# Navy to let women sail on submarines



## McG

Navy to let women sail on submarines
Last all-male bastion of Canadian Forces
to be integrated on new vessels next year
KEVIN COX AND JEFF SALLOT

Friday, March 9, 2001


HALIFAX and OTTAWA -- Master Seaman Sophie MacArthur got her first look at the cramped quarters and complicated technology inside Canada‘s lone operating submarine yesterday -- and began seriously thinking about signing up for the service.

"I like to try new things. I don‘t know if I‘d want to do it for the rest of my life but I definitely want to have a try at it," the 10-year veteran, now serving as a naval communicator on HMCS Montreal, said shortly after the navy announced women would be eligible for service on submarines.

"It‘s very different working on a ship. On a submarine you have to basically be able to perform any job on board in an emergency so it takes a lot of skills just to be a submariner," said MS MacArthur, gazing down from the dock at Victoria, a refurbished British submarine recently bought by the Canadian navy.

In the face of strong opposition from male sailors, the navy said women would be eligible for service in the last all-male bastions in the Canadian Forces, following Norway, Sweden and Australia in opening submarines to women.

The announcement caps an 11-year effort by the Canadian Forces to comply with the equality provisions of federal law and to topple barriers to women serving in every type of combat role from fighter pilot to infantry soldier.

Integrated sub crews will become a reality next year when the first women volunteers complete specialized training for service aboard Canada‘s four new Victoria-class submarines, said Vice-Admiral Greg Maddison, chief of the navy.

HMCS Victoria was commissioned last December. Its sister ships are expected to arrive at six-month intervals over the next two years.

The new British-made subs are roomier than Canada‘s now-retired Oberon-class, thus allowing separate change rooms and toilet facilities for men and women.

MS MacArthur was going home last night to consider signing up for service under the sea -- which involves month-long voyages in close quarters with little privacy.

She doesn‘t foresee any problems with privacy issues, even though men and women would have to sleep in the same area -- segregated sleeping quarters were ruled out because of the expense of renovating compartments.

"There‘s concern [with privacy] on any ship, whether it‘s a submarine or a surface vessel. As long as everybody is adult about it there shouldn‘t be any problem," she said.

But the problem may not be the 50 people working in the submarine. It may come from suspicious and skeptical spouses on land.

At a briefing on board the Victoria yesterday, several sailors expressed concern about their wives‘ reactions, said Commander Bill Woodburn, who skippers the Victoria.

He said there are many questions about how women will be integrated into the operation of the submarines.

"Is it doable? Yes. Do we have all the answers? No," Cmdr. Woodburn said.

Rear Admiral Bruce MacLean, commander of the Maritime Atlantic Force, said women would have a chance to take a look at life on a submarine before they literally take the plunge.

"It is going to be a challenge both for our men and women and in how we deal with the concerns of their spouses at home," Rear Adm. MacLean said.

"But I am absolutely convinced you simply can‘t deny 50 per cent of the population an opportunity to serve Canada on a submarine."

Rear Adm. MacLean said the privacy issue has been dealt with in other branches of the Forces.

"We have men and women sleeping in tents in Bosnia for months at a time. Is that any different type of privacy situation than on a submarine? I don‘t think so," he said.

Vice-Adm. Maddison said integration will require "cultural changes" among male submariners, and there may be "issues about how you deal with relationships that may develop" aboard the subs, but the navy believes its sailors are adult professionals who can adapt.

Canada‘s other warships -- indeed all Canadian Forces combat units -- were ordered integrated in 1989 by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. But the cramped Oberon submarines were exempted because of the lack of privacy.

Vice-Adm. Maddison said the four Victorias -- each with a crew of 48 officers and sailors -- afford men and women a measure of privacy, thus eliminating the last barrier to mixed crews.

He acknowledged there will be strong opposition from male submariners who are used to working in their skivvies on long undersea voyages.

They enjoy being in a "male-dominated culture where they could wander around in a submarine with a certain level of clothing on or off," Vice-Adm. Maddison said. "That will change."

A survey of 256 submariners found that fully two-thirds opposed the idea of mixed crews. Many of the men said they believed their wives would object because of the possibility of extramarital relationships developing. (Military regulations forbid sexual contacts in the workplace, including aboard ships.) The survey was conducted two years ago when the Canadian Forces began studying the issue.

Male sailors also strongly opposed integration of frigates, minesweepers and other surface ships in 1989, but mixed crews have proven to be a success, Vice-Adm. Maddison said.

"There really is a behavioural change, an attitudinal and cultural change, when men and women are serving together. And it‘s all positive," he said.

The navy has about 10,000 sailors. About a thousand of them are women. The women tend to be in onshore administrative and clerical jobs. There are only 475 women in the so-called hard sea trades, shipboard jobs that range from sonar operators and electricians to cooks and carpenters.

The navy surveyed the women in the sea trades and discovered that 27 per cent were interested in submarine service.

The Canadian Forces rejected the idea of trying to make one of the crews of the four new Victoria subs all-female because it would take too long.


----------



## McG

*Gender equality in the military is ‘just talk‘*
*Scathing report: Intolerance toward women ‘runs deep in the Forces‘*
(from the National Post Online, 17 Mar 01)
Mike Blanchfield, Ottawa Citizen

Despite a scathing report yesterday on intolerance to women in the Canadian Forces, a senior member of the military‘s last remaining male bastion says too much of a fuss is being made over resistance to women in the ranks.

Even when the news came that women will now be allowed to serve on Canadian submarines, the last all-male units in the Canadian Forces, submariners reacted with a shrug, says Commander Michael Williamson.

"A lot of them said: ‘We knew it was coming.‘ Some of them said: ‘Yeah, whatever, let‘s just get on with our job,‘ " Cmdr. Williamson said in an interview from the English coastal town of Barrow-In-Verness, where he is leading the training of crews for three new Victoria-class submarines Canada is acquiring from Britain.

"In five years, they‘re going to look back and say: ‘Yeah whatever, what was all the fuss about?‘ "

However the report, released yesterday by an advisor to Art Eggleton, the Defence Minister, suggests that intolerance runs deep in the Forces, especially toward women.

"Insensitivity, ignorance and biases" have marred attempts to integrate more women and visible minorities into the Forces, says the report by Captain (ret.) Sandra Perron, the minister‘s special advisor on gender issues, who was appointed to report on the success of gender issues in the Forces.

Capt. Perron, who travelled the country to get a broad spectrum of views on the integration process, said she heard some disturbing sentiments.

She said much of the talk about gender and minority integration in the Forces is just that -- talk.

As one Army instructor told her: "Real Canadians don‘t want anything to do with this social re-engineering b.s."

"The time has come for results," Capt. Perron said yesterday. "These fears need to be addressed. It‘s an attitude we‘re seeing across the Canadian Forces. And until that‘s addressed, progress is going to be very, very slow."

Capt. Perron, the Army‘s first female infantry officer, came into the public eye in 1992 when a disturbing photograph was published showing her tied to a tree and blindfolded for a mock execution as part of a hazing ritual.

She resigned from the Forces five years ago and now works for General Motors in Montreal.

Capt. Perron said she is encouraged by the commitment from many top officers, including General Maurice Baril, the chief of the defence staff.

"Neanderthal behaviour is not going to be acceptable," Mr. Eggleton said of the report. "People either change their behaviour or they get another job."

"Attitudes don‘t change overnight. Culture takes some time to change. But we can insist upon good professional behaviour."

Cmdr. Williamson acknowledged the integration of women on submarines will be challenging, but said military men realize they have no choice in the matter.

"I said, ‘Chaps, it‘s the law: gender equality; we obey the law.‘ That‘s what we do in the military. We follow government direction, government policy, and we do the best we can and get on with the job."

The Canadian Human Rights Commission ordered the military 12 years ago to fully integrate women into all aspects of the military, but it exempted submarines because of the close quarters on Canada‘s old Oberon class of submarines. That changed when Canada bought four larger, slightly used Victoria-class submarines from Britain.

Canada took possession of its first sub last fall, but three more remain at the shipyards of British Aerospace where Cmdr. Williamson has been stationed for the past three years.

He is overseeing the process of taking the submarines out of mothballs and training the Canadian sailors -- all men, so far -- who will operate the new boats. The final vessel is to be delivered by the middle of next year, around the same time the first women could be coming on board.

Cmdr. Williamson, an 18-year veteran, believes women swill be accepted as equals.

"It‘s a different Navy than it was 15 years ago. As society in general has become more accepting, I think these guys are. There‘s no doubt the women can do the job physically and technically. It‘s just a question of getting over old mores, or habits," he said.

"[Submariners] get on with the job," he adds, "whether it‘s in the face of adversity, in the face of challenge . . . and if they‘re told to accept women in women in submarines, they‘ll go: ‘Right oh; grumble, grumble,‘ ... and they‘ll get on with it.‘ "


----------



## Springroll

Since this topic was already here, I figured I would just raise it form the dead to ask a question to the subbies.

What are your opinions on women being aboard a sub? 
If you have sailed with some, how did it go? 
Was it as hard or easy as expected??


----------



## cameron

As someone pursuing graduate studies in history and anthropology I too would be interested in reading any replies to springroll's questions.  As a black man with an interest in the CF and considering perhaps joining at some point in the future, I would also like to hear about the experiences of any visible minorities serving in the CF and who are army.ca members or guests.


----------



## aesop081

cameron said:
			
		

> As a black man with an interest in the CF and considering perhaps joining at some point in the future, I would also like to hear about the experiences of any visible minorities serving in the CF and who are army.ca members or guests.



Nobody cares what colour you are. Its what you do that people care about .......plain and simple.


----------



## geo

The only colours we recognize in the CF are 
Green = Land / army
Blue = Air / Air force  and
Black = Navy
Nothing to do with skin tone...
We also refer to the colour Purple = trades that are common to all environment 

The Canadian Military has come a long way over the last 50 years - as CDN aviator has stated, good soldiers are what we're concerned about.


----------



## cameron

Thanks CDN Aviator, I appreciate that you feel that way, but unfortunately not everyone in this world shares that same enlightened view.  Military and paramilitary organisations in particular (not just in Canada) do have a bit of a reputation in this regard.  There is a book entitled 'Black in Scarlet' written by a guy from the Caribbean island of Nevis (his name escapes me at the moment, as soon as I remember i'll post it) who served several years in the RCMP.  He had quite a good service record, yet in the book he details the fight he endured to be accepted as an equal in the RCMP.  While progress has undoubtedly been made, as stated in the article old attitudes die hard, especially in uniformed organizations which can be a bit hidebound.

If the CF is to attract more of the high quality recruits it so badly needs, then honest and open discussion on race and gender need to be held both on milnet.ca and other forums.  That is if the CF is really serious about attracting bright and dedicated people, regardless of race and gender.


----------



## Delicron

> If the CF is to attract more of the high quality recruits it so badly needs, then honest and open discussion on race and gender need to be held both on milnet.ca and other forums.  That is if the CF is really serious about attracting bright and dedicated people, regardless of race and gender.



+1

I think thoughtful discourse on the matter is helpful, as long as it is not injurious to operations.


----------



## aesop081

cameron said:
			
		

> If the CF is to attract more of the high quality recruits it so badly needs, then honest and open discussion on race and gender need to be held both on milnet.ca and other forums.  That is if the CF is really serious about attracting bright and dedicated people, regardless of race and gender.



I was honest and open in what i said and Geo even backed me up. Race/colour/creed/whatever dont matter. How well you do your job is the only yardstick used. I think as an organization we have moved beyong the 1950s and its high time for "visible minorities" to stop acting like they are going to be victimized at every corner and get on with it.


No worries about the double post, i removed it


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

Well for the most part in the Navy, the old belief that women could not do the job of men has been long surpassed. I too echo what my Air Force compatritot and Geo have stated. I am sure that some of the guys holding on to old school beliefs feel women cannot do the job but thats going by the way side and is being left behind.


----------



## 284_226

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Nobody cares what colour you are.



Apparently, the CF cares.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have a large number of their personnel complete the "Employment Equity Self-Identification Census" in order to comply with the Employment Equity Act.  I got nailed just before Christmas.


----------



## aesop081

284_226 said:
			
		

> Apparently, the CF cares.  Otherwise, they wouldn't have a large number of their personnel complete the "Employment Equity Self-Identification Census" in order to comply with the Employment Equity Act.  I got nailed just before Christmas.



You are obviously incapable of understanding my point. The CF must comply with the employement equity act. Nobody in the CF will care if the guy working next to him/her is black, blue, yellow or all of the above.

Give your head a shake :


----------



## NCRCrow

Springroll are you going to volunteer for Submarine service?


----------



## 284_226

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> You are obviously incapable of understanding my point. The CF must comply with the employement equity act. Nobody in the CF will care if the guy working next to him/her is black, blue, yellow or all of the above.
> 
> Give your head a shake :



You're obviously incapable of understanding the point that Cameron was trying to raise.  Anyone that thinks racial discrimination no longer exists in the CF needs to give their head a shake.  The CF conducts surveys such as the census I mentioned to identify the number of visible minorities in the CF.  Why would you think they would need to know that?  It's just one of many tools that is used to combat racial discrimination, as well as other prohibited forms of discrimination.

Save the condescending remarks about giving my head a shake - or at least save them for someone who doesn't have more TI than you do.  The only difference between when I joined and now is that people have gotten much more skilled at hiding their racism.  It's still out there.

edit:  added _as well as other prohibited forms of discrimination_ to first para.


----------



## Infanteer

:boring:

Not an issue....


----------



## Rowshambow

So.......are there any red, yellow, black, purple, mauve, white, or any other colours that I missed, people working on the subs that wants to answer the original question?


----------



## 284_226

Infanteer said:
			
		

> :boring:
> 
> Not an issue....



The Directorate of Human Rights and Diversity (DHRD) disagrees with you.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/cfpn/engraph/5_07/5_07_dhrd_ee-research_e.asp



> However, a number of areas of concern were highlighted by the results, and indicate that *more progress is needed*. While Aboriginal personnel and personnel who are members of visible minorities reported being satisfied with their working relationships and with career management and progression overall, *their reported levels of satisfaction in these areas were lower than those of their counterparts who are not members of these two groups*.
> 
> As well, respondents from these two groups were more likely to report having experienced discrimination, and that much of that discrimination was based on race and ethnicity.


----------



## Gunner98

The CF does the surveying and reporting because the Employment Equity Act says they must.

Source:  CF Personnel Newsletter  Issue 3/03 – 5 March 2003

Ref: http://www.mdn.ca/hr/cfpn/engraph/3_03/3_03_ee-main_e.asp

Extract: As an “employer” under the Act, the CF is now liable for an audit by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and is obliged to comply with mandatory EE audit requirements. These include collecting workforce information via a self-identification census; conducting a workforce analysis to compare the representation of its designated groups members against the Canadian workforce; reviewing its employment systems looking for barriers to employment, training and promotion; and updating its employment equity plan. The aim is to ensure the CF provides fair and supportive working environments that accommodate the needs of each designated group.


Ref: http://www.mdn.ca/hr/cfpn/engraph/3_03/3_03_ee-you_e.asp

Extracts: Self-identification” is simply the process of stating whether or not you belong to one of the four designated groups—women, Aboriginal persons, members of a visible minority group, and persons with disabilities—under Canada's Employment Equity Act. To self-identify or not is a personal decision – you can't self-identify for someone else, nor can you be ordered to self-identify.

The CF represents and promotes the interests of Canadians – all Canadians. As the demographics of the general Canadian population change over time, the pool of available CF recruits will also change. By tracking the demographics of the CF, we can easily see if we're missing out on a source of recruits, and then design recruiting strategies to target these areas of the Canadian population.

Instead of repeating the entire census every few years, data will be collected continuously in order to keep the CF demographic information up to date. Anyone who missed the initial census or who submitted a form without self-identifying, can complete and submit a form any time.


----------



## SeaDog

I'm a submariner and as for the original question - it is a non-issue.  On subs your professional knowledge and ability as a submariner are what matter.  That being said, the floodgates have not exactly opened up since we allowed women on boats .  There are only around 3 females on the east coast that are currently in sea-going billets.  As my wife (who was in the Navy at the time, as well) speculated "It sure as hell may be allowed for us to come down here - but I don't understand why you'd want to.." upon seeing the inside of a diesel boat for the first time   I would say that the same holds true for race and sexual lifesyle.  There's a CO who openly flies the rainbow flag in his office.  Great sub driver.  Period.  And most of the other guys seem to have the same opinion.  As a very respected senior submariner once confided in me over a pint "There are only two types of people in boats...the ones you trust your lives with and the ones that you'd rather see shore posted..."


----------



## drunknsubmrnr

I agree. There's a huge difference between qualified and non-quals. The rest just doesn't matter.


----------



## cameron

Thanks for the perspectives guys, this is the kind of helpful discussion I was trying to get at.


----------



## Springroll

HFXCrow said:
			
		

> Springroll are you going to volunteer for Submarine service?



Originally, I was definitely considering it in the future but now its not really a volunteer situation.
I got my posting msg today...to subs...lol
I was a little scared at first, but now I am getting excited and look forward to the challenge.

The only question i am wondering know, is about the training. I know my screening will need to be done, but once that is all clear, then what? I have heard a few different things as far as the length of the training and such.

_edited to change know to now_


----------



## PPCLI Guy

284_226 said:
			
		

> Save the condescending remarks about giving my head a shake - or at least save them for someone who doesn't have more TI than you do.  The only difference between when I joined and now is that people have gotten much more skilled at hiding their racism.  It's still out there.
> 
> edit:  added _as well as other prohibited forms of discrimination_ to first para.



Ok - I will bite.  I have more TI than you do (by any measure - feel free to PM me for _bona fides_) - and you *do* need to give your head a shake.  Colour, race, creed, sexual orientation - none of it matters.  All I care about is whether Pte-Maj Snuffy can do their job.


----------



## RobJackson28

Correct: "race", colour, what-have-you shouldn't matter, regardless, part of the screening process for recruitment involves questions pertaining to equality. How does addressing issues of equality, especially in regards to recruitment, mean anything other than that? 

Required or not, it's important for the CF to bring up equality to ensure individual members do not possess prejudice which would hinder the ability of that individual (and those around them) to do their job.


----------



## 284_226

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Ok - I will bite.  I have more TI than you do (by any measure - feel free to PM me for _bona fides_) - and you *do* need to give your head a shake.  Colour, race, creed, sexual orientation - none of it matters.  All *I* care about is whether Pte-Maj Snuffy can do their job.



You'll notice I've highlighted part of your post.  Feel free to speak for yourself, but are you really qualified to speak for the entire CF?

Put another way - you won't mind providing me with proof that there were no incidents of racial or other form of prohibited discrimination in the last year in the CF?

 Hint:  I'm aware of one instance at my own unit.

I'm finding it very hard to believe that there are still this many CF members that have their heads in the sand regarding various forms of discrimination in the CF.

Take a look at the Canadian Forces Diversity Climate Survey - particularly the slides dealing with neosexism and neoracism.  Also note slide 36, which reports that only 10.6% of the survey respondents were of the opinion that discrimination is no longer an issue, or that there are other more important concerns.

As someone else stated, I believe you'd have been more accurate stating "Colour, race, creed, sexual orientation - *none of it* matters *is supposed to matter*."

edit: to add "neosexism and".


----------



## aesop081

284_226,

I just had a thought. Its career manager season. I'm guessing you didnt get the news you wanted. Must have been a "visible minority" thing eh ?


----------



## Franko

284_226 said:
			
		

> I'm finding it very hard to believe that there are still this many CF members that have their heads in the sand regarding various forms of discrimination in the CF.



No. The thing is too many of us are busy going on tour and doing our job to care about this topic. Some people, it would seem anyways, have too much time on their hands.

My driver and and a few others in my troop are of a visible minority and all I care about is their well being and their performance. 

Regards


----------



## armyvern

He didn't say there was none. There's asshats everywhere -- it sure as fuck doesn't mean the system condones it or encourages it and harbours it.

This thread kills me. 

Being a female and all who did her time digging her trenchs at the beginning of "gender equality" 20 years ago. I quite look forward to doing it again too.

I have yet, that's right, YET, to experience any form of biasness against me or sexual harassment whatever because of my sex. 

Because I do my f'n job the best that I can do it. I don't play the "female card" -- I don't get called on it. 

I DO know some women that have "claimed" that their lack of progression at the pace THEY thought it should be who claimed it was because of their "being a female" ... I can assure you though that it was not --- it was because they were bags of shit who sat back and watched the men and the women who DID their jobs DOING their jobs.

When a chick makes a comment that "I can't go drain the air tanks under the truck because my uniform and hair will get dirty" (immediately after coming in from the field at that!!) then writes up a grievance that she got a shitty PER (exactly what she deserved) because she "was a female" who was being discriminated against because "females were just beginning to do these things", she's got problems. The problem wasn't with the men or the CF -- it was with her. 

Just because they claim it --- doesn't make it true and factual. Ergo her loss on that grievance. If that's the case, why didn't the other women who DID do the job (ALL the job) get shitty write-ups too? But, my gawd she was good at screaming it and claiming it to everyone who'd listen every time she got the chance. Sad part is, some who were NOT there with us actually believed her at one point. I'm glad that got sorted out. We're still in and she's out. Good friggin' riddance to her to. And I'd say the exact same about anyone else who didn't do the damn job, regardless of race, coulour, religion etc.


----------



## Strike

284_226,

I'm not saying that this doesn't exist, but I really don't care.  What matters to me is what is done to *correct* the situation.  Anyone can complain and point out faults, but what good does that do?


----------



## the 48th regulator

cameron said:
			
		

> As someone pursuing graduate studies in history and anthropology I too would be interested in reading any replies to springroll's questions.  As a black man with an interest in the CF and considering perhaps joining at some point in the future, I would also like to hear about the experiences of any visible minorities serving in the CF and who are army.ca members or guests.



Hi Cameron,

One of the first Canadians to die in Afghanistan was a friend and former member of my regiment.  He went regular force, and became a member of the PPCLI.  He went as far to become a paratrooper with them.

I can assure you, when he served with me in the 48th, never did we have to worry about racism.

We were a regiment from Toronto, so you can imagine the multitudes of ethinicity that made up the regiment.  But we were all highlanders, and we all wore the kilt and the Falcon.





Words of remembrance written by Corporal Di Capua while serving in Afghanistan

Dileas Gu Brath Dyer!

tess


----------



## 284_226

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> 284_226,
> 
> I just had a thought. Its career manager season. I'm guessing you didnt get the news you wanted. Must have been a "visible minority" thing eh ?



Here's a thought for you.

I'm a heterosexual white male Protestant, 4th generation Canadian.  Is there a reason why you think I'm making this up, instead of reading the results of the Canadian Forces' own studies into the subject?  

Let me guess - you and RBD were part of the 10.6%, right?



			
				Recce By Death said:
			
		

> No. The thing is too many of us are busy going on tour and doing our job to care about this topic. Some people, it would seem anyways, have too much time on their hands.



That looks remarkably like the comment that was made on the aforementioned study - "In this day and age (in Canada) I do not believe there is a major factor with discrimination due to the programs and discrimination courses we have available to us".

Quite clearly, the survey results point to the need for continuing the various programs and courses.



> My driver and and a few others in my troop are of a visible minority and all *I* care about is their well being and their performance.





			
				ArmyVern said:
			
		

> *I* have yet, that's right, YET, to experience any form of biasness against me or sexual harassment whatever because of my sex.



Ah, there's that "I" again.  And why is it that when confronted with the issue of bigotry, the first thing that usually comes out of people's mouths is "I'm not a bigot, I have friends who are black/Asian/gay/French/insert name of other minority here"?  You do realize that means nothing, right?



			
				ArmyVern said:
			
		

> He didn't say there was none. There's asshats everywhere -- it sure as frig doesn't mean the system condones it or encourages it and harbours it.



Huh?  We have several people in this very thread who aren't even acknowledging it as an issue!  (Which just happens to be one of the problems that the survey suggests needs attention).


----------



## the 48th regulator

284_226,

Have you ever personally witnessed discrimination within the military?

dileas

tess


----------



## Franko

284_226 said:
			
		

> Let me guess - you and RBD were part of the 10.6%, right?



WTF are you talking about?

If you're trolling.....

Regards


----------



## George Wallace

284_226 said:
			
		

> Here's a thought for you.
> 
> I'm a heterosexual white male Protestant, 4th generation Canadian.  Is there a reason why you think I'm making this up, instead of reading the results of the Canadian Forces' own studies into the subject?
> 
> Let me guess - you and RBD were part of the 10.6%, right?
> 
> That looks remarkably like the comment that was made on the aforementioned study - "In this day and age (in Canada) I do not believe there is a major factor with discrimination due to the programs and discrimination courses we have available to us".
> 
> Quite clearly, the survey results point to the need for continuing the various programs and courses.
> 
> Ah, there's that "I" again.  And why is it that when confronted with the issue of bigotry, the first thing that usually comes out of people's mouths is "I'm not a bigot, I have friends who are black/Asian/gay/French/insert name of other minority here"?  You do realize that means nothing, right?
> 
> Huh?  We have several people in this very thread who aren't even acknowledging it as an issue!  (Which just happens to be one of the problems that the survey suggests needs attention).



Let's stop being a complete idiot.  

You have just accused a woman who stated that she personally has never seen discrimination against her in all her times in Service as being unqualified to speak on the subject.

You have misinterpreted a statement that you posted from a report.

[Edited to allow response from mbr.]


----------



## 1feral1

MCG said:
			
		

> Navy to let women sail on submarines
> Last all-male bastion of Canadian Forces
> to be integrated on new vessels next year
> KEVIN COX AND JEFF SALLOT
> 
> Friday, March 9, 2001
> 
> 
> HALIFAX and OTTAWA -- Master Seaman Sophie MacArthur got her first look at the cramped quarters and complicated technology inside Canada‘s lone operating submarine yesterday -- and began seriously thinking about signing up for the service.
> 
> "I like to try new things. I don‘t know if I‘d want to do it for the rest of my life but I definitely want to have a try at it," the 10-year veteran, now serving as a naval communicator on HMCS Montreal, said shortly after the navy announced women would be eligible for service on submarines.
> 
> "It‘s very different working on a ship. On a submarine you have to basically be able to perform any job on board in an emergency so it takes a lot of skills just to be a submariner," said MS MacArthur, gazing down from the dock at Victoria, a refurbished British submarine recently bought by the Canadian navy.
> 
> In the face of strong opposition from male sailors, the navy said women would be eligible for service in the last all-male bastions in the Canadian Forces, following Norway, Sweden and Australia in opening submarines to women.
> 
> The announcement caps an 11-year effort by the Canadian Forces to comply with the equality provisions of federal law and to topple barriers to women serving in every type of combat role from fighter pilot to infantry soldier.
> 
> Integrated sub crews will become a reality next year when the first women volunteers complete specialized training for service aboard Canada‘s four new Victoria-class submarines, said Vice-Admiral Greg Maddison, chief of the navy.
> 
> HMCS Victoria was commissioned last December. Its sister ships are expected to arrive at six-month intervals over the next two years.
> 
> The new British-made subs are roomier than Canada‘s now-retired Oberon-class, thus allowing separate change rooms and toilet facilities for men and women.
> 
> MS MacArthur was going home last night to consider signing up for service under the sea -- which involves month-long voyages in close quarters with little privacy.
> 
> She doesn‘t foresee any problems with privacy issues, even though men and women would have to sleep in the same area -- segregated sleeping quarters were ruled out because of the expense of renovating compartments.
> 
> "There‘s concern [with privacy] on any ship, whether it‘s a submarine or a surface vessel. As long as everybody is adult about it there shouldn‘t be any problem," she said.
> 
> But the problem may not be the 50 people working in the submarine. It may come from suspicious and skeptical spouses on land.
> 
> At a briefing on board the Victoria yesterday, several sailors expressed concern about their wives‘ reactions, said Commander Bill Woodburn, who skippers the Victoria.
> 
> He said there are many questions about how women will be integrated into the operation of the submarines.
> 
> "Is it doable? Yes. Do we have all the answers? No," Cmdr. Woodburn said.
> 
> Rear Admiral Bruce MacLean, commander of the Maritime Atlantic Force, said women would have a chance to take a look at life on a submarine before they literally take the plunge.
> 
> "It is going to be a challenge both for our men and women and in how we deal with the concerns of their spouses at home," Rear Adm. MacLean said.
> 
> "But I am absolutely convinced you simply can‘t deny 50 per cent of the population an opportunity to serve Canada on a submarine."
> 
> Rear Adm. MacLean said the privacy issue has been dealt with in other branches of the Forces.
> 
> "We have men and women sleeping in tents in Bosnia for months at a time. Is that any different type of privacy situation than on a submarine? I don‘t think so," he said.
> 
> Vice-Adm. Maddison said integration will require "cultural changes" among male submariners, and there may be "issues about how you deal with relationships that may develop" aboard the subs, but the navy believes its sailors are adult professionals who can adapt.
> 
> Canada‘s other warships -- indeed all Canadian Forces combat units -- were ordered integrated in 1989 by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. But the cramped Oberon submarines were exempted because of the lack of privacy.
> 
> Vice-Adm. Maddison said the four Victorias -- each with a crew of 48 officers and sailors -- afford men and women a measure of privacy, thus eliminating the last barrier to mixed crews.
> 
> He acknowledged there will be strong opposition from male submariners who are used to working in their skivvies on long undersea voyages.
> 
> They enjoy being in a "male-dominated culture where they could wander around in a submarine with a certain level of clothing on or off," Vice-Adm. Maddison said. "That will change."
> 
> A survey of 256 submariners found that fully two-thirds opposed the idea of mixed crews. Many of the men said they believed their wives would object because of the possibility of extramarital relationships developing. (Military regulations forbid sexual contacts in the workplace, including aboard ships.) The survey was conducted two years ago when the Canadian Forces began studying the issue.
> 
> Male sailors also strongly opposed integration of frigates, minesweepers and other surface ships in 1989, but mixed crews have proven to be a success, Vice-Adm. Maddison said.
> 
> "There really is a behavioural change, an attitudinal and cultural change, when men and women are serving together. And it‘s all positive," he said.
> 
> The navy has about 10,000 sailors. About a thousand of them are women. The women tend to be in onshore administrative and clerical jobs. There are only 475 women in the so-called hard sea trades, shipboard jobs that range from sonar operators and electricians to cooks and carpenters.
> 
> The navy surveyed the women in the sea trades and discovered that 27 per cent were interested in submarine service.
> 
> The Canadian Forces rejected the idea of trying to make one of the crews of the four new Victoria subs all-female because it would take too long.



All for being politically correct.

Its cramped enough as it is.

Wes


----------



## cameron

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Hi Cameron,
> 
> One of the first Canadians to die in Afghanistan was a friend and former member of my regiment.  He went regular force, and became a member of the PPCLI.  He went as far to become a paratrooper with them.
> 
> I can assure you, when he served with me in the 48th, never did we have to worry about racism.
> 
> We were a regiment from Toronto, so you can imagine the multitudes of ethinicity that made up the regiment.  But we were all highlanders, and we all wore the kilt and the Falcon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Words of remembrance written by Corporal Di Capua while serving in Afghanistan
> 
> Dileas Gu Brath Dyer!
> 
> tess



Thanks for relating that experience regulator, Army Vern's perspective was a very interesting and enlightening one too.  I should say at this point that I have two reasons for needing to know this, one personal the other academic.  The personal one is my interest in the CF and in possibly joining at some point (most likely Reserve).  The academic one is that if I decide to, after my present studies, go on and do a PhD, one possible thesis topic i'm considering is the history of visible minorities in Canada's maritime trades, including shipbuilding, trawler fishing, the merchant navy and *the Canadian Navy*.  Therefore the reason for my query.


edited to fix quote/post


----------



## cameron

Springroll said:
			
		

> Originally, I was definitely considering it in the future but now its not really a volunteer situation.
> I got my posting msg today...to subs...lol
> I was a little scared at first, but now I am getting excited and look forward to the challenge.
> 
> The only question i am wondering know, is about the training. I know my screening will need to be done, but once that is all clear, then what? I have heard a few different things as far as the length of the training and such.
> 
> _edited to change know to now_



Congratulations Springroll! I envy you, best of luck


----------



## armyvern

284_226 said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> Ah, there's that "I" again.  And why is it that when confronted with the issue of bigotry, the first thing that usually comes out of people's mouths is "I'm not a bigot, I have friends who are black/Asian/gay/French/insert name of other minority here"?  You do realize that means nothing, right?
> 
> *Huh?  We have several people in this very thread who aren't even acknowledging it as an issue!  (Which just happens to be one of the problems that the survey suggests needs attention).*



Here's my response and it goes along with that last line of your PM that you sent me where you wondered whether or not I was going to come back into this thread to point out to others that they may have misinterpreted your comments to me. I'll point out that I have just come back from Tim Hortons (with an extra large black) and so am just NOW getting back to this thread after leaving the site immediately after making my last post in this thread.

No, I'm not ignoring "their misinterpretation" of your comments for whatever reasons, I simply wasn't here to see them until now.

So here's my response, as I pm'd you.

One can only speak from their experience. When one says "I don't care how someone does the job as long as they do it" -- THAT does NOT mean that they are NOT acknowledging the issue. It means that THEY do NOT discriminate. 

It neither means that THEY must be part of the 10.6%. YOU are just trolling now.

As to my comment:


> He didn't say there was none. There's asshats everywhere -- it sure as frig doesn't mean the system condones it or encourages it and harbours it.



which YOU have have responded to with:


> Huh?  We have several people in this very thread who aren't even acknowledging it as an issue!  (Which just happens to be one of the problems that the survey suggests needs attention).



Does NOT mean that they aren't ackowledging it is an issue. It means they are saying it isn't an issue FOR THEM either as soldiers or leaders (and that would be based on their OWN experience -- which THEY CAN speak to as per your #24). 

It may also mean that:

they, like me, believe that



> it sure as frig doesn't mean the system condones it or encourages it and harbours it



or that it is as big an issue as YOU make it out to be. The CF, being Federal, HAS to conduct these studies. The point being (and the same one that I made earlier) is that the chick involved in the situation I DESCRIBED in my initial response ... would have answered that study with a "yes, yes, yes, I am and have been discriminated against because I am a female." Just because she said so, doesn't *MAKE* it so, but it still counts as a "yes" for "sexual discrimination" in the study -- even though it had nothing to do with it -- except in her own damn eyes.

Lot's of people are disgruntled. Lots of people will blame that on anything they can, rather than look at themselves in the mirror and admit that they are a bag of shit and that race, sex, creed, nor colour has anything to do with it. Rather, their own shortcomings resulted in the 'disgruntledness'.

Studies, statistics and damn statistics.

Boy, talk about someone misinterpreting someone's comments. When they say that it isn't an issue for THEM -- for you to misinterpret that to mean that they are part of the 10.6%, or that they condone it, or that they refuse to acknowledge it.  : Wow. It's all one huge conspiracy all right.   :


----------



## the 48th regulator

cameron said:
			
		

> Thanks for relating that experience regulator, Army Vern's perspective was a very interesting and enlightening one too.  I should say at this point that I have two reasons for needing to know this, one personal the other academic.  The personal one is my interest in the CF and in possibly joining at some point (most likely Reserve).  The academic one is that if I decide to, after my present studies, go on and do a PhD, one possible thesis topic i'm considering is the history of visible minorities in Canada's maritime trades, including shipbuilding, trawler fishing, the merchant navy and *the Canadian Navy*.  Therefore the reason for my query.
> 
> 
> edited to fix quote/post



Right on Cameron, good luck.  You will find that there are many trades available, and you will make many life long friendships.

dileas

tess


----------



## geo

Let's get this straight....
Is there racism & sexual discrimination in the CF?  Yes
The CF reflects Canadian society and what you find on civy street you will find in the CF.

That having been said, the CF smaller and is much better at getting a grip on the situation.
Members are more concerned with getting the job done and placing their life in the hands of their work mates.  Some motivator huh?

We have a zero tolerance policy -  This does not mean that the accused will be dismissed upon our hearing the 1st accusations, it means corrective measures will be taken when it has been brought to the attention of the superiors...  and if the superior does not take care of things, then THAT superior TOO is as liabel for having let the behavior continue.

284_286  if you say you have seen something of it in your unit.... did you do anything about it?

All in all, I as a senior leader, I have made ffort to make the "workplace" as harmonious as possible.  Is it perfect - probably not BUT, it's pretty good.


----------



## George Wallace

Let's get something straight and on the table once and for all; everyone is "biased".  It is human nature.  It won't go away.  No one holds a monopoly on it.

It is human nature to be "biased" towards anything that is new, unknown, or different.  This "bias" includes things like "Racism", "Homophobia", "Sexism" and a very wide range of biases towards other matters including "Religion", "Ethnic Origin", "Social Class", "Place of Birth", "Who your Parents were", and on and on.  

Does it exist?  Yes!  

Do the members of the CF have policies in place to counter "biases"?  Yes!

Is it a "MAJOR" concern to the majority who are now Serving in the CF, whereby it is negatively affecting their work environment?  No.        Only those who are commonly found to be trying to justify their own advancement in a career where they have not performed satisfactorily seem to be pulling out the "Discrimination Card".  People who have been substandard in their performance evaluations due to poor work ethics and inflated egos.  People who have been milking the System and crying foul for every and any percieved injustice (In many cases, total fabrications.) to compensate for their poor PER evaluations.  It makes you wonder who has the moral and ethical problems; the complaint or the complaintant?

So I repeat say again:  Is it a "MAJOR" concern to the majority who are now Serving in the CF, whereby it is negatively affecting their work environment?  No.


----------



## armyvern

Enough already.

I've received PMs that have essentially begged me to post in this thread. Apparently only "one" of the usual suspects has admitted that discrimination exists in the CF. A close read of the thread will reveal that is NOT the case at all.

This usual suspect is sick & tired of the PMs to me goading me into posting by a certain member ... who then claims me (being one of the usual suspects) "circling my wagons" and never admitting that the CF doesn't have any discrimation. I stated that they was discrimation -- right in this very thread. Don't ask me to post in here, then PM a mod to assist your ass because your getting "dogpiled" when YOU aksed me to respond. 

I think that's clear enough for anyone to understand.

Troll: Goodbye.


----------



## Springroll

cameron said:
			
		

> Congratulations Springroll! I envy you, best of luck



Thanks cameron!! I hope it all works out too!


----------



## McG

There is bias & discrimination in the CF.  We saw it proven on this thread last night when a member accused all female submariners of being promiscuos & sleeping around with the crew and then defended that comment.  (and we are not going to revisit that debate as the thread is now cleaned-up & I hope the individual sees the error of the comment)

However, I (yes, I know it is another "I" but they are adding up) have seen little to no discrimination based on gender outside of the example above (certainly, nothing springs to mind).  For the people who experience it, discrimination is a problem.  At the institutional level, I do not think there is a major problem.  The fact is that there are things in place to respond to discrimination if/where it occurs.  Those who might discriminate know that they would be gambling with the future of their service.


----------



## Gunner98

The system is generally effective in dealing with discrimination, harassment and racism.  The system has come a long way in the last 20 years with the implementation of checks and balances.  The normal appearance of dislike or disrespect is based on personal actions, lack of assimilation, poor teamwork skills and incompetent performance of a task or duties.  The system is not self correcting but the policies that support the checks and balances are in place.  It takes leadership at all levels to recognize unjust treatment, acknowledge every complaint and ensure that an appropriate investigation of the allegations is conducted.  That is the law of the land and the CF adheres to it.


----------



## boxseats

Congratulations  Springroll !!!!!!      Congratulations  Springroll !!!!!!     Congratulations  Springroll  !!!!!!   

33 years ago I was at the leading edge of equal opportunity for women in the US Army.  Many of the things I did were a first. I was the first woman to graduate 1st in the class for my MOS.  When I was posted, I was the first woman my section sergeant had under his supervision in 15 years of service.  When we went on field exercises, often I was the only woman out there with a couple thousand men.  While I was at my company, the first female officer was posted in the history of the company, and the battalion, I think.  Afterwards, in college, when I was in the veteran’s assistance queue, I was told I was in the wrong line countless times.  When I joined a veteran’s organization about 15 years ago, I was the first women elect to an office in the history of that local post.

Those times are history, and now there is Vern, and you, and more in the future.  There was discrimination, of course.   Both ways.  In bad ways and good ways.  Sometime I had men watching out for me because I was a woman.  That taught me how great most men are.  Decent, honest, protective, and often in the way of a comrade that is gender-irrelevant.  

When you are one of the first women posted on a sub, I am guessing there may be many unanticipated situations that will be left to the good efforts of you and those around you.  For example, the first time I went out on a field exercise, no one had really thought ahead and planned about what they were going to do with me at night.  Our squad kind-of muddle thru it, and arrangement were decided among us.  Also, every time I needed to use the facilities, I needed to take a man with me to stand outside, since no one wanted any awkward intrusions.  I bet out of those thousands of men out there, maybe only two dozen knew there was a woman around and about.  It was always a fun and interesting surprise when I went to the mess tent.

You will be fine because you are servicing with honorable and decent men and woman, in the majority, like many of the ones that appear on this site.  You have what it takes to figure it out, as things come up, and so does everyone else.


----------



## Strike

boxseats +1

As for the sub issue, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to serve on one has something different going on in their head.   ;D  Not neccessarily wrong, just different.  I prefer being able to role over on my cot/bed/rack and not have to worry about getting stuck.  Then there's that wonderful "boat" smell.  Of course, serving on the boat you'd probably get used to it, but that doesn't make it smell any sweeter.     WRT the use of the heads and ablutions, I can only compare to my field experience.  It's amazing how creative you can get in order to clean yourself.  And I'm sure after awhile people just won't care what you're wearing (or not) when you go for your bird bath.

Good luck on the training.  I don't envy you...but that's only because I have an issue with small spaces.   ;D


----------



## X-mo-1979

I have only seen one type of racism.
"Warrant doesn't like me cause I'm a Muslim."

...Of course it had nothing to do with him being late twice that week,poor turn out for parade,poor work ethic.

Most of the time I ever hear anything about racism (in a serious manner) It's usually someone making excuses for their poor performance.Nothing to do with the warrant being a racist.

Does it exist.Yup.
Does it affect work?In some situations.

I worked with an Indian (from India) and a Pakistani.They hated each other with a passion.Refused to even look at each other.There was never anything done as both said they were fine with the other person.But behind closed door's they were very open for the hate of not the other person,but the other persons background.

I am working with a small group of people.Mix of Polish,natives,black,french,English (from multiple Caucasian backgrounds) the only thing it affects is the jokes. ;D We are all really tight and are comfortable with each other to do so.I take my share of the ribbing for being a stupid newf,and the rest for the sweeping generalisations of their race,religion,etc.

But as I said most of the times I hear of someone having a "rough go",it them.Not their background.


----------



## cameron

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Right on Cameron, good luck.  You will find that there are many trades available, and you will make many life long friendships.
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



Thanks regulator.


----------



## SeaDog

> As for the sub issue, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to serve on one has something different going on in their head.



Out of curiosity, do you know my wife? :skull:

Cheers.
Dolphin Code 38


----------



## Strike

SeaDog said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, do you know my wife? :skull:
> 
> Cheers.
> Dolphin Code 38



 ;D


----------

