-b21f3b628f0dn@googlegroups.com>,
peterwezeman@hotmail.com <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>civil service.

(Hal Heydt)
Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.

(He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
Electrician's Mate.)

In article <07a0f27b-08c4-4ab0-98ad-7ea1d983d13en@googlegroups.com>,
Jack Bohn <jack.bohn64@gmail.com> wrote:
>"Every Marine is infantry." sounds succinct enough. Or does "infantry"
>raise some connotation I'm not aware of?
>(Trying to think of a navy equivalent: "Every sailor also a paint-chipper"?)

(Hal Heydt)
Can't speak to "every sailor", but having taken a 2-quarter set
of classes in Navigation from the Department of Naval Science
(aka Navy ROTC) at Cal--I wasn't in the program, I just wanted to
take the classes--I can tell you that every Naval *officer* is
required to know how to navigate a ship.

This was back in the day before satellite navigation, so, while
we didn't get to actually practice with sextants, we did a *lot*
of sight reductions. I am given to understand that celestial
navigation is making a big comeback in Naval officer training
since it became apparent that GPS constellations would be a prime
target in any major war, so best not to have every navigator
totally dependent on GPS.

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
> peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> >Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
> >armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
> >are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
> >similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
> >civil service.
> (Hal Heydt)
> Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
> job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
> putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
> worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>
> (He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
> electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
> Electrician's Mate.)
Railroads kept the job title "fireman" long after steam locomotives went out of use.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

In article <DuDYK.231092$51Rb.42741@fx45.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>"peterwezeman@hotmail.com" <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> writes:
>>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>
> <SNIP>
>
>What does this have to do with Science Fiction?

(Hal Heydt)
Ummm...? It affects plausible expecations for works set in out
future and--if ignored--make willing suspension of disbelief
diffcult?

In article <rIvLBG.rn9@kithrup.com>,
Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
>In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2-9b71-b21f3b628f0dn@googlegroups.com>,
>peterwezeman@hotmail.com <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>>civil service.
>
>(Hal Heydt)
>Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>
>(He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>Electrician's Mate.)

The USN gave my uncle a career by making him a ship's cook. This
facilitated a sidways move and he ended up high end gourmet chef.

(I don't know what customers would have made of a chef with a thick
Nova Scotian* accent and sailor's tattoos)

* He was born in the US but moved to NS as a kid. In fact, I think
he thought he was a Canadian citizen right up to the moment his
induction papers arrived.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), "peterwezeman@hotmail.com"
<peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>> >Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>> >armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>> >are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>> >similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>> >civil service.
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>> job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>> putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>> worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>>
>> (He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>> electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>> Electrician's Mate.)
>
>Railroads kept the job title "fireman" long after steam locomotives went out of use.

Probably a union thing ...
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 15:50:04 GMT, djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
Heydt) wrote:

>In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2-9b71-b21f3b628f0dn@googlegroups.com>,
>peterwezeman@hotmail.com <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>>civil service.
>
>(Hal Heydt)
>Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.

/Fahrenheit 451/ uses a similar definition, of course.

And it's on-topic!

>(He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>Electrician's Mate.)
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Mon, 26 Sep 2022 21:23:28 -0700 (PDT), "peterwezeman@hotmail.com"
<peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>civil service.

The Army was using "female soldier" when I got out. What it is using
now I have no idea, but I wouldn't put "female infantryman" past them.

"Midsommer Murders", for a while, had a "WPC" who appeared regularly.
Presumably, this was "Woman Police Constable" (as opposed to "PC").
The character eventually became a Detective Constable and was
introduced as such but was always listed as "WPC" in the X-Ray.

Insane and tortured are the twists and turns of /this/ topic!
--
"In this connexion, unquestionably the most significant
development was the disintegration, under Christian
influence, of classical conceptions of the family and
of family right."

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 11:38:46 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), "peterw...@hotmail.com"
> <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >> In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> >> >Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
> >> >armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
> >> >are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
> >> >similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
> >> >civil service.
> >> (Hal Heydt)
> >> Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
> >> job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
> >> putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
> >> worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
> >>
> >> (He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
> >> electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
> >> Electrician's Mate.)
> >
> >Railroads kept the job title "fireman" long after steam locomotives went out of use.
> Probably a union thing ...
> --
Yes, but it was also argued on the basis of safety. On a steam locomotive the engineer
and fireman could each only see down one side of the locomotive, and each had a blind
spot extending to a point considerably in advance of the loco. Over the years, the
fireman had become sort of a co-driver, doing things like confirming trackside signals
called out by the engineer. Many non-steam locomotives, such as the Pennsylvania's
GG1 electrics or a modern freight road unit moving "long hood forward" also have
blind spots to the front.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:09:44 PM UTC+1, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> "peterw...@hotmail.com" <peterw...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> <SNIP>
>
> What does this have to do with Science Fiction?
It might have been science fiction. Once upon a time the Navy and armed forces news would have been the introduction of radio, then radar, then stealth.. Now our armed forces strive for a strategic lead in political correctness.

"peterwezeman@hotmail.com" <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> writes:
>On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 11:38:46 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), "peterw...@hotmail.com"
>> <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> >> In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>> >> >Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>> >> >armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>> >> >are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>> >> >similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>> >> >civil service.
>> >> (Hal Heydt)
>> >> Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>> >> job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>> >> putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>> >> worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>> >>
>> >> (He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>> >> electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>> >> Electrician's Mate.)
>> >
>> >Railroads kept the job title "fireman" long after steam locomotives went out of use.
>> Probably a union thing ...
>> --
>Yes, but it was also argued on the basis of safety. On a steam locomotive the engineer
>and fireman could each only see down one side of the locomotive, and each had a blind
>spot extending to a point considerably in advance of the loco. Over the years, the
>fireman had become sort of a co-driver, doing things like confirming trackside signals
>called out by the engineer. Many non-steam locomotives, such as the Pennsylvania's
>GG1 electrics or a modern freight road unit moving "long hood forward" also have
>blind spots to the front.

OTOH, you had cab-forward steam locos like the SP 4-8-8-2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-8-8-2

Which purportedly were designed to keep the stack smoke from
killing the engineer in the sierra nevada tunnels. The picture
on the wiki doesn't really exhibit just how large the engine is.

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 12:26:42 PM UTC-4, James Nicoll wrote:
> In article <rIvLB...@kithrup.com>,
> Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
> >In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
> >peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> >>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
> >>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
> >>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
> >>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
> >>civil service.
> >
> >(Hal Heydt)
> >Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
> >job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
> >putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
> >worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
> >
> >(He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
> >electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
> >Electrician's Mate.)
> The USN gave my uncle a career by making him a ship's cook. This
> facilitated a sidways move and he ended up high end gourmet chef.
>
> (I don't know what customers would have made of a chef with a thick
> Nova Scotian* accent and sailor's tattoos)
>

"The fish here should b good...."

> * He was born in the US but moved to NS as a kid. In fact, I think
> he thought he was a Canadian citizen right up to the moment his
> induction papers arrived.
> --

--
Kevin R

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 2:56:09 PM UTC-4, mcdow...@sky.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:09:44 PM UTC+1, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> > "peterw...@hotmail.com" <peterw...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > What does this have to do with Science Fiction?
> It might have been science fiction. Once upon a time the Navy and armed forces news would have been the introduction of radio, then radar, then stealth.. Now our armed forces strive for a strategic lead in political correctness.

"Trooper" has no gendered ending. Traditional in the cavalry.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper

--
Kevin R

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 9:09:44 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> "peterw...@hotmail.com" <peterw...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
> <SNIP>
>
> What does this have to do with Science Fiction?
Non-traditional gender roles have long been a staple in science fiction. In A. E. van Vogt's 1943
short story _Concealment_ a woman is the captain of an exploring starship. In Robert Heinlein's
_Starship Troopers_ the protagonist's friend Carmen Ibañez enlists in the Federation service to
become a spacecraft pilot officer, and the protagonist remarks that women were, on average, the
best pilots. When Joe Haldeman's Hugo and Nebula winning novel _The Forever War_ was published
in 1974 women were not yet allowed in combat arms in the United States military. I'm sure there are
many other examples.

Peter Wezeman
anti-social Darwinist

On 27/09/2022 15.03, Kevrob wrote:

> "Trooper" has no gendered ending. Traditional in the cavalry.
>
> https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper

It's interesting that Heinlein used it in the title of a novel
focusing on infantry.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Always use apostrophe's and "quotation marks" properly.

In article <rsIYK.100166$ocy7.23231@fx38.iad>,
Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net> wrote:
>"peterwezeman@hotmail.com" <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> writes:
>>On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 11:38:46 AM UTC-5, Paul S Person wrote:
>>> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 09:03:09 -0700 (PDT), "peterw...@hotmail.com"
>>> <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 10:56:40 AM UTC-5, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> >> In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >> peterw...@hotmail.com <peterw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>>> >> >Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>>> >> >armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>>> >> >are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>>> >> >similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>>> >> >civil service.
>>> >> (Hal Heydt)
>>> >> Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>>> >> job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>>> >> putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>>> >> worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>>> >>
>>> >> (He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>>> >> electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>>> >> Electrician's Mate.)
>>> >
>>> >Railroads kept the job title "fireman" long after steam locomotives
>went out of use.
>>> Probably a union thing ...
>>> --
>>Yes, but it was also argued on the basis of safety. On a steam
>locomotive the engineer
>>and fireman could each only see down one side of the locomotive, and
>each had a blind
>>spot extending to a point considerably in advance of the loco. Over the
>years, the
>>fireman had become sort of a co-driver, doing things like confirming
>trackside signals
>>called out by the engineer. Many non-steam locomotives, such as the
>Pennsylvania's
>>GG1 electrics or a modern freight road unit moving "long hood forward"
>also have
>>blind spots to the front.
>
>OTOH, you had cab-forward steam locos like the SP 4-8-8-2:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-8-8-2
>
>Which purportedly were designed to keep the stack smoke from
>killing the engineer in the sierra nevada tunnels. The picture
>on the wiki doesn't really exhibit just how large the engine is.

(Hal Heydt)
Not just the smoke. The heat, as well. There is one of those
units at the California State Railway Museum is Sacramento. It's
rather...large.

In article <tgv87u$mf3$1@reader2.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <rIvLBG.rn9@kithrup.com>,
>Dorothy J Heydt <djheydt@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>In article <c1f4b831-91c2-49e2-9b71-b21f3b628f0dn@googlegroups.com>,
>>peterwezeman@hotmail.com <peterwezeman@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>Until recently, women were barred from many job categories, or
>>>Military Occupational Specialties (MOS), in the United States
>>>armed forces. Now that this is no longer the case, the forces
>>>are retitling MOS in gender neutral language where necessary,
>>>similar to the replacement of "fireman" by "firefighter" in the
>>>civil service.
>>
>>(Hal Heydt)
>>Well...that's *one* definition of "fireman". My father's first
>>job in the Navy was as a fireman. However, he wasn't tasked with
>>putting fires *out*, rather keeping the fire going properly. He
>>worked in the engine room keeping the boilers ready.
>>
>>(He jumped at the chance when the Navy offered to teach him
>>electronics and by the time he left the Navy--in 1933--he was an
>>Electrician's Mate.)
>
>The USN gave my uncle a career by making him a ship's cook. This
>facilitated a sidways move and he ended up high end gourmet chef.
>
>(I don't know what customers would have made of a chef with a thick
>Nova Scotian* accent and sailor's tattoos)
>
>* He was born in the US but moved to NS as a kid. In fact, I think
>he thought he was a Canadian citizen right up to the moment his
>induction papers arrived.

(Hal Heydt)
My father got a career out of his Navy training, as well. It
included working as the electrician in a residence hotel during
the Depression, engineering officer on ships, 12 years in the US
Maritime service teaching electrical and electronic systems to
merchant marine seamen, then as a field service engineer
under military contract, and finally doing that same work as a
civilian employee of--of all things--the Navy.

In the Maritme Service he was a commissioned officer, ending up
as a Lt. Commander. This came as quite a shock to the Navy
Lieutenant he reported to when it came time to do the paperwork
after my father died. Said lieutenant had no idea my father had
any military background and that was was when he found out that
my father had out-ranked him something over 20 years earlier.

On 9/27/2022 3:36 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 27/09/2022 15.03, Kevrob wrote:
>
>> "Trooper" has no gendered ending.  Traditional in the cavalry.
>>
>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper
>
> It's interesting that Heinlein used it in the title of a novel
> focusing on infantry.

Did Heinlein get to pick the title of the book ?

Don't most publishers reserve the book title naming for themselves ?

Lynn

In article <th06l2$68bl$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 9/27/2022 3:36 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
>> On 27/09/2022 15.03, Kevrob wrote:
>>
>>> "Trooper" has no gendered ending.  Traditional in the cavalry.
>>>
>>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper
>>
>> It's interesting that Heinlein used it in the title of a novel
>> focusing on infantry.
>
>Did Heinlein get to pick the title of the book ?
>
>Don't most publishers reserve the book title naming for themselves ?

(Hal Heydt)
My own--extremely limited--experience is that publishers will
generally go with the title the author picks, though there are
accounts of publishers changing titles.

I can think of one instance (not a book) where the author put a
nominal title on a work intending that the publisher would change
it/give it formal one, and they didn't. Antonin Dvorak sent his
publisher his symphony #9 saying, "Here is a symphony from the
New World" (he was in the US at the time) and it was published as
"From the New World", though more commonly called the "New World
Symphony."

On 28/09/22 09:36, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> On 27/09/2022 15.03, Kevrob wrote:
>
>> "Trooper" has no gendered ending.  Traditional in the cavalry.
>>
>> https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper
>
> It's interesting that Heinlein used it in the title of a novel
> focusing on infantry.
sig: (Always use apostrophe's and "quotation marks" properly. )

Yes. I had overlooked that when my immediate reaction to Kevrob's post
was 'Can a trooper be a trooper without a trooper"s horse?'
and
'Can a paratrooper be a trooper without a parachute?'
and
"Soldier has no gendered endings."

And Heinlein qualified the use.

On Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 9:05:44 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 9/27/2022 3:36 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
> > On 27/09/2022 15.03, Kevrob wrote:
> >
> >> "Trooper" has no gendered ending. Traditional in the cavalry.
> >>
> >> https://www.etymonline.com/word/trooper
> >
> > It's interesting that Heinlein used it in the title of a novel
> > focusing on infantry.
> Did Heinlein get to pick the title of the book ?
>
> Don't most publishers reserve the book title naming for themselves ?
>

One could argue a member of the MI, when armored, was the functional
equivalent of a tank.

--
Kevin R