• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Navy to consider gender-neutral ranks

BeyondTheNow

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
6
Points
530
Ask practically any female in one’s vicinity. This is/was a non-issue to 95% of them. Another 3% didn’t feel it was an issue until someone pointed it out. The last 2% is who this is geared towards.

Being sensitive wrt certain aspects of society, and crucial specifics of individuality (I won’t get into them) is vital. But there’s a line between respecting those aspects and pandering.

In any event, if/when changes take affect, it will still be 5-10 years until the rank changes are reflected properly in docs across the board. Heck, RCAF Pte=>Avr took effect 5ish yrs ago and it still isn’t reflected across the board from Ottawa downwards.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
BeyondTheNow said:
Ask practically any female in one’s vicinity. This is/was a non-issue to 95% of them. Another 3% didn’t feel it was an issue until someone pointed it out. The last 2% is who this is geared towards.

See? The poor things have been brain washed into this demeaning situation, without even knowing it, by our toxic, patronizing, white male driven, anti-feminist agenda.  :sarcasm:
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,157
Points
1,090
For those curious, the Government policy on the process to approve changes to a QR&O ending with a (G) is at the link below.  Note that the DND/CAF process precedes that, and requires specialized legal support that is in very short supply.  TL;DR it's nowhere near as simple as it first appears.

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/treasury-board-submissions/governor-in-council-submissions.html
 

McG

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,965
Points
1,160
dapaterson said:
Not clear enough that it's related to the Navy and Boats.

How about:  BoatyMcBoatMasterBoatWarrantBoater
I don't know …
I thought the Navy preferred to attach "Sea" to everything.  I don't see "Sea" in there anywhere.  So options are clearly:
  • Sea-Boaty McBoatperson
  • Sea Mariner
  • Sea Sailor
  • Sea Rate
  • Sea Sea
  • Sea Private
  • Private at Sea
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,110
Points
940
MCG said:
I thought the Navy preferred to attach "Sea" to everything. 
Only because the Rush-Bagot treaty ruined naval warfare on the Great Lakes and Lake Champlain.  :eek:rly:
 

jaysfan17

Member
Reaction score
2
Points
230
FFS, why do we have to live in a society so aggressively PC!

I never liked the "Seaman" part of the rank because of the obvious annoying jokes that would come to follow, but I would much prefer if it was changed for that reason and not political purposes.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
jaysfan17 said:
FFS, why do we have to live in a society so aggressively PC!

I never liked the "Seaman" part of the rank because of the obvious annoying jokes that would come to follow, but I would much prefer if it was changed for that reason and not political purposes.

“When one watches some tired hack on the platform mechanically repeating the familiar phrases - bestial atrocities, iron heel, blood-stained tyranny, free peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder - one often has a curious feeling that one is not watching a live human being but some kind of dummy, the appropriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his brain is not involved.”

― George Orwell,  Politics and the English Language
 

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880
RCN is going to the polls to consult on changes to Rank designations

...

Sailors from across the Canadian Armed Forces will receive an e-mailed invitation to participate in the poll, and Social Media posts will invite retired members, stakeholders and interested Canadians to also participate. The engagement period will run from July 17th, through to the end of the month, July 31st.

Options for consideration include:

- Replacing “Seaman” with “Sailor” meaning ranks would be Ordinary Sailor, Able Sailor, Leading Sailor and Master Sailor and would maintain their current abbreviated titles (OS, AB, LS and MS); and
- Sailor classes such as Sailor 3rd Class (S3), Sailor 2nd Class (S2), Sailor 1st Class (S1) and Master Sailor (MS).

There will also be an open feedback field which will allow respondents to suggest alternative options for consideration.

The results of this poll will be considered in making the final decision to effect changes to these rank designations this fall, corresponding with the 110th Anniversary of the RCN and the 20th Anniversary of UNSCR 1325: Women, Peace and Security. This is an opportunity for the RCN to reinforce its commitment to being an inclusive and diverse organization.


http://www.navy-marine.forces.gc.ca/en/news-operations/news-view.page?doc=rcn-is-going-to-the-polls-to-consult-on-changes-to-rank-designations/kbtm8jnh
 
S

stellarpanther

Guest
Wow... and I sometimes think I take political correctness too far.  I know how my vote will go if I get the survey.  Something about saying "sailor, get over here" doesn't sound right.
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,753
Points
1,060
Whoever made the poll clearly didn't do any research. S1, S2, S3 are abbreviations for staff officers. Also sounds pretty uncreative.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160

We really need to start thinking outside of the 'Navy' box on this one and call in the whole 'Defence Team' to help out.

Here's where the Army can help. What about some Gender Neutral ranks like:

- Private
- Corporal
- Master Corporal
- Sergeant
- Etc

:)
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,674
Points
1,040
PuckChaser said:
Whoever made the poll clearly didn't do any research. S1, S2, S3 are abbreviations for staff officers. Also sounds pretty uncreative.

Only because no one actually cares what the poll says. I think if it resoundingly comes back as "don't change it" they will change it anyway to bravely lead change.

Glad this is the focus when our frigates are hitting 30 years old with no replacement getting ready to hit the water and our subs are well past their half life with no replacement project even started. Fortunately we can start limiting our sea days as we won't have enough sailors to field that many concurrent crews I guess, so things are fine.

:trainwreck:

I honestly couldn't care less if they swap it to 'sailor' instead of 'seaman', although it does sound really awkward and grammatically wrong. But between things like this and the stupid bling on the uniform I've lost faith that they are focusing on things that matter.

[edited to add]

What about parking? That's what people really want to know about.
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Reaction score
706
Points
1,060
It doesn’t sound like ‘don’t change it’ is one of the options.
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
255
Points
880
I'm kind of surprised they aren't reevaluating the use of terms such as "Master" and "Chief".

Edit: My bad, seems it was already touched earlier. Still surprised though!
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
4,606
Points
1,010
not that I have a dog in the fight, but I kind of like going to "Matelot".  The French word for sailor can be gendered appropriately.  You can use 1st, 2nd and 3rd class to equate to MS, LS, and OS.  It abbreviates well in both languages and in speech ie "M1 Bloggins, bring me that set of binoculars, please".
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,674
Points
1,040
reverse_engineer said:
I'm kind of surprised they aren't reevaluating the use of terms such as "Master" and "Chief".

Edit: My bad, seems it was already touched earlier. Still surprised though!

Chief/Chef are just the English/French equivalents for the title of 'leader' for the communities, and predates colonization of the Americas.  There are something like 50 different different nations in the Assembly of First Nations, with a number of unique languages and cultures with their own term for their leaders, and they use Chief/Chef as well when they are writing it in English/French. It's a widely used term all over the place and doesn't have a negative meaning (for example, CEO).

There is a long history with 'Master' tradesman, which meant that you have mastered the skill sets of the trade and were licensed by the guild to have apprentices, and goes from Apprentice to Journeyman to Master titles (before the trade name; ie master blacksmith). It's still used in trades today, and you can become licensed as a master welder, master electrician etc when you demonstrate an expertise in your field and have enough experience. Generally at that point you are inspecting/overseeing other people's work and certifying it meets the standard.

From that context, Master Seaman/Corporal makes sense, as you have demonstrated a certain amount of expertise in your trade and have enough experience to train/supervise people. Not a direct comparison to a master tradesman level (as they'll have much more experience), but that's the context of it. That's still widely understood and commonly used in trades, and is a totally distinct meaning from master/slave.

It's also widely used generally in nautical terms, and the highest level of qualification you can get on the civilian side is 'master mariner', which means they can captain pretty much anything.

Personally, have no objection to the concept of updating the rank names, but if we are going to change it to 1st/2nd/3rd, it's close to the civilian equivalent names but nowhere near the qualification level (ie 4th class marine engineer is the roundsman, and 1st class mar eng is the Chief Engineer) so will just confuse the heck out of anyone outside of DND.  It also means every single publication, policy, document, or regulation that references ranks will not line up, so there is a lot of staff time required to update them. Maybe not a big deal if it's done piecemeal along with other changes, but still collectively means hundreds of hours of staff work for something that no one was clamouring for, and will probably take a decade or two before people stop using the old term occasionally out of habit.

I'd rather they devote our time and energy to real, meaningful changes rather then window dressing, and given that this has already generated a few pages of discussion, and hundreds of facebook comments, it will be a real time suck for no real gain.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,533
Points
1,060
Don't know if there has been any thought on this one - but -

Seeing that sailors don't sail any more but that every sea-going billet appears to be a technical one - already designated as "Technicians" - how about simply calling the positions Ordinary Tech,  Able Tech Leading Tech and Master Tech.  Or, if you prefer, Entered Apprentice, Journeyman 1 and 2 and Master Tech.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
3,064
Points
1,040
Chris Pook said:
Don't know if there has been any thought on this one - but -

Seeing that sailors don't sail any more but that every sea-going billet appears to be a technical one - already designated as "Technicians" - how about simply calling the positions Ordinary Tech,  Able Tech Leading Tech and Master Tech.  Or, if you prefer, Entered Apprentice, Journeyman 1 and 2 and Master Tech.

Techs are trades (Sonar Tech, Marine Tech, etc...).  Operators are not techs. But I see where you are going with it.

I've privately railed against the term seaman for years.  Police Officer, Fire fighter, actor... 

I'm not sure if sailor is as smooth to pronounce as seaman, but we'll get over it.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,674
Points
1,040
Did a quick google search; a number of the 5000 series DAODs would need changed and I'm sure there are a lot of personnel admin related regulations, pubs, orders and other official documents that would need updated to give an idea of the scope of the change required. There are a number of QR&Os as well. Fortunately the NDA schedule only uses army ranks, so at least there is that.

Not a reason to not do it, but it's not a trivial thing to update, even if they just change a single word. Not a big deal if there is a transition period spanning a normal review cycle (5 years?) but just the review/approval level required for the higher level regs alone is significant, with even the lower level documents having a pretty stringent and well defined change approval process that take a lot of time.

Hopefully there is a streamlined process that they wrote down when they switched over to 'Aviator', but not
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,685
Points
1,060
Underway said:
I've privately railed against the term seaman for years.  Police Officer, Fire fighter, actor... 

Legitimate question here. Does Human and Mankind bother you as well?
 
Top