Should a mother join the Navy?

Always a Civvie would be proud, based on your logic the armed forces would a gay only institution as they dont have kids. Not realistic me thinks.
 

Karma

War Hero
phil1972 said:
Always a Civvie would be proud, based on your logic the armed forces would a gay only institution as they dont have kids. Not realistic me thinks.
OK, on re-reading I appreciate I should probably just have said ''yes'' rather than try to explain my position.

People are responsible for their own actions, I see no reason for officialdom to stand in their way.
 

kingoftwigs

War Hero
Shipwreck, thats not what he said, I have no kids and a few women can vouch I'm not gay. (Although one did acuse me after I....)
 

hammockhead

Lantern Swinger
wardmaster said:
Of course the RN is not dangerous. If Navy folks had wanted dangerous jobs, they could have had their brains removed and concrete inserted and joined the Army as cannon fodder! They had brains so they joined the RN.
Tell that to the 30 dead from the SHEFFIELD, 13 dead from GLAMORGAN, 22 off the ARDENT, 12 off the ATLANTIC CONVEYOR, etc. Nowhere is safe if you're in a grey metal box on the receiving end of enemy missiles.
 
hammockhead said:
wardmaster said:
Of course the RN is not dangerous. If Navy folks had wanted dangerous jobs, they could have had their brains removed and concrete inserted and joined the Army as cannon fodder! They had brains so they joined the RN.
Tell that to the 30 dead from the SHEFFIELD, 13 dead from GLAMORGAN, 22 off the ARDENT, 12 off the ATLANTIC CONVEYOR, etc. Nowhere is safe if you're in a grey metal box on the receiving end of enemy missiles.
May they rest in peace
At least they were casualties from being involved in a conflict that was in all respects worthwhile. The retaking of the Falklands Islands a British possession/protectorate .

As for Women /Men and parents --at the moment it is fashionable to have a househusband -------------the Wife continues her career and becomes the salary earner.
 
hammockhead said:
wardmaster said:
Of course the RN is not dangerous. If Navy folks had wanted dangerous jobs, they could have had their brains removed and concrete inserted and joined the Army as cannon fodder! They had brains so they joined the RN.
Tell that to the 30 dead from the SHEFFIELD, 13 dead from GLAMORGAN, 22 off the ARDENT, 12 off the ATLANTIC CONVEYOR, etc. Nowhere is safe if you're in a grey metal box on the receiving end of enemy missiles.
A very good point Hammockhead. I was being deliberately provocative, which I probably shouldn't have been in a CA thead.
 

dhobyitch

Lantern Swinger
Deeps said:
Phil-''Hole in the ground''? Thats a little bit ignorant isnt it? I did my time on an Armilla patrol in 1989 so I know the score. I do not mean any disrespect to the RN at all. Infact it is common knowledge within the army
that RN chopper pilots are the very best in the business and will do anything whatever the risk to help. My point in simple terms is,how many sailors have been killed or injured on active service in Iraq in the last 4 years?. Once again I will say that the RN has a vital role in the middle east . But from a soldiers point of view with 3 tours of Iraq under my
MK 6a kevlar helmet please spare me the ''for queen and country'' stuff.
Well put deeps, the only worry i had out there is if the CSB would last. Falklands, different Joo Joo snippet value banked at 400 psi.
 

Jimmy_Green

War Hero
Deeps said:
Well here is my input.Lets face compared to the Army and those members of the armed forces that are ''landbased'' in Iraq the RN has minimal risk. Ok 15 have been captured by the Iranians,but they are not really in any danger are they? they will be used as a political tool then realeased after the Iranians have got there use out of them. I do find it very frustrating listening to some people on here going on about ''frontlines'' ''fighting for queen and country'' etc etc when really the only fight the RN has out there is when the beer bosun forgets to collect the mess issue. The RN has an important job in the middle east ,just please spare me the [email protected] about how dangerous it is.
With ref to women / mothers out there. Well if they can do the job ,great let them. However as I have stated already its not as if its ''house to house fighting '' whilst sunbathing on the GDP.
You're talking bollocks there, Deeps. There are plenty of matelots that are landbased, both in Iraq and Afghanistan and they face the same dangers dodging morters etc as everyone else. And don't forget, Royal Marines are part of the Navy too. Two matelots I work with have just got back from Iraq, one other has done a tour there and is going back again, or to Afghanistan fairly soon and I expect to be going to one or t'other next year.

Deeps said:
Phil-''Hole in the ground''? Thats a little bit ignorant isnt it? I did my time on an Armilla patrol in 1989 so I know the score. I do not mean any disrespect to the RN at all. Infact it is common knowledge within the army
that RN chopper pilots are the very best in the business and will do anything whatever the risk to help. My point in simple terms is,how many sailors have been killed or injured on active service in Iraq in the last 4 years?. Once again I will say that the RN has a vital role in the middle east . But from a soldiers point of view with 3 tours of Iraq under my
MK 6a kevlar helmet please spare me the ''for queen and country'' stuff.
Is this a competition? We've had more killed than you, nah nah nah nah!!!

And I did Armilla at the same time as you.
 

finknottle

Banned
I always thought Royal Marines were an integral part of the Royal Navy?

It is obvious to anyone that in the current theatres of conflict Jolly Jack in the main does not face the same risks to life and limb as front line combat soldiers.
 

Deeps

War Hero
Boys if you read my post you would note that it was ref ship based sailors. I totally understand the dangers all 3 services face whilst landbased. As for the RM well I should know I was with them on Telic 1 on the AL FAW.
 

Nigaramus

Lantern Swinger
higthepig said:
It may be worth remembering that it isn`t all that long ago that when a servicewoman became pregnant they had to leave, or am i too old?
And sued the mob for all they could get!!
 

finknottle

Banned
I was merely putting in a gentle reminder for the ‘squillienth’ time that ours are Royal Marines not any old marines. It’s bad enough the media continually shortcutting their full title without it happening on a mainly Pussers forum.
 

Squirrel

Lantern Swinger
Deeps said:
Phil-''Hole in the ground''? Thats a little bit ignorant isnt it? I did my time on an Armilla patrol in 1989 so I know the score. I do not mean any disrespect to the RN at all. Infact it is common knowledge within the army
that RN chopper pilots are the very best in the business and will do anything whatever the risk to help. My point in simple terms is,how many sailors have been killed or injured on active service in Iraq in the last 4 years?. Once again I will say that the RN has a vital role in the middle east . But from a soldiers point of view with 3 tours of Iraq under my
MK 6a kevlar helmet
please spare me the ''for queen and country'' stuff.
Very cheap Deeps, and frankly, having read a lot of your stuff, I would have expected better of you. Many of us on here have done our share fella, whether it be in Iraq, Afghanistan or countless Armillas, the Falklands...I could go on
My point is, you have no more right to voice your opinions on here than the rest of us my friend, a lot of people might say things with which you don't agree, but they're still their opinions and feelings, and throwing your operational experience at what they have to say to tell them to shut up, is frankly, a bit sad.
 

Deeps

War Hero
Squirrel Thank you for your post. I am human and I do get a little frustrated sometimes with a lot of the posts on this site. Yes you are correct we all have the right to an opinion,that is what this site is about. I will wind my neck in ref this thread and some of the points/my opinions I have posted. No offence was was ment at all. In simply terms my post was ment to reflect that whilst I have been and many others have had IED's rocket attacks, suicide bombers , sniper fire , public order and having lost several mates as well.Its a hard pill to swollow when we here about the dangers the Royal Navy at sea in the middle east face. Once again I do apologise if I caused any anger .But please understand my frustrations. However saying all of the above , I choose my career so I get on with it.
 

F169

War Hero
letthecatoutofthebag said:
safewalrus said:
In retrospect maybe mothers should go to sea, they can always have a creche onboard! Used to be called the Wardroom when I was in! Wonder what it's called now - remember this ain't about 'wimmin' at sea, they've already proved they can do the job - any bugger can sit on their backside and roll around and be sick - sex don't come into it!

What the main point is (and I think some of you seem to be missing it!) is should MOTHERS i.e. those responsible for the upbringing of children - societies future! be allowed to be away from their charges! And don't give me that rubbish about fathers too - since we fell out of the trees it's been custom and practice for the male of the species to go away and fend for the family - and it don't matter how!

Yep take 'em to sea, but take the 'rug rats' with them! Of course if the 'rug rats' stay home they become nice unbalanced creatures that run away from home and join the Forces (it's what the generals depend on - kids from unsettled / no homes seeking some kind of 'family' - always was always will be!) come on people tell me about all the nice balanced people with two parents living together etc. etc. that you joined up with! I've got several seconds to spare!!!!
I shouldn't bite but... this comment is out the dark ages, SafeWalrus.

Everyone (fathers,mothers and singlies) has every right to pursue the career they want to. Provided the kids are being looked after there is no difference between LS Turney or any other mother following her career in the RN and spending time away from home and some female city executive leaving her kids with an nanny all day.

As I have said earlier in another fourm this is the 21st century FFS!!!
LTCOOTB - too many 'rights' not enough responsibilities that is the problem with the 21st century. Just because people are allowed to do things doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Unfortunately now George Bush has stuck his oar in I dont see this ending any more quickly now.
 
F169 said:
letthecatoutofthebag said:
safewalrus said:
In retrospect maybe mothers should go to sea, they can always have a creche onboard! Used to be called the Wardroom when I was in! Wonder what it's called now - remember this ain't about 'wimmin' at sea, they've already proved they can do the job - any bugger can sit on their backside and roll around and be sick - sex don't come into it!

What the main point is (and I think some of you seem to be missing it!) is should MOTHERS i.e. those responsible for the upbringing of children - societies future! be allowed to be away from their charges! And don't give me that rubbish about fathers too - since we fell out of the trees it's been custom and practice for the male of the species to go away and fend for the family - and it don't matter how!

Yep take 'em to sea, but take the 'rug rats' with them! Of course if the 'rug rats' stay home they become nice unbalanced creatures that run away from home and join the Forces (it's what the generals depend on - kids from unsettled / no homes seeking some kind of 'family' - always was always will be!) come on people tell me about all the nice balanced people with two parents living together etc. etc. that you joined up with! I've got several seconds to spare!!!!
I shouldn't bite but... this comment is out the dark ages, SafeWalrus.

Everyone (fathers,mothers and singlies) has every right to pursue the career they want to. Provided the kids are being looked after there is no difference between LS Turney or any other mother following her career in the RN and spending time away from home and some female city executive leaving her kids with an nanny all day.

As I have said earlier in another fourm this is the 21st century FFS!!!
LTCOOTB - too many 'rights' not enough responsibilities that is the problem with the 21st century. Just because people are allowed to do things doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Unfortunately now George Bush has stuck his oar in I dont see this ending any more quickly now.
Well I would have said the same, though I was thinking in the frame of the real Royal Navy when you did 30 months away not twelve weeks

Twelve weeks away from a child you bore is still disgusting but money is better than a young child eh it is the 21st Century, ditch the kid and own a 4x4
So they manage to get sea drafts adjusted so each can look after the kid alternate quarters, stuffed now one is delayed due to service commitments
I am sure someone will be happy doing a pier head jump to accomodate this unforseen circumstance,
What happens when the one at home is on days when a "subsmash" "subsunk" comes in, Oh I cant chief have to be home for the baby sitter, thats ok Hooky some other sod can do it, have a nice evening
 

silverfox

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Your understanding of how the modern navy works is woefully lacking, and this is not the first thread in which you have shot from the hip with no acknowledgement of reality. Things have moved since last you were in the navy. We no longer rely on sails for example, and we tend to load the guns from the back end rather than the front.

Like it or not society has changed and the Armed Forces have to be a reflection of that society. I know of no example where the business of having a child made any difference to the operational effectiveness of any sailor (although I'm sure someone will enlighten me..) - there were several mothers amongst the ship's company when I was an XO and it was never an issue - indeed those mothers were far more responsible in their parenting than most.

This is meant to be a forum for reasoned arguement and logical debate. Your posts take the form of sweeping generalisations based on largely personal prejudices. Please heed this gypsy's warning that any future posts of a similar content will be deleted as having failed the relevance test.
 
Nigaramus said:
higthepig said:
It may be worth remembering that it isn`t all that long ago that when a servicewoman became pregnant they had to leave, or am i too old?
And sued the mob for all they could get!!
Sorry - you can't chose which laws you abide by and which you do not. The MoD was in the wrong by requiring pregnant ladies to leave, ergo they had to make restitution. Are you telling Nig that if you were seriously injured by someone elses negligence you would not sue the arse off them?
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

New Posts

Top