Sky: "British Armed Forces 'Could Be Run By A Woman'"

#1
"The British armed forces could be run by a woman one day, the nation's most senior female military officer has suggested.

In her first interview since being promoted, Air Vice-Marshal Elaine West told Sky News the military is modernising to mirror society and insisted the UK is not out of date by preventing women from fighting on the frontline."

British Armed Forces 'Could Be Run By A Woman'
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#2
Sky said:
The armed forces are exempt from the Sex Discrimination Act which is why they are able to restrict women from serving on the frontline.
Not correct.

The Government determine which jobs in the Armed Forces are available to women.

The only reason that 29% of RN branches aren't available to women is largely due to the fact the submarine service branches are still dithering with regard practical accommodation issues (which the the rest of the service sussed over twenty years ago).

Other than that, the only exclusions apply to Royal Marines Commandos, Army Line Infantry Regiments and of course the erm, RAF Regiment.


 
#3
It's far easier to sort accommodation for females on a surface ship than a submarine NJ. As females have only recently been permitted to serve on boats it's only bombers that have the space at the moment. Not every surface ship was ready for females when they first went to sea and the newer surface fleet had those twenty years to incorporate it into modern war canoes. Compare the space you've got on a 23 or 45 to that of Astute.
 
#4
Not correct.

The Government determine which jobs in the Armed Forces are available to women.

The only reason that 29% of RN branches aren't available to women is largely due to the fact the submarine service branches are still dithering with regard practical accommodation issues (which the the rest of the service sussed over twenty years ago).

Other than that, the only exclusions apply to Royal Marines Commandos, Army Line Infantry Regiments and of course the erm, RAF Regiment.


[/FONT][/COLOR]
I don't think its dithering, more the fact of how it is going to work. They really are going to have problems integrating this idea. Im not saying it should not happen. Its just not as easy as it sounds.
Do they even forcibly draft men from the surface fleet anymore? I haven't met anyone who was drafted boats against there will. (not saying it did not happen in the past)
 
#5
I was also told by one of the part three WRNS officers that almost all of the women who had shown an interest were writers which is causing a problem seen as how bombers only have one writer at sea.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#6
The simple truth is that the submarine service movers & shakers have had thirty-odd years to consider the accommodation issue since the concept was first considered on surface ships. Instead, they adopted a "head in the sand" approach, possibly in the hope it would go away, preferring to spin the line about carbon monoxide which had already been dis-proven and finally accepted by the US Navy several decades ago.

With regard the number of females realistically considering joining the submarine service, it would follow that the branches with the most females serving within them (Wtr/CIS), would probably produce the majority of expressions of interest.

In my ten years experience of RN recruitment I've only met one female who expressed an interest in joining submarines and I guess the service will continue to use the excuse of "cost to change" disproportionate to the actual requirement. Once the submarine designers adopt the inevitable requirement on future builds, cost will not be an issue however, it's taken them a couple of decades to get this far and I don't believe there will be sufficient numbers of volunteers to sustain a continuous female presence underwater - in other words, fitted for, but not with.
 
#8
The simple truth is that the submarine service movers & shakers have had thirty-odd years to consider the accommodation issue since the concept was first considered on surface ships. Instead, they adopted a "head in the sand" approach, possibly in the hope it would go away, preferring to spin the line about carbon monoxide which had already been dis-proven and finally accepted by the US Navy several decades ago.

With regard the number of females realistically considering joining the submarine service, it would follow that the branches with the most females serving within them (Wtr/CIS), would probably produce the majority of expressions of interest.

In my ten years experience of RN recruitment I've only met one female who expressed an interest in joining submarines and I guess the service will continue to use the excuse of "cost to change" disproportionate to the actual requirement. Once the submarine designers adopt the inevitable requirement on future builds, cost will not be an issue however, it's taken them a couple of decades to get this far and I don't believe there will be sufficient numbers of volunteers to sustain a continuous female presence underwater - in other words, fitted for, but not with.
Why the Astutes were not designed for both men and women i do not know. As for bombers though the steel was cut for Vanguard before women even went to sea on ships.
 

tomcat24

Lantern Swinger
#9
"The British armed forces could be run by a woman one day, the nation's most senior female military officer has suggested.

In her first interview since being promoted, Air Vice-Marshal Elaine West told Sky News the military is modernising to mirror society and insisted the UK is not out of date by preventing women from fighting on the frontline."

British Armed Forces 'Could Be Run By A Woman'
She's talking about a fantasy
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#11
"The British armed forces could be run by a woman one day, the nation's most senior female military officer has suggested.

In her first interview since being promoted, Air Vice-Marshal Elaine West told Sky News the military is modernising to mirror society and insisted the UK is not out of date by preventing women from fighting on the frontline."

British Armed Forces 'Could Be Run By A Woman'
It seems that we still haven't confirmed "woods-related activities" by bears... :roll:

As far as I'm concerned, anyone dumb enough to want to join the military - regardless of their gender, sexuality or religion - should be allowed to do so, so it's inevitable that, by the process if elimination, a wimmins (hell, even a lesbianismist one) will run the Armed Forces eventually... :thumbleft:
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#12
I'm probably spinning the thread off on a tangerine by explaining the reason behind the RN's apparent sexism with regard the submarine service, but think it is important to knock-down pathetic arguments centered around mythical supposition relating to accommodation and utter crap relating to "women's health" issues.

The perceived "problem" rests with the males, rather than females. There are times when it's extremely embarrassing from a male recruiting perspective when you visit a girls school, for example, in this day and age and have to spout known untruths with regard the illogical "reasons" behind female career restrictions.

The yardstick should be entry standards and requirements for the job, not gender.
 

DruAde

Lantern Swinger
#14
Reminds me of when the kid came back from the AFCO when joining. She wanted to go on boats but the CA told her she couldnt because of medical reasons particular to women. Sounded like a crock then and Ninja confirms it lol.
 
#15
Having said that, I remember back in 2000 when IRDK finally took up station in the Falklands. The biggest Logs headache was organising a suitable sanitation service for jam rag/jam ciggie disposal. Thanks lads. The nearest contractor that could assist was in bloody Chile.
 

Ninja_Stoker

War Hero
Moderator
#16
It's surprising, when put in perspective, that it took ten years from the first manned space flight, to get a bloke bimbling on the moon, but twice that time to get our heads around the concept of accommodating mixed genders on boats. I know many oppose it for a variety of reasons, some quite possibly nearly even valid, but all it takes is the open-minded approach of being "fitted for". Whether the take-up materialises is irrelevant, the option is made available.
 
#17
I'm probably spinning the thread off on a tangerine by explaining the reason behind the RN's apparent sexism with regard the submarine service, but think it is important to knock-down pathetic arguments centered around mythical supposition relating to accommodation and utter crap relating to "women's health" issues.

The perceived "problem" rests with the males, rather than females.
I'm sure there is an element of inbuilt sexism in the higher echelons that's delaying the inevitable, and there are certainly some 'old fashioned' ideas amongst a good few of the guys at sea, much as I'm sure there was in the surface world when women first went to sea. I think there's a cultural issue here too however. As you say, the health issue has been firmly disproved but in this country we're still squeamish about mixed accommodation. Having women at sea on boats works for the Aussies and Norgies because they haven't worried about accommodation issues. They've just stuck the women onboard and got on with it. We've got this hang up where we must separate the sexes, which 'A' and 'T' boats aren't designed for.
This need to segregate then causes potential issues when we do have women onboard. A 'V' boat has a whole separate bunkspace with its own heads, but if we say only women are allowed to use that bunkspace and then can't get enough volunteers to fill it the gaps have to made up with men who then have to squeeze into already full 'male' bunkspaces. If we could just get over ourselves and get on with it then we'd make the transition to having women at sea much easier for ourselves.
Separate heads, fair enough, but does it really matter if men and women are in the same bunkspace?

The yardstick should be entry standards and requirements for the job, not gender.
Absolutely. As it should be for everything.
 

sgtpepperband

War Hero
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#18
I'm sure there is an element of inbuilt sexism in the higher echelons that's delaying the inevitable, and there are certainly some 'old fashioned' ideas amongst a good few of the guys at sea, much as I'm sure there was in the surface world when women first went to sea.
In 1990 I was serving on HMS Juno, one of the first ships to get voluntary Wrens on board. From the lads' perspective, nobody really gave a damn; the ones we had were great, despite the scrutiny they were under. The negative issues - probably driven by the institutional sexism you refer to - tended to come from the SRs and Occifers. I did not subscribe to this point of view myself but I could understand why some of them demonstrated that attitude (usually in private).

I would imagine that probably all of those who were 'old and bold' SRs and Occifers in the early '90s are no longer serving and that pretty much all RN ratings currently serving have always known females to serve at sea - there are probably plenty of female personnel who will have close to 20 years' sea service by now, more than their male counterparts in some cases - so why this sexist opinion still exists is rather worrying and rather immature, if you ask me.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
A Submariners 6
higthepig Social & Reunions 15
higthepig Site Issues 1

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts

Top