Is it safe for women to serve at sea?

[Always_a_Civvy]

In the light of the Coates case, I was wondering if people think the House of Commons Defence Committee ought to look at the issue of women at sea again? This is with regard to the statement made today that alcohol will not be banned from ships (thanks TattooDog) and with regard to the failure to strictly enforce the no-touching rule. Perhaps it is impractical to enforce? If women are to remain afloat, should they serve in all-women ships? After all the close confines of a ship cannot be compared to the conditions in shore barracks for women who join the Army or RAF.

Head down, awaiting flak! :twisted:

 

[Lamri]

Personally I don't like women serving with men on ships and I never have done. Thats my opinion and its got nothing to do with women not being able to do mens jobs or any of that kind of rubbish.

It will never be undone though. What political party has the suicidal tendancy to do that!

 

[moondog]

Women can do most jobs at sea,
But in my world,separate ships Please !

 

[moondog]

Alcohol.Sea Time.Women.
They don,t mix
Two life,s ruined.

 

[2badge_mango]

In the light of the Coates case, I was wondering if people think the House of Commons Defence Committee ought to look at the issue of women at sea again? This is with regard to the statement made today that alcohol will not be banned from ships (thanks TattooDog) and with regard to the failure to strictly enforce the no-touching rule. Perhaps it is impractical to enforce? If women are to remain afloat, should they serve in all-women ships? After all the close confines of a ship cannot be compared to the conditions in shore barracks for women who join the Army or RAF.

Head down, awaiting flak! :twisted:

If the said committee and all others who have no idea of what USED to constitute service in the Royal Navy had kept their f*****g beaks out the problem would never have arisen.

Disgusted - York.

 

[F169]

Wasn't it Maggie who forced the issue originally?

AAC - there are thousands of women working at sea, day in day out. Just think of the Cruise ship industry. Women at sea in the RN should have f*** all to do with the HofC Select Committee.

As to the RN specifically, in a well managed ship the no touching rules are perfectly capable of being enforced and 'no-go' areas will not exist. Again, in a well managed ship alcohol will not be a problem. I say managed instead of led because both issues are management not leadership ones.

 

[golden_rivet]

Is it safe for gays to serve at sea? I can't understand why there is all this fuss about women (or gays come to that) in the military. I just think it's a sign of an ill educated mass of people who will slowly be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century. At one time it was thought that black people shouldn't be trusted with guns and were too thick to fly aeroplanes. I don't see any difference in attitudes to women except that there is the added complication that the military structure relies upon and indeed encourages men to see women as 'comfort for the troops' and this creates problems when they have to work very closely together in a professional capacity. They also encourage people to drink to relieve tension and look what family/health/psychological problems that creates for many who serve.

I don't understand why enforcing the no touching rule should be so difficult, but perhaps someone could explain? It works well enough in civvy street. I presume predatory gay men wouldn't last long in the forces so why should men prey on women and get away with it - or indeed women upon men.

I hope some serving women will post on this topic.

 

[mikh]

Women have served on RN Ships for something like 16 or 17 years now it was a move I was'nt over the moon about when it happened, but its here to stay.

One case should not be used to decide the issue of women at sea.

 

[JeffB]

AAC - What en entirely pointless tabloid style question to pose.

Do you seriously think that the select committee, (particularly since they are all politicians) will touch this one with a barge pole? They won't go anywhere near such an investigation for fear a. of alienating half of their electorates and b. getting hung out to dry by the court of human rights.

Is it safe for women to go to sea? - what do you think? do we at best promote an atmosphere of mysogyny and at worst encourage rapists to go about their disgusting habits unfettered? - I don't think we are anywhere on that scale. I put it to you that us matelots are, on the whole a much more balanced bunch than you will find in many other industrial workplaces.

Women go to sea, they have done for nearly 20 years and they will continue to do so for the forseeable future - so get used to it. Furthermore, if you were to remove women from sea-going billets overnight you would cause a huge manpower issue and would have to tie up significant numbers of hulls - do you think that they would increase the recruiting pipelines to compensate? - not a chance - welcome to the next black hole.

In my personal opinion, having served in both stag and mixed manned ships, the presence of women onboard does bring its own issues but that is what the Code of Social Conduct is all about and it is up to the Ship's leadership to enforce that line.

In short: unsafe for women at sea? - don't be ridiculous!
Select committee involvement? - forget it!
Remaining issues after 20 years? - leave it for the tabloid media to get woefully wrong (as is their forte).

You wanted flak - you've got it!

 

[hobbit]

The matter of females at sea does not question the ability of women to perform any task that males are required to perform but the basic issue of SEX. Nature sometimes takes over regardless of any man made rules so the possibility of consensual or other sexual activity is always present. Add alcohol and the possibility is increased considerably. So the mixture of male , female and alcohol = hanky panky, an equation that has been well accepted for a long time.
Forget all the infantile debate accept the facts and do not have mixed crews or booze in any fighting force for the reasons stated. Oh! and while you're at it ban smoking too. Imagine the lives and ships lost because some weak bastard wanted a smoke or a drink and with the addition of male/female well use your imagination.
I rest my case although the disaster involving HMAS Melbourne and HMAS Voyager ( 1964 ) comes to mind. The recent unfortunate and unpleasant case may be the proverbial tip of the iceberg with many more not reported or revealed so why not use preventive measures instead of PW unenforcable laws. Probabley because there's no one with the balls to make the decision. :idea:

 

[Scribes]

Safe for women at Sea? Hell no! The other side have missiles, bombs, mines, guns, bullets, sharp sticks... all sorts of nasties. Of course it's never been safe for blokes to go to sea either but that's never bothered anyone.

 

[Shakey]

AAC - What en entirely pointless tabloid style question to pose.

Oh, you'll get used to him Jeff.

 

[Nutty]

The matter of females at sea does not question the ability of women to perform any task that males are required to perform but the basic issue of SEX. Nature sometimes takes over regardless of any man made rules so the possibility of consensual or other sexual activity is always present. Add alcohol and the possibility is increased considerably. So the mixture of male , female and alcohol = hanky panky, an equation that has been well accepted for a long time.
Forget all the infantile debate accept the facts and do not have mixed crews or booze in any fighting force for the reasons stated. Oh! and while you're at it ban smoking too. Imagine the lives and ships lost because some weak bastard wanted a smoke or a drink and with the addition of male/female well use your imagination.
I rest my case although the disaster involving HMAS Melbourne and HMAS Voyager ( 1964 ) comes to mind. The recent unfortunate and unpleasant case may be the proverbial tip of the iceberg with many more not reported or revealed so why not use preventive measures instead of PW unenforcable laws. Probabley because there's no one with the balls to make the decision. :idea:

Hobbit I wonder why you refer to the Melbourne-Voyager disaster in this thread? It would appear that other than a error of judgement on the bridge of Voyager the only other factor that could have played any part was the Capt. of Voyager having a problem with stomach ulcers which he had not reported as he would have lost his command. This has been discounted at the various enquires held on the matter. Nothing to do with Women, sex or booze.

Nutty

 

[slim]

Of course its safe for women to serve at sea, as long as they remember to take the pill!

As an old fart I'm pleased that my time expired before wrns served at sea.
I like to remember wrns as sexy things wearing sussies, not women stokers.

 

[hobbit]

I was in Penguin at the time of the disaster Nutty and the buzz in the RAN was that the skipper of the Voyager was known as Drunken Duncan. Seems there may have been a grog prob as well as ulcers. Like many accidents sometimes the facts are concealed for a number of reasons, reputations etc. Saw enough during my time in boats to justify a dry navy. One episode in Tangiers 1954 the forendies got stuck into the local brew and ended up locked in the tube space for 24 hours, locked themselves in. I could go on but wont. Any other dits about booze in pussers ? Must be many although not like the rape case perhaps which is not very good for the service.
:grin:

 

[slim]

Having just posted something on similar thread, I just can not believe we are asking this question. Its been nearly two decades since the RN and the WRNS merged. Almost every on in the RN has only ever served in a mixed Navy. These questions about women at sea belong in the darks ages! Its 2007 not 1807 FFFS! :evil:

In 1806 women were at sea :smile:

 

[Maxi_77]

Having just posted something on similar thread, I just can not believe we are asking this question. Its been nearly two decades since the RN and the WRNS merged. Almost every on in the RN has only ever served in a mixed Navy. These questions about women at sea belong in the darks ages! Its 2007 not 1807 FFFS! :evil:

In 1806 women were at sea :smile:

And long before that as well, although it became more common in the 17th and 18th C as periods in commission became longer.

It may be noted that the first long commisions were started by our first great lefty leadr Olly who started the practice of long commisions to avoin paing the sailors who in those days got paid when they were 'paid off'

 

[slim]

And long before that as well, although it became more common in the 17th and 18th C as periods in commission became longer.

It may be noted that the first long commisions were started by our first great lefty leadr Olly who started the practice of long commisions to avoin paing the sailors who in those days got paid when they were 'paid off'

Peter, you shouldn't have posted this, might give the government ideas about pay :smile:

 

[Maxi_77]

And long before that as well, although it became more common in the 17th and 18th C as periods in commission became longer.

It may be noted that the first long commisions were started by our first great lefty leadr Olly who started the practice of long commisions to avoin paing the sailors who in those days got paid when they were 'paid off'

Peter, you shouldn't have posted this, might give the government ideas about pay :smile:

I think we are OK this time when they find out just how much their contractor will charge to unravel the new pay software.

 

[whitemouse]

The role of women at sea was brought up, by a team of Wren Officers, when I served in Pembroke in the 70s, and there were objections then, from the men of all ranks, but also included a lot (and very strongly) from the wives.

These objections/doubts were along the lines of:
danger at sea - particularly if a combat situation arose
lack of strength in humping & dumping (no puns intended here !!)
the mixing of the sexes in a very close confined space - the wives, I recall, were very vociferous in this point.

I can see that in this latest case it is very likely that wives will may well raise this issue yet again.

It seems to me that the old adage 'it takes two to tango' could be part of the problem.
And if drink was part of the cause, what were the officers / Captain doing in allowing this to happen ? :???:

:neutral: