Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

Nozzer

Interesting read. How many here are who they claim I wonder? How many would own up? This thread is a deterrent to future honesty, I'm afraid! :(
 
NozzyNozzer said:
Bloody hell you lot. I never wanted a thread on me. I just wanted to slip away quietly but be honest with you first.

There have been some unexpectedly generous comments here and some not entirely unexpectedly nasty ones. To be honest I expected much worse, though I'm offended though not terribly surprised by Uncle Albert's insinuations. After all it is a bit odd taking an interest in a boys training establishment. Had I not been 15 at the time I read that Sunday Times article in utter disbelief, my interests would no doubt have fallen elsewhere, but Uncle Albert, under the circumstances, it's fair comment. In fact I studied paedophilia during criminology so I suppose he ought to know that were I that way inclined I most certainly would NOT have admitted it. I should have seized the chance to be a moderator and chatted up young sailors - though that would not of course have been paedophilia which is a pathological interest in pre-pubescent children. Pedastry is I think what he infers. Were I really into that I would have become a Scoutmaster or become active in the Sea Cadets. Paedophiles are not interested in old men, which is what ex-Ganges boys are - something I should have preferrred not to have to say. Nor are they into fantasising in this way - what they want is to secure pre-pubescent children for sex and exchanging pictures of young children being abused, etc.

On the other issues, I lied because the questions I want answers to as a criminologist were not forthcoming when I asked them by other, conventional, orthodox, legitimate means. There seems to be widespread denial by ex-Ganges boys about what they were subjected to, some of the evidence clearly indicating sexual abuse which ought to be recorded in an academic paper and dealt with further by specialists in this field. My specialist fields are miscarriages of justice and the events leading to the Holocaust, hence my interest in Ganges, as representative of institutional tolerance to criminality - with lessons for the forces today. I have learned as I stated that the place was not as evil as I had first thought when I began this mini-project in February this year. To me the misuse of both corporal punishment and the already documented foreskin inspections are clear indicators of a culture that tolerated child abuse within the Royal Navy. I have no doubt that these practices are no longer performed in the Service, but I still think their past use should be explored academically and some sort of restitution, even a Ministerial apology, sought, for the victims. I have encountered quite a few victims over the years - men who are still psychologically damaged by what they were subjected to there. It is easy to say remember the good times and forget the bad, but when one encounters people like these who have clearly been damaged by their experiences this is less than satisfactory. I regard this as denial. It is a form of denial that compromises the mental welfare of others, however few they may be.

I stated last night that I would disappear because I assumed that under the circumstances I would be persona non-grata. After all, there is nothing worse that having someone deceitful in your midst, especially a researcher or journalist researching for a dissertation, though in view of what has happened, I must abandon that research - it was unethical and misguided. I shall stick to more mundane and non-controversial topic in future.

I feel immensly guilty about my input in other areas - that was unintensional but just developed out of a perceived need to respond to what I felt was inappropriate comment. I have asked the Mods to delete the accounts or Seacat and NozzyNozzer and was surprised that I was able to log in today. I also think it would only be right under the circumstances for Lingy to exchange his Oxygen Label for my unearned medals. I have no problem with this. I certainly hope I have NOT been responsible for putting anyone off joining up, as that would be a grave fault indeed.

Nozzy :(

As real ex Ganges boy,and there are many of us still around,I would have thought you would have made proper contact with us through this site and gained research information first hand.I'm sure most of us would have supplied a lot more detailed first hand record of our expeirences at Ganges.Corporal punishment was the exception rather than the rule,I knew of only one boy recieving cuts during my year there and that was for absconding,which is the norm for that offence.

As for sexual abuse,I have been in contact with many Ganges inmates during service,and after, and have never heard of this happening.

We were a large community,but word of mouth soon spread if something different was going on out of our normal routine.We were'nt children,we were not treated like children,we were members of the Royal Navy,albeit in training. :x
 
Maxi_77 said:
NozzyNozzer said:
Hi Shakey,

You have made some perfectly good points here, though I contest your assertions about me, but in the end it's up to you what you believe about me as I have already lied to you all once. Nutty knows the details and the facts and as a former policeman he is in a good position to check up on me, though I do not wish the personal details disclosed on RR for PerSec reasons.

I do not get kicks about children getting abused in this way, or in any way for that matter. If I had my way the minimum age for joining any military type organisation would be 18 and parents who hit their kids would go to prison for it, just as a yob who assaults a granny in the street - after all, there's no moral difference between the two acts! But the issues do need raising in a criminological context and not denying. All I met when I tried to research these issues by legitimate means was a blank wall of denial or claims of "it did us no harm". Really? No one has satisfactority explained to me why the so-called "inspections" were necessary and I must therefore draw my own conclusions from that.

Incidentally, for the record, an interest in post-pubescent children in uniforms being abused is pedastry. An academic interest in mistreatment generally (eg. making people stand in dustbins, burying kit, killing innocent civvies under extreme stress during a combat situation, etc) does not yet have a name to my knowledge, but I am sure you can devise one.

You are entitled to draw whatever conclusions you choose to about me. I am not being a drama queen however, simply stating some bald facts about me. I did so, perhaps ill advisedly with hindsight, in an attempt to tell you something about myself. The easy solution would have been to carry on pretending, to let my alter ego take over: to let the delusion dominate, which was beginning to happen. Of course the easiest thing would have been, when the going got tough, to claim that it was a big wind up after all, but that's not my style.

My asexuality is incidental to Klinefelter syndrome. Most people take the treatment, I stopped. I couldn't see the point. It's my choice/fault. The beards and boiler suits is an attraction in the same way my eyes are diverted by an interesting turntable or engine. There may be something residual, but I feel nothing tangible sexually.

I finally wish to reiterate that you are fully entitled to articulate your low opinions of me Shakey, just in case there is any criticism that you've been harsh. Your criticism is fair under the circumstances. I am the wrongdoer, not you. I request that the MODS decide what should be done about me, and soon. Perhaps Shakey you should PM them all to this effect, now? Frankly I want to get it over with.

Steve.

On the point of The Inspections, one must remeber that standards of personal hygene were not as good as they are now and certainly often not that achievable for those towards the bottom of the social scale where they did not even have a bath or toilet in the house. One of the things learnt in both WWs was that personal hygene is important, hence short military haircuts for example. An important part of new entry training was ensuring that as many as possible who had not aquired the habit before leaving home di so before they got to the fleet. Inspecting the part you refeed to was part of that process, but ofcourse now we are all obsessed with cleanliness the problem is greatly reduced. Such inspections were and perhaps still are also carried out in the US military, now perhaps more to do with routing out sexually aquired infections.

Peter
At last a man with common sense.I did not find the the inspections a problem ,they were conducted in a proper manner with little embarrassment as possible.Hygiene was the factor not sexual voyeurism.
 
NozzyNozzer said:
Bloody hell you lot. I never wanted a thread on me. I just wanted to slip away quietly but be honest with you first.

There have been some unexpectedly generous comments here and some not entirely unexpectedly nasty ones. To be honest I expected much worse, though I'm offended though not terribly surprised by Uncle Albert's insinuations. After all it is a bit odd taking an interest in a boys training establishment. Had I not been 15 at the time I read that Sunday Times article in utter disbelief, my interests would no doubt have fallen elsewhere, but Uncle Albert, under the circumstances, it's fair comment. In fact I studied paedophilia during criminology so I suppose he ought to know that were I that way inclined I most certainly would NOT have admitted it. I should have seized the chance to be a moderator and chatted up young sailors - though that would not of course have been paedophilia which is a pathological interest in pre-pubescent children. Pedastry is I think what he infers. Were I really into that I would have become a Scoutmaster or become active in the Sea Cadets. Paedophiles are not interested in old men, which is what ex-Ganges boys are - something I should have preferrred not to have to say. Nor are they into fantasising in this way - what they want is to secure pre-pubescent children for sex and exchanging pictures of young children being abused, etc.

On the other issues, I lied because the questions I want answers to as a criminologist were not forthcoming when I asked them by other, conventional, orthodox, legitimate means. There seems to be widespread denial by ex-Ganges boys about what they were subjected to, some of the evidence clearly indicating sexual abuse which ought to be recorded in an academic paper and dealt with further by specialists in this field. My specialist fields are miscarriages of justice and the events leading to the Holocaust, hence my interest in Ganges, as representative of institutional tolerance to criminality - with lessons for the forces today. I have learned as I stated that the place was not as evil as I had first thought when I began this mini-project in February this year. To me the misuse of both corporal punishment and the already documented foreskin inspections are clear indicators of a culture that tolerated child abuse within the Royal Navy. I have no doubt that these practices are no longer performed in the Service, but I still think their past use should be explored academically and some sort of restitution, even a Ministerial apology, sought, for the victims. I have encountered quite a few victims over the years - men who are still psychologically damaged by what they were subjected to there. It is easy to say remember the good times and forget the bad, but when one encounters people like these who have clearly been damaged by their experiences this is less than satisfactory. I regard this as denial. It is a form of denial that compromises the mental welfare of others, however few they may be.

I stated last night that I would disappear because I assumed that under the circumstances I would be persona non-grata. After all, there is nothing worse that having someone deceitful in your midst, especially a researcher or journalist researching for a dissertation, though in view of what has happened, I must abandon that research - it was unethical and misguided. I shall stick to more mundane and non-controversial topic in future.

I feel immensly guilty about my input in other areas - that was unintensional but just developed out of a perceived need to respond to what I felt was inappropriate comment. I have asked the Mods to delete the accounts or Seacat and NozzyNozzer and was surprised that I was able to log in today. I also think it would only be right under the circumstances for Lingy to exchange his Oxygen Label for my unearned medals. I have no problem with this. I certainly hope I have NOT been responsible for putting anyone off joining up, as that would be a grave fault indeed.

Nozzy :(

As real ex Ganges boy,and there are many of us still around,I would have thought you would have made proper contact with us through this site and gained research information first hand.I'm sure most of us would have supplied a lot more detailed first hand record of our expeirences at Ganges.Corporal punishment was the exception rather than the rule,I knew of only one boy recieving cuts during my year there and that was for absconding,which is the norm for that offence.

As for sexual abuse,I have been in contact with many Ganges inmates during service,and after, and have never heard of this happening.

We were a large community,but word of mouth soon spread if something different was going on out of our normal routine.We were'nt children,we were not treated like children,we were members of the Royal Navy,albeit in training. :x
 
I don't give a flying Fcuk whether you or anyone else is gay, ethnic or ambidextrous. Its the person within who counts.
The only problem I have with the gay community is, why do you have to wear your sexuality like a banner? Stop shoving it in peoples faces, just be yourself.
You'll probably find most people will like you a lot better for it.
RoofRat
 
harryaitch said:
As real ex Ganges boy,and there are many of us still around,I would have thought you would have made proper contact with us through this site and gained research information first hand.I'm sure most of us would have supplied a lot more detailed first hand record of our expeirences at Ganges.Corporal punishment was the exception rather than the rule,I knew of only one boy recieving cuts during my year there and that was for absconding,which is the norm for that offence.

As for sexual abuse,I have been in contact with many Ganges inmates during service,and after, and have never heard of this happening.

We were a large community,but word of mouth soon spread if something different was going on out of our normal routine.We were'nt children,we were not treated like children,we were members of the Royal Navy,albeit in training. :x

Harryaitch,

Quite right of course, but two factors influenced my decision. The first was what I then perceived to be a denial of abuse by former inmates and the second was a reluctance to ask some of these questions outright!

On the subject of your status: the law is a mess, but I based my definition of a child for the purposes of the research on the NSPCC's definition which they have been using since they were founded in Victorian times, namely anyone aged 16 or below. The treatment which now appears to have sometimes meted out would be considered by them to constitute child cruelty, and I agree, though I conceed that some may be more mature than others at that age.

For the record I have heard of at least one case of a former inmate who claimed to have been molested in bed by an NCO whilst at Ganges. I presume that this was the exception.

Anyway, I apologise again for my behaviour.

Steve.
 
G'day all.

I have just run through all the new postings, I think at least eight different threads, and I was indeed beginning to think that I had joined the wrong group.

Everything I read was about today was about "Ganges" and smally boys, being trained hmmmm and gays, asking questions, I was beginning to think that it was a group with a hangava lot of gays in it.

I really was pleased to see that some of them had come clean, as it was really easy to see what they were trying to get threads steered onto, what did surprise me was the number of old hands as many proffess to be in this group, falling for their skite-ing and joining in the rubbish as though they really believed what these couple of guys had written. ....................

Quoting their rubbish and then adding a single line to it, (1) or maybe two whole lines, (2). Really top reading for old matelots, who have been there and done that.

I'm afraid that that most mature ex matelots expect a wee bit more out of a group, than the way these last few different threads have been that I latched onto, as supposedly all the new topics since I last logged on. (yesterday in fact)

The moderators of all these groups (and slim) should have wakened up to what was happening long before the confessions were posted, and quickly did something about it. But again so should all the old hands who have been playing right into their devious hands,

Surely the old hands could see what was happening and if not why not ?? If you have done your bit in the :Andrew" then surely you can feel when things are "pusser" and when they are not, all these long winded threads about nothing that self respecting matelots , both male and female, would ever dream about writing, but they had most of the old hands drooling about the two guys, joining in with their romance novels, and keeping feeding them snippets that they could elaborate on.

There are more than enough true tales of "Jack"or Jackess" lol. ashore without listening to these possers??

I personally don't care what gender they are, as long as they don't try to shove it down our throats, as Roof rat said in a reply before.If they want to say something then surely have a thread for them alone or stop them entirely.

regards pingbosun
 
pingbosun said:
G'day all.

I have just run through all the new postings, I think at least eight different threads, and I was indeed beginning to think that I had joined the wrong group.

Everything I read was about today was about "Ganges" and smally boys, being trained hmmmm and gays, asking questions, I was beginning to think that it was a group with a hangava lot of gays in it.

I really was pleased to see that some of them had come clean, as it was really easy to see what they were trying to get threads steered onto, what did surprise me was the number of old hands as many proffess to be in this group, falling for their skite-ing and joining in the rubbish as though they really believed what these couple of guys had written. ....................

Quoting their rubbish and then adding a single line to it, (1) or maybe two whole lines, (2). Really top reading for old matelots, who have been there and done that.

I'm afraid that that most mature ex matelots expect a wee bit more out of a group, than the way these last few different threads have been that I latched onto, as supposedly all the new topics since I last logged on. (yesterday in fact)

The moderators of all these groups (and slim) should have wakened up to what was happening long before the confessions were posted, and quickly did something about it. But again so should all the old hands who have been playing right into their devious hands,

Surely the old hands could see what was happening and if not why not ?? If you have done your bit in the :Andrew" then surely you can feel when things are "pusser" and when they are not, all these long winded threads about nothing that self respecting matelots , both male and female, would ever dream about writing, but they had most of the old hands drooling about the two guys, joining in with their romance novels, and keeping feeding them snippets that they could elaborate on.

There are more than enough true tales of "Jack"or Jackess" lol. ashore without listening to these possers??

I personally don't care what gender they are, as long as they don't try to shove it down our throats, as Roof rat said in a reply before.If they want to say something then surely have a thread for them alone or stop them entirely.

regards pingbosun

Pingers
Please look at the date on the thread, its old hat (though its also brown hat) So whats so terrible about it, an RR member is gay so what, as you see from most of the comments the majority do not give a toss. So Steve is gay, as are many in the armed forces. As an RR member it is not up to me to decide who can or cannot post, I do like the banter though and Steve gives as good as he gets (no pun intended). He is a respected member of RR and many of us would like to see him as a mod. :smile:
 
slim said:
Pingers
Please look at the date on the thread, its old hat (though its also brown hat) So whats so terrible about it, an RR member is gay so what, as you see from most of the comments the majority do not give a toss. So Steve is gay, as are many in the armed forces. As an RR member it is not up to me to decide who can or cannot post, I do like the banter though and Steve gives as good as he gets (no pun intended). He is a respected member of RR and many of us would like to see him as a mod. :smile:

I agree Slim, strange that Pingers should say, "I have just run through all the new postings" and reply to a thread last posted on over 6 months ago.

Pingbosun, have you been on a lengthy deployment away from PC access perchance?

Whilst it is only just over a year old, A few "members" have declared their interest for "uphill gardening", and this forum is all the better for their participation, there is also a good chance that other members have not the courage to come out, but, still participate. A bit like real life I am sure, I don't suppose that all gay members of the RN have come out openly for fear of homophobia.

Your posting mainly concerns the posting for old and bold members of the "Andrew" , I believe the idea of this forums conception was a forum for serving matelots to post both serious and irreverent threads, as with ARRSE the original. Obviously Past members of the mob have latched on and are posting as well, in fact a while ago there were so many postings re Ganges, the mere mention of the name was frowned on as it was distracting new serving members from joining.

I think at the moment it has reached a sort of balance, if you want a forum for all things "Pusser, I am sure there is something on the lines of "lostoppos" or "Forces Reunited", which would suit you.

On RR we are happy for members to start or comment on any thread, whatever their sex, race, creed, gender or colour.

Regards

Terry
 

Latest Threads

Top