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

A "Why" Dress Thread split from OCdt Speaks at Freedom Rally

Communities tend to use the the colloquial versions (which is fine). I think you’re starting to realize that using colloquialisms is okay and should not detract from the conversation.
 
SupersonicMax said:
CP-140 is not “a thing.
Click to expand...


CP-140 Aurora fleet modernization and life extension - Canada.ca

The Aurora fleet is Canada’s primary airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft. It has been modernized with a world-class integrated mission suite with state-of-the-art avionics, communications systems, computer networks, and sensors.
www.canada.ca www.canada.ca

It's 'a thing' on my 1000hrs Certificate...that my CO presented me at a Sqn H & A years ago (that, I will add, my DEUs were properly turned out and my parade ankle boots were polished for 😁as I know those things ended up "on the internet").

SupersonicMax said:
I think you’re starting to realize that using colloquialisms is okay and should not detract from the conversation.
Click to expand...

I think you're starting to realize I matched your foolish question (about dirt on parade boots...) with my own foolishness. 😁
 
Eye In The Sky said:
I think you're starting to realize I matched your foolish question (about dirt on parade boots...) with my own foolishness. 😁
Click to expand...
It is not foolish. It was a personal way to show you that you need to use context (which you cannot get from a single frame) in enforcing dress standards. Calling those “leadership failures” without knowing all the facts is immature.
 
Remius said:
We have dress regs or we don’t. Time and place and common sense should always be considered...We enforced the regs. Beard, no beard. I don’t care one way or another on a professional level. If it’s in the dress regs we try to follow those rules. Same reason I won’t accept a civilian belt in DEUs or half assed tied knot tie or whatever. If the rules change for those things I’ll enforce them accordingly. Until then, using good judgement, we shouldn’t let things slide.
Click to expand...

This links in to the point I have been, perhaps poorly, trying to make.

- NCOs and Warrant/Petty Officers do the bulk of the "policing". Common sense...always. operational context? I care if my subs uniform (which is ALSE now, in my mind...) is serviceable, worn IAW orders (dual layer stuff) and approved relaxations, and if reqr'd...sanitized.

- Normal working day in sqn lines...add in "thread free, patches IAW the CADO"...

- Function where we're in the Maytag suit? buttons and badges are correct, pressed, lint free...all the normal stuff I consider 'standard'. Not because of some 'personal standard' of mine...because of the CAF standard. If a CAF mbr has done basic (Reg Force), they know how to wear DEU. I know Res is a little different...

Whatever the regs are...enforce them. If something don't make sense anymore...remove it from the regs. Do I care where a pony tail is? Not personally...as long as it is safe. BUT...my job, one of them, is to check for and correct these things. If I ignore it...and the SCWO, or WCWO etc sees me 'turning a blind eye'...I'll be answering to them. And I already know that conversation; "we don't get to determine the policy...but we are expected to enforce it".
 
cavalryman said:
And all of a sudden, I'm looking at my pepper shaker wondering whether I need to sift through it for droppings. But don't mind me. I'm just an old Army guy. :cool:
Click to expand...

What else have to go to do on a Friday evening? Free entertainment!!
 
LittleBlackDevil said:
What are the valid reasons for not keeping up a PT routine?

I ask honestly, not trying to be a jerk. I understand that you can't go to the gym -- I haven't been to a gym since early March of 2020 -- but why shouldn't can't people still do jogging, rucking, pushups, air squats, and other such good things at home (or on streets around their home)? I believe even the strictest stay-at-home orders made allowances for outdoor exercise.

Especially from a CAF perspective I am missing why it is acceptable to let one's self go. I can understand cancelling the Force Testing because testing involves contact with others.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to picture living in Ottawa, Toronto, etc in 'dense' population areas, large apt/condo buildings, etc...and convincing myself in the spring of 2020 when the pandemic kicked off...or thru the follow-on waves....that going from "apt/condo" to the street was a worthy risk. I'm not sure I would have done it...I know what the 'Command intent' was but...for people to assume that risk/benefit, I don't blame anyone who decided 'not worth it'.

Many people would have had to make 'contact with others', even indirectly in elevators etc...just to get 'to the street'. WAG on my part but...I know at first, my grocery store trips were 'calculated events' to avoid the masses...
 
Ok, so is the issue with the ponytail the fact that it was too long or that it was over her shoulder in the picture? If it is the fact that it is over her shoulder in the picture, is it not possible that the PA involved told her to do it to drive home the fact that she is female and to show the new dress policy?

I wouldn't be surprised in if in the future males won't be allowed to correct dress issues with females, or the risk of a sexual harassment complaint becomes too great to make it worthwhile.

At another uniform job I've had in the past I was told to correct males, but not say anything to females because apparently noticing something about a uniform=looking at someone inappropriately.
 
Kilted said:
Ok, so is the issue with the ponytail the fact that it was too long or that it was over her shoulder in the picture? If it is the fact that it is over her shoulder in the picture, is it not possible that the PA involved told her to do it to drive home the fact that she is female and to show the new dress policy?
Click to expand...

Pony tails are to be worn IAW the dress instr. It isn't.

PAs don't have the authority to deviate on their own, and how would showing a ponytail on the shoulder 'show the new dress policy'..when that isn't the dress policy?

Para's 1 - 4. Dress instructions | Chapter 1 Command, control and staff duties - Canada.ca

Some of us, me being the vocal one on here, obviously, are tired of being responsible for enforcing regs that aren't being applied across the board. Change em, drop em...whatever....but this '2 or 3 standards' stuff is absolute bullshit.
 
dapaterson said:
Let's simplify: a single hair standard, men and women.
Click to expand...
Those six pages were fun while they lasted. :)

www.milnet.ca

Is it time for gendered hair standards to go?

I was actually interested in the difference between CF members and the cadets. I think there would be an undeniable argument for male and female cadets to have a single standard. I was surprised that they still have gendered standards which are enforceable by denying membership. Shocking...
www.milnet.ca www.milnet.ca

LOCKED
 
Eye In The Sky said:
Why would it matter if it's authorized or not? People just do what they want anyways...and the CAF Social Media folks post it not having a clue :)

https://www.facebook.com/RCAF.ARC/photos/a.10150142814416237/10157918285586237

https://www.facebook.com/RCAF.ARC/photos/a.10150142814416237/10156789614411237

[edit: link removed per members request]
Click to expand...
Just so I’m following… did the pictures change? For the top one I see a SARTech with his sleeves pushed up… that’s been authorized for like 2 years now.
 
Not going to lie, you have completely lost me with the ponytail thing as no one actually explained what the issue is. From what I have gathered, it appears that women are not allowed to turn their heads for fear of their ponytails touching their shoulders.

I could be wrong on this one...but that's what it looks like to me.
 
SupersonicMax said:
Solution? Before admonishing someone for dress, perhaps it’d be useful to understand the context behind the “why” someone may be out of dress and show leniency and flexibility when someone acts in good faith.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of a story I heard of guys coming back into KAF after a couple months of heavy fighting being jacked up by the Camp Sergeant Major for having beards.
 
Maxman1 said:
A guy on my DP1 was part of that parade. Trying to explain why it looked bad was like talking to a brick wall.
Click to expand...
If they had done it without tac vests and marched normally, it probably wouldn't have been an issue. Although, it's not typically the type of parade you would have rifles on.
 
Last edited:
Eaglelord17 said:
Men, Women, Sikh, Muslim, Natives, etc. If we are all equal and expect to be treated equally, why do we insist on separate standards?
Click to expand...
I think, more correctly, some separate standards are imposed upon us in the names of diversity and inclusion. The intent is to broaden the appeal of the CAF to under-represented segments of society to meet certain recruiting targets established for political reasons so that the CAF is representative of the country it serves. While that's a laudable goal, it has never really been attained.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top