Hubbry Logo
PoguePogueMain
Open search
Pogue
Community hub
Pogue
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Pogue
Pogue
Pogue
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

U.S. military support personnel, like these Army culinary specialists, may be referred to by some combat personnel as pogues.

Pogue or POG (/poʊɡ/ POHG) is American pejorative military slang for non-combat or non-infantry personnel.

History

[edit]

"Pogue" may have entered the American military lexicon during the Civil War through "póg," the Irish language word for "kiss." In this telling, the word "pogue" was popularized by deployed Irish-American sailors who were envious of onshore personnel who still enjoyed the affections of their sweethearts.[1]

By World War I, "pogue" was used by U.S. Marines to refer to a male homosexual.[2] In World War II, its definition shifted to Marines thought to be soft or unfit for duty.[3] By the time of the Vietnam War, "pogue" referred to rear echelon support personnel.[4] Paul Dickson's War Slang humorously defined "pogue" during Operation Desert Storm as "anyone who arrived in the Gulf after you."[5]

In the modern Marine Corps and Army, the oft-used acronym "POG"—standing for "Person Other than Grunt," with "grunt" being slang for an infantryman—may have originated as a backronym for "pogue."[1][6] Some have argued that "pogue" and "POG" are of disparate origins and meanings.[1][7] Though the term is usually considered condescending and derisive, opinions vary about its level of offensiveness.[8]

In media

[edit]

In Gustav Hasford's 1979 semi-autobiographical novel The Short-Timers, he illustrates the Marine infantryman's contempt for pogues: "Sergeant Gerheim is disgusted by the fact that I am to be a combat correspondent and not a grunt. He calls me a poge [sic], an office pinky. He says that shitbirds get all the slack."[9] In Stanley Kubrick's 1987 film Full Metal Jacket, an adaptation of Hasford's novel, Sergeant Joker is chastised for wearing a peace button by a character listed in the credits as "Poge Colonel."[10]

[edit]

A closely related U.S. Army term is "REMF," standing for "Rear Echelon Motherfucker,"[11][12] which gained popularity during the Vietnam War.[13] Another term is "fobbit," a mixture of "forward operating base" and "hobbit,"[14] originated during the Iraq War, lampooning support personnel who rarely leave the safety of the "Shire."[15]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Pogue

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Pogue (/poʊɡ/ POHG) is American military used as a to describe non- or support personnel who are not directly involved in . The term is commonly applied in the U.S. Army and Marine Corps to distinguish such roles from frontline , often called "grunts." It is frequently backronymed as "person other than grunt" (POG).

Definition and Etymology

Primary Meaning

In American military slang, "pogue" (pronounced /poʊɡ/, rhyming with "vogue") is a term referring to non-combat or non- personnel, particularly those in support roles away from direct frontline action. It is often expanded as an acronym for "Person Other than Grunt" (POG), highlighting the distinction between infantry "grunts" who face immediate combat risks and others perceived as spared such hardships. The term carries connotations of disdain and resentment from personnel toward those in rear-echelon or administrative positions, implying a lack of or shared sacrifice in battle. Examples include roles such as clerks handling paperwork, cooks preparing meals, or mechanics maintaining equipment, which are essential to operations but viewed by some as less valorous. This emotional stigma fosters a social within the , where "pogues" may face ridicule or exclusion from the camaraderie of frontline units. Unlike neutral designations such as "support personnel," which acknowledge logistical necessities without judgment, "pogue" emphasizes perceived privilege and detachment from the rigors of , amplifying inter-service tensions.

Linguistic Origins

The of "pogue" is debated, with several theories proposed regarding its military adoption. The term in traces its roots to the Irish Gaelic word póg, meaning "," which entered in the through Irish immigrants. This derivation implies a connotation of softness or , evolving from earlier uses where the word suggested passive or receptive behavior. The phonetic adaptation from póg to "pogue" reflects standard anglicization patterns in immigrant , preserving the short vowel sound while integrating into English . Alternative theories propose connections to "pogue" as an Irish , a shortened form of the Scottish , which was Gaelicized as Polóc and later assimilated to póg due to phonetic similarity. In nautical contexts, the term may have originated among Irish-descended U.S. Navy sailors during the , who used it to deride shipmates assigned to shore duty, associating them with romantic "kisses" from locals while others remained at sea. This maritime usage marks one of the earliest documented applications in American military-adjacent , predating broader adoption. Another theory links it to early 20th-century in homosexual communities for passive roles, adopted by U.S. during before evolving into a general . The word's integration into formalized military lexicon occurred by the 1940s, influenced by World War I-era among U.S. , where it initially served as a slur for passive roles in homosexual encounters before broadening. First documented in glossaries of the period, such as those compiling WWII terms, "pogue" appears in references to non-frontline personnel, showing a shift from informal immigrant and subcultural usage to standardized . Archival evidence from soldier glossaries and period military publications, like Gordon Rottman's FUBAR: Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition: Soldier Slang of World War II, illustrates this phonetic evolution and adaptation, with no significant variations in spelling until later acronymic backformations.

Historical Development

Early Usage in World War II

The term "pogue" gained prominence in U.S. during , emerging around 1942–1943 as American forces rapidly mobilized for combat in both the European and Pacific theaters. Originally derived from the Irish Gaelic word póg meaning "kiss," it had earlier connotations in among as a slur for homosexuals, but by WWII its meaning evolved to denote individuals perceived as soft, unfit, or avoiding rigorous duty, especially within units facing intense frontline conditions. This shift coincided with the unprecedented expansion of the U.S. Armed Forces, which had approximately 1.8 million personnel upon entering the war in but swelled to a peak of approximately 12 million by 1945 through mass and . The need to support global operations created a vast non-combat —logisticians, clerks, and administrators—who often remained in rear areas or stateside bases, breeding resentment among combat troops who viewed them as shirking the hardships of battle. soldiers in campaigns like the Guadalcanal offensive in the Pacific (1942–1943) and the in (1944) frequently employed "pogue" to mock these "stateside pogues," as evidenced in contemporary GI compilations and personal correspondence preserved in archives. The term's adoption reflected broader tensions in a swollen by civilians unaccustomed to service, where standards were sometimes relaxed to meet manpower demands, leading drill instructors and unit leaders to label underperformers as pogues. By 1944, it appeared in informal publications and writings, underscoring its role in reinforcing esprit de among frontline fighters while disparaging support roles essential yet distant from . Postwar memoirs by veterans further documented its prevalence, illustrating how "pogue" encapsulated the divide between those and the expanding behind the lines.

Evolution in Postwar Conflicts

Following its initial usage in , the term "pogue" experienced a revival and intensification during the (1950–1953), where it served to differentiate frontline infantry, often called "grunts," from logistics and support troops amid the static along the 38th parallel. In oral accounts and veteran recollections from the conflict, "pogue" conveyed contempt for rear-echelon personnel perceived as avoiding the brutal conditions of frozen hills and prolonged engagements, such as those at Pork Chop Hill. The term reached its peak pejorative connotation during the (1965–1973), becoming a stark marker of the divide between combat troops in the "boonies" and "rear echelon" support staff, as documented in slang compilations and oral histories from the era. Draft policies, which placed diverse personnel—including reluctant draftees—into varied roles, amplified resentments, with infantrymen using "pogue" to deride those in safer administrative or supply positions far from patrols and ambushes. By the (1990–1991), the term's intensity declined amid integrated operations that blurred traditional distinctions between combat and support roles through rapid mechanized advances and air dominance. Technological advances, such as precision-guided munitions and real-time logistics coordination, reduced the spatial separation between units, diminishing the "rear echelon" stigma, though "pogue" persisted as in training contexts for non-infantry personnel or as a humorous jab at late arrivals to the theater.

Usage in U.S. Military Branches

In the U.S. Army

In the U.S. Army, "pogue" or its acronym "POG" (Person Other than Grunt) serves as a pejorative slang term primarily employed by infantry personnel to denote soldiers in non-infantry roles, emphasizing perceived differences in combat exposure and mindset rather than strictly Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) assignments. The term gained traction among 11-series MOS holders, such as Infantrymen (11B) and Indirect Fire Infantrymen (11C), who self-identify as "grunts" due to their focus on direct ground combat, weapons handling, and tactical maneuvers in high-risk environments. In contrast, support roles like logistics (92-series) or administrative specialists are often tagged as pogues when viewed as detached from frontline hardships, though the label reflects a "mentality" of shirking shared burdens more than formal job duties— for instance, a combat medic attached to an infantry unit may escape the slur through demonstrated teamwork. This distinction fosters interpersonal dynamics that can both reinforce cohesion within squads—through banter that builds a sense of elite camaraderie—and erode trust across units by stereotyping support personnel as less resilient or essential. In training settings, such as basic combat training, the term appears in informal ribbing to motivate recruits toward grunt-like discipline, potentially overlapping with morale-building exercises that highlight role interdependencies, though it risks escalating into divisive if unchecked. At installations like Fort Benning (redesignated Fort Moore in 2023), where occurs, this slang underscores the cultural premium on physical and , yet it can alienate non-11-series trainees early in their careers. During post-9/11 operations in and , "pogue" evolved to critique "fobbits"—Army personnel confined to forward operating bases (FOBs), where they handled rear-echelon tasks like administration or without patrolling beyond wire perimeters, contrasting sharply with dismounted operations. The term, surging in use around 2005, captured frustrations over unequal risks, as grunts faced improvised explosive devices and ambushes while fob-based soldiers enjoyed relative safety and amenities, thereby amplifying inter-role tensions in deployed brigades. Recognizing such slang's potential to undermine unit effectiveness, U.S. Army leadership has pursued mitigation through and programs expanded since the early 2000s, which prohibit disparaging remarks, , and intimidation that target individuals based on perceived roles or contributions, promoting instead to enhance overall cohesion. These initiatives, embedded in annual and leader development, address how terms like pogue can perpetuate stereotypes, with policies emphasizing respect across MOS to support mission readiness in diverse formations.

In the U.S. Marine Corps

In the United States Marine Corps, the term "pogue" or its "POG," standing for "Person Other than Grunt," is commonly used to refer to in non- roles, such as administrative personnel, support, specialists, and mechanics, in contrast to the "grunt" identity associated with ground combat elements. This distinction reinforces the Corps' elite combat ethos, where (MOS 03xx) are viewed as the core of the force, while POGs handle essential but rear-echelon functions that enable operations. The term prominently features in recruit training at Marine Corps Recruit Depots , and Camp Pendleton, California, where it underscores the "every Marine a " philosophy. All recruits, regardless of future MOS, complete intensive rifle marksmanship training during the 13-week boot camp, emphasizing that combat proficiency is a universal requirement to blur lines between grunts and potential POGs, though the persists to motivate adherence to warfighting standards. This approach instills a shared identity, with drill instructors often invoking the term to highlight the expectation that even future support-role Marines must master basic skills. Post-Vietnam, "POG" maintained strong currency in Marine operations, including the Gulf War's Operation Desert Storm in 1991, where it described non-combat MOS Marines supporting amphibious assaults and logistics, and in in from 2001 onward, amid efforts that integrated support roles into forward areas. The aligns with official MOS classifications, categorizing personnel outside ground combat fields (e.g., 01xx personnel, 60xx aviation) as distinct from , perpetuating the slang in unit banter and culture. To mitigate the stigma of being labeled a POG, the Marine Corps has emphasized universal combat training policies, particularly in the 2010s, requiring annual rifle requalification and combat skills refreshers for all Marines to affirm the "every Marine a rifleman" doctrine and foster cohesion across roles. This approach, rooted in doctrinal publications, aims to reduce divisions by ensuring non-infantry Marines maintain operational readiness, though informal use of the term endures as a motivational tool within the Corps' warfighting culture.

Cultural and Social Impact

Representations in Media

In Stanley Kubrick's (1987), the term "pogue" is employed to underscore divisions between combat infantry and rear-echelon personnel during the . In a heated exchange set in Vietnam, the character Private Payback accuses another soldier of being a "fucking pogue," contrasting his own claimed frontline experience with the perceived safety of non-grunt roles. This usage highlights the boot camp and wartime tensions that foster such , portraying it as a marker of resentment toward support troops. The 2005 film Jarhead, directed by and adapted from Anthony Swofford's of the , incorporates "pogue" to mock rear-echelon soldiers, reflecting the boredom and frustration of deployed toward administrative and logistical personnel. In the source , Swofford derides "staff pogues" who avoid the rigors of frontline , a theme echoed in the film's depiction of Marine Corps hierarchies and the psychological strain of non-combat assignments. Television portrayals further emphasize these dynamics, as seen in the miniseries (2008), based on embedded journalist Evan Wright's account of the 2003 Iraq invasion. The series depicts Marine infantry using "POG" (pronounced "pogue") to denote non-combat roles, amplifying tensions between grunts and support units during operations. In Wright's book, a Marine defines it as "Persons other than grunts—pussies," capturing the term's role in reinforcing in-group solidarity among combat troops while belittling others. Such depictions in film and television have perpetuated the pejorative connotations of "pogue," shaping public understanding of military subcultures by illustrating how enforces of valor and sacrifice since the late . No prominent representations have emerged since 2008, consistent with the term's evolving usage.

Influence on Military Culture

The term "pogue," used as for non-combat or support personnel, plays a dual role in by serving as banter that reinforces group identity while also perpetuating divisions that undermine morale. in general builds esprit de corps and by breaking down rank barriers and fostering a shared cultural among service members, allowing for quick communication and bonding in high-stress environments. However, language like "pogue" can weaken unit morale by promoting negative and toward support roles, contributing to internal tensions that affect overall group effectiveness. Low and morale are negatively associated with PTSD symptoms across roles. While -exposed individuals face higher PTSD prevalence rates (up to 17% among U.S. veterans), support personnel may experience related challenges. PTSD symptom networks show similarities between those with and non-combat index traumas, though with differences in symptom . The impact extends to recruitment and retention, where perceptions of role stigma influence non-combat enlistees' experiences and decisions to stay in service. General military morale crises have correlated with retention challenges, as surveys from the 2010s showed declining satisfaction among personnel in non-frontline roles amid broader well-being declines. Although specific studies on slang's effects from the 1990s to 2020s are limited, taboo language's role in fostering hostility has been identified as a factor in reduced optimism and job satisfaction, particularly for those in administrative or logistical positions. Efforts to mitigate these effects include integration initiatives within professional military education, such as (JPME) programs, which since 2015 have emphasized outcomes-based training on leadership and joint operations to promote inclusive unit dynamics and reduce divisive practices. Broader Department of Defense reforms, including the September 2025 review of and policies, address conduct like derogatory language to prevent morale degradation, though these have focused on refining definitions to balance discipline with operational readiness. In communities, the persistence of like "pogue" influences social interactions, often reinforcing identity hierarchies in discussions around service experiences, though formal organizations prioritize unity over such divisions. Media portrayals occasionally amplify these stereotypes, embedding them further into cultural narratives.

Similar Slang Expressions

In the United States , several terms parallel "pogue" in their derogatory application to non-combat or support personnel, emphasizing a perceived lack of frontline exposure. "REMF," short for Rear Mother Fucker, originated during the as a harsh for troops in safer, administrative roles far from zones, and was later revived in and to critique those insulated from direct threats. Similarly, "fobbit," a portmanteau of "" (FOB) and "," emerged in the early 2000s to mock soldiers who rarely ventured beyond the fortified perimeter of their base, evoking images of sheltered, homebound characters from J.R.R. Tolkien's works. "Chairborne ranger," a play on "airborne ranger," derides desk-bound officers or clerks who perform sedentary duties, often implying they romanticize field experience without enduring it. Internationally, analogous expressions appear in other militaries, reflecting cross-cultural disdain for rear-area roles. In British forces, "pongo" (or "pongoes") serves as a naval and slur for soldiers generally, stemming from 19th-century comparisons to apes and perpetuated in inter-service banter. Australian military includes "base rat," a I-era term for soldiers who linger perpetually at bases for comfort and safety, avoiding the front lines and akin to a "base " in British usage. These terms share functional similarities with "pogue" by reinforcing military hierarchies through ridicule of relative safety, often surfacing in multinational settings like exercises where and support troops from allied nations interact. For instance, during joint operations, U.S. "fobbits" might be likened to British "pongoes" in base-bound roles, highlighting tensions over risk exposure among diverse forces. Distinctions in tone and persistence vary: "Pogue" is generally milder and less profane than the vulgar "REMF," yet it has proven more enduring in the U.S. , persisting across conflicts due to its concise, adaptable for non-infantry personnel.

Modern Adaptations and Decline

In the 2010s and beyond, the term "pogue" has adapted into the acronym "POG," shorthand for "Person Other than Grunt," reflecting its persistent but evolved role in military lexicon as a mildly pejorative label for non-infantry personnel. This shift emphasizes the acronym's phonetic similarity to the original Gaelic-derived word while aligning with modern abbreviative trends in service member communication. The usage remains common in discussions of military roles, though it carries connotations of rear-echelon support rather than outright disdain and is discouraged by leadership. Advancements in and cyber operations have increasingly integrated support functions into combat environments, as seen in U.S. military analyses of hybrid threats as of . Unmanned systems enable remote strikes and intelligence gathering, allowing personnel in non-traditional roles to contribute directly to operations without physical proximity to the . Similarly, cyber specialists now engage in offensive actions that parallel engagements. Department of Defense policies on , including prohibitions on slurs and derogatory language, aim to promote in diverse forces. Looking ahead, the term's potential obsolescence aligns with the all-volunteer force's evolution toward integrated, technology-driven operations that emphasize collective contributions over hierarchical slang. Recent DoD reports on demographics and propensity indicate stable but challenged , with cultural unity as a key retention factor amid technological shifts as of 2025. As warfare continues to decentralize roles, "pogue" may recede into historical usage, supplanted by terminology reflecting collaborative mission structures.

References

  1. https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/pogue/
  2. https://www.military.com/off-duty/2020/02/05/fascinating-beginning-term-pog.html
  3. https://www.mirecc.va.gov/docs/visn6/9_military_speak_lingo_glossary_vocabulary_slang_oif.pdf
  4. https://www2.iath.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Glossary/Sixties_Term_Gloss_K_P.html
  5. https://course-exhibits.library.dartmouth.edu/s/HIST10_23S/page/pog
  6. https://www.ancestry.com/last-name-meaning/pogue
  7. https://www.coffeeordie.com/article/pog-or-pogue
  8. https://bootcampmilitaryfitnessinstitute.com/2024/06/11/what-is-a-pogue/
  9. https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-us-military-numbers
  10. https://thekwe.org/topics/what_is_it/what_is_it.htm
  11. https://tavvntc.org/slangpq.htm
  12. https://www.rivervet.com/oif_glossary.htm
  13. https://thedogtagchronicles.com/2014/05/18/pog-is-a-mentality-not-an-mos/
  14. https://www.armywriter.com/NCOER/11B.htm
  15. https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2023/08/15/6d5d2e88/cmf-11-board-products-15-aug-23.pdf
  16. https://thedogtagchronicles.com/2012/04/04/why-grunts-hate-pogs/
  17. https://home.army.mil/benning/units/bct
  18. https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-jargon-from-iraq-and-afghanistan.html
  19. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq-slang.htm
  20. https://angrystaffofficer.com/2015/11/03/how-forward-operating-bases-created-the-illusion-of-war-in-iraq-and-afghanistan/
  21. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20190605_R44321_0ed48b9c9f6fe3838638551a6a10ad6252fe3630.html
  22. https://www.army.mil/article/242011/traditional_hazing_crosses_line_to_sexual_assault
  23. https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/origin-of-the-term-pog/
  24. https://www.mcrdpi.marines.mil/Centennial-Celebration/100-facts-about-Parris-Island/
  25. https://www.smmc.marines.mil/Portals/145/Docs/LeadingMarines/Chapter1-OurEthos.pdf?ver=FR2ZducA3k0xUxsCF4D8ZA%253D%253D
  26. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093058/quotes/?item=qt0475808
  27. https://audiobookstore.com/audiobooks/jarhead
  28. https://subslikescript.com/series/Generation_Kill-995832/season-1/episode-2-The_Cradle_of_Civilization
  29. https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-terms-and-jargon.html
  30. https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/NCO-Journal/Archives/2024/September/Taboo-Language/
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2891773/
  32. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38661464/
  33. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165032720326239
  34. https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2015/06/understanding-the-us-militarys-morale-crisis.html
  35. https://www.ndu.edu/News/Article-View/Article/3727538/a-new-form-of-accountability-in-jpme-the-shift-to-outcomes-based-military-educa/
  36. https://api.army.mil/e2/c/downloads/2025/09/30/0ca0fb42/review-of-hazing-bullying-and-harassment-definitions-osd010714-25-fod-final.pdf
  37. https://karve.wordpress.com/2019/04/26/why-an-army-man-is-called-a-pongo/
  38. http://www.combat.ws/S4/MILTERMS/DOWNUNDR.HTM
  39. https://www.csis.org/analysis/chapter-9-technological-evolution-battlefield
  40. https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2025/05/22/the-shifting-battlefield-technology-tactics-and-the-risk-of-blurring-lines-of-warfare/
  41. https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Support-Services/Culture-Resilience/Equal-Opportunity/Definitions-and-Policies/
  42. https://jamrs.defense.gov/Portals/20/Documents/YP58Spring2024_PropensityUpdate_Briefing.pdf?ver=ZRC0NHuC1JaCLIvpTHztRg%253D%253D
  43. https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2023/02/03/our_all-volunteer_military_force_implodes_879776.html
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.