• 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

CountDC

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
27
Points
580
SeaKingTacco said:
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".

Don't know about that one, I can see the issue of  "Mat, bring me the binoculars!"  Now we have people complaining about getting treated like and called a door mat. 
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,341
Points
1,160
Jarnhamar said:
Legitimate question here. Does Human and Mankind bother you as well?

I'm shocked at your blatant attempt to erode the the progress of gender neutral language.

Signed,

Mx. Daftanbarmy :)

d


"Mankind" is an inherently sexist term. It reinforces the general viewpoint that the normal, default type of human is male, and females and non-binary people are abnormal or exceptional. When we talk about people, we need to be mindful about ensuring we're really talking about everyone. Saying "humankind" or just "people" instead of "mankind" is one way to do this.

https://www.bustle.com/p/7-gender-neutral-terms-we-should-all-be-using-9565996
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
2,819
Points
1,010
Jarnhamar said:
Legitimate question here. Does Human and Mankind bother you as well?

Serious answer:
First, thanks for being polite.  I do appreciate that about this forum.  All adults here who can be friends and disagree.  :eek:

Mankind does.  Its an archaic term and inaccurate. Women are not a kind of man. Peoplekind is stupid, just use the world people. Human not so much, because human is a whole word, not a combo of different words with seperate meanings.

Seaman is a label for a man.  Sea-man.  Sailor is also a whole word and label for a job.  It's why I say infantry or infanteer not infantryman.  Labels should be inclusive.

Do I correct other peoples grammar and make myself an insufferable virtue signaler?  Nope.  Speak how you like.  I've a hard enough time controling my own brain-mouth connection. I don't need the job of looking after yours.  But if you ask I'll tell you what I think (which the survey is doing).

If language is inclusive people feel included.  It also why I never start a presentation with "Good morning ladies and gentlemen" I start with "Good morning everybody"  because it includes everyone. As a leader I'm responsible to include everyone.  It's why I use staffing or crewing, not manning. Perfectly acceptable alternatives.

I never used to think like this but what does this cost me?  Nothing.  What does it get me?  From those who notice, appreciation and surprising loyalty. But most won't notice.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,162
Points
1,060
Underway said:
Serious answer:
First, thanks for being polite.  I do appreciate that about this forum.  All adults here who can be friends and disagree.  :eek:

Mankind does.  Its an archaic term and inaccurate. Women are not a kind of man. Peoplekind is stupid, just use the world people. Human not so much, because human is a whole word, not a combo of different words with seperate meanings.

Seaman is a label for a man.  Sea-man.  Sailor is also a whole word and label for a job.  It's why I say infantry or infanteer not infantryman.  Labels should be inclusive.

Do I correct other peoples grammar and make myself an insufferable virtue signaler?  Nope.  Speak how you like.  I've a hard enough time controling my own brain-mouth connection. I don't need the job of looking after yours.  But if you ask I'll tell you what I think (which the survey is doing).

If language is inclusive people feel included.  It also why I never start a presentation with "Good morning ladies and gentlemen" I start with "Good morning everybody"  because it includes everyone. As a leader I'm responsible to include everyone.  It's why I use staffing or crewing, not manning. Perfectly acceptable alternatives.

I never used to think like this but what does this cost me?  Nothing.  What does it get me?  From those who notice, appreciation and surprising loyalty. But most won't notice.

I get it.  Kind of like good manners and being civil, eh?  ;)

As you say: it doesn't cost me much.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
4,372
Points
1,110
Seaman has obvious gendered issues. How about substitute “seaman” with “swimmer”? You can keep all the same acronyms, it’s aquatically themed, there’s no gender loading, and it avoids all possible real or perceived issues arising out of ‘seaman’. The navy would not longer have ‘seaman’ all over its paperwork; ships’ chains of command could very easily adapt to their ‘swimmers’ being set loose on port visits... Everyone wins.
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,255
Points
1,060
Underway said:
Serious answer:
First, thanks for being polite.  I do appreciate that about this forum.  All adults here who can be friends and disagree.  :eek:

You're welcome my friend.

Mankind does.  Its an archaic term and inaccurate. Women are not a kind of man. Peoplekind is stupid, just use the world people. Human not so much, because human is a whole word, not a combo of different words with seperate meanings.

I see human and mankind as essentially the same term. Not really something I'm going to get up in arms over. It's a species.

Much like you, I do try and be more inclusive to females when using terms like infantryman or policeman. I don't care if someone doesn't and I find it obnoxious when someone always corrects other peoples language.
"It's actually fire-person, not fireman". I just think fuuuuuuck off.



I think sailor sounds better than seamen (since seamen isn't inclusive to sailing on oceans  :eek: ) but it's ridiculous to argue getting called a seamen is a barrier that stops women (or anyone) from joining the navy. If it is, then they're the type of CAF member that spends 20 years on sick chits and is a constant pain in the ass, in my opinion.

Also I shouldn't be vilified for having my own opinion and views, such as if I want to say infantrymen or firemen. We have a problem where we want our opinions to be valued and heard but don't extend that to others.


 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,255
Points
1,060
Brihard said:
Seaman has obvious gendered issues. How about substitute “seaman” with “swimmer”? You can keep all the same acronyms, it’s aquatically themed, there’s no gender loading, and it avoids all possible real or perceived issues arising out of ‘seaman’. The navy would not longer have ‘seaman’ all over its paperwork; ships’ chains of command could very easily adapt to their ‘swimmers’ being set loose on port visits... Everyone wins.

Swimmer is an ablest term and not respectful of people who can't swim  :whistle:
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
721
Points
1,010
Underway said:
Serious answer:
First, thanks for being polite.  I do appreciate that about this forum.  All adults here who can be friends and disagree.  :eek:

Mankind does.  Its an archaic term and inaccurate. Women are not a kind of man. Peoplekind is stupid, just use the world people. Human not so much, because human is a whole word, not a combo of different words with seperate meanings.

Seaman is a label for a man.  Sea-man.  Sailor is also a whole word and label for a job.  It's why I say infantry or infanteer not infantryman.  Labels should be inclusive.

Do I correct other peoples grammar and make myself an insufferable virtue signaler?  Nope.  Speak how you like.  I've a hard enough time controling my own brain-mouth connection. I don't need the job of looking after yours.  But if you ask I'll tell you what I think (which the survey is doing).

If language is inclusive people feel included.  It also why I never start a presentation with "Good morning ladies and gentlemen" I start with "Good morning everybody"  because it includes everyone. As a leader I'm responsible to include everyone.  It's why I use staffing or crewing, not manning. Perfectly acceptable alternatives.

I never used to think like this but what does this cost me?  Nothing.  What does it get me?  From those who notice, appreciation and surprising loyalty. But most won't notice.

Man or woman.  To me Seaman could be a sea man or a sea woman, I'd take no personal offence.  But I understand why some people would like to see a change.  I also use the term "staffing" as opposed to "manning", it's more appropriate. 
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,420
Points
1,360
Puddle Private
Cove Corporal
Jetty Jackie
Seaweed Sergeant
Whale Warrant
Master Whale Warrant
Chief Whale Warrant

Gender neutral and reflective of the unified nature of our Armed Forces  ;D
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
6,331
Points
1,090
And of the relative sizes of more senior members of the senior service.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,420
Points
1,360
dapaterson said:
And of the relative sizes of more senior members of the senior service.

That was unstated but I may have had that in mind  ;D
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
281
Points
930
This would have been quite a hassle a few years ago, but since 2015 the Naval ranks are no longer listed by name in the National Defence Act -- so changing them doesn't require an Act of Parliament anymore. They are now in QR&O, amendable by Order in Council. Still, two points to note: first, changing rank titles isn't actually within the Navy's authority, they can recommend Water Corporal or Leading Rating or Scion of Poseidon or Matelots for everyone (French and English both), but it has to go to Cabinet for final approval; second, is this kind of trivia really what the RCN wants to spend Cabinet time on?

 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
6,331
Points
1,090
RCN contends with the rest of DND/CAF for cabinet time and attention; before that, it also requires departmental attention and resources to advance, not the least of which is lawyers trained in regulatory drafting, a very rare skillset.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,885
Points
1,260
Humphrey Bogart said:
The reddit thread for this is goddamn comedic gold!

The reddit thread for most CAF things are comedic gold, especially the ones that bash this site.
 

FSTO

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,215
Points
1,090
IAW fair dealings and all the rest.

https://torontosun.com/news/national/royal-canadian-navy-to-replace-seaman-in-rank-titles-with-gender-neutral-term/wcm/fa67ca1f-23de-425e-8dc5-2b7ab8fb4aa7

OTTAWA — The Canadian military’s sailors and the public will have a chance to weigh in as the Royal Canadian Navy moves to drop the term “seaman” when referring to its most junior sailors and replace it with something more gender-neutral.

Navies around the world have described their junior sailors as “seamen” for decades if not centuries, with the Royal Canadian Navy using “ordinary seaman,” “able seaman,” “leading seaman” and “master seaman.”

But those terms are being replaced in Canada as the navy — which is short hundreds of sailors — charts new waters to become more diverse and inclusive, according to Cdr. Deborah-Lynn Gates, who is responsible for the navy’s personnel policy.

“We appreciate tradition,” Gates told The Canadian Press. “And we’re not downplaying tradition absolutely at all. But it’s truly a matter for us to show that we are progressive and that we are listening and we are really, truly representative of Canadian society.”

The move is also aimed at making sure the navy’s most junior members feel safe and proud of their ranks and jobs, Gates said, acknowledging the double entendre associated with the term “seaman.”
(Are we that immature that our sailors don't feel safe when some damn fool giggles at the word "Seaman" vice "semen")


“What this will do is ensure a safe environment so there is no double entendre,” she said. “Definitely at the tactical level, we want to make sure our most junior members understand and feel safe when they are being called their rank, being called their name or being addressed.”
(And how safe are these poor souls going to feel when the supersonic missile is homing in on their ship? Has it not been beaten ito them that this career choice is full of dangers to life and limb and some of that danger is intentional?)

Members of the navy as well as the public at large will be able to vote online on two alternatives starting Friday, with both variants substituting “sailor” in place of “seaman” in different ways.

One simply replaces “seaman” with “sailor” in the existing ranks. The other would do away with adjectives such as “able” and “leading” in favour of labels such as “sailor first class” and “sailor second class.”

There will also be an option to suggest alternative terms.

(So what is it Cdr? Have the choices already been made and you and your focus group doesn't give a fiddlers what anyone else has to say? Or are you just doing this in a poor attempt to look like you're listening?"

The poll will be posted online and run until the end of July. The results will feed into senior commanders’ decision on which term to use. The suggested change will ultimately need to be approved by cabinet.

The plan to drop “seaman” has already prompted backlash on social media, with some criticizing what they see as an overabundance of political correctness and others decrying a loss of tradition. Others, however, say the move is long overdue.

Gates suggested the use of “seaman” has been a potential barrier to recruitment for the navy, which has been pushing to address a shortage of 850 sailors. The navy has said it can manage the shortfall at the moment, but is worried about the longer-term implications.
(REALLY? This is going to be the panacea solution to our recruiting and retention problems? Well gongs galore, patches upon patches and wifi at sea hasn't solved any of the problems. In what universe do you think this idea will work? I will not be surprised that "Heart of Oak" will be the next target)

“When they hear you’ll start off as an ordinary seaman, it’s maybe just a little thing, but it did not resonate,” Gates said. “So we know it’s not resonating with recruits and for us it’s a matter of making sure we’re being representative and that we are modern and forward-looking.”
(How about we look at establishing a recruiting process that is agile and will respond to potential recruits before they reach CRA? How about an assessment system that penalizes toxic and corrosive leadership instead of rewarding it? These are things that would resonate with our young sailors and Jr Officers much much more than trying to virtue signal with this crap.)
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
836
Points
1,040
I have no skin in this game, but "sailor" just doesn't sound right to me.  The days of sail for warships has passed and if they're worried about the double entendre of "seaman/semen" then I cringe at how they'll react to people coming up to them and seductively saying "hey sailor...".  ::)

Personally if the ranks need to change I'd prefer to go with "Mariner" over sailor.  It's an accurate description, sounds professional, has no negative interpretations (that I'm aware of) and checks the bilingual box "Mariner"/"Marin".
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
346
Points
810
Why not go for some old school terms that are still used informally and are actually gender neutral then? OD (ordinary deckhand) for OS, AD (able deckhand) for AS, Killick for LS, Master Killick for MS.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,361
Points
1,040
Mariner is an already a commercial profession with licensing requirements for ship captains. A master mariner can captain anything, but that all falls under the IMO agreements and is regulated by Transport Canada federally.

I believe we are overthinking this; if they want to change it, no worries, but sailor is pretty straightforward and probably the best bet. It doesn't cause confusion with any commercial qualifications and still sounds like a rank that is easily identified as being naval.

Suspect there is probably a laundry list of things ahead of this for for people that don't feel included, but if the BGHs are going full steam no point wasting calories fighting city hall. Seems like lipstick on a pig, but making real changes to things like parental leave, child care options or whatever else would be a real, meaningful change for inclusivity is probably outside their wheelhouse funding wise.
 
Top