New Dress Regs 🤣

[Brad Sallows]

The good news is that this mostly caters to attention-seeking behaviours.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The good news is that this mostly caters to attention-seeking behaviours.

Yup.

This is going to bring us in a lot of choice candidates whose reasons for joining are solid and institution driven.

This will lessen our retention issues too. The desire to be a member of the military balancing on long hair and nails and men wearing dresses is important.

 

[Eaglelord17]

If it does help recruitment or retention, that's a great thing, but that's a side benefit. The initiative was done primarily to be more inherently inclusive. You're supposed to do the right thing because it's the right thing to do, not because it would benefit you.

I doubt it will help. I know personally it just adds to the CAF being a joke and for me it makes me want to be in less rather than more.

Society has a expectation for what the military is. Their view is much closer to something along the lines of full metal jacket, than the pot smoking, lime green long haired, long fingernailed hippie. That view matters whether or not people choose to acknowledge that. Part of the reason I think many become disenchanted with the CAF is because we are eroding our military ethos.

I have seen what happens when we don't properly enforce discipline, this everyone has a say mentality is one that will get people killed. Simple example being we had a fire on ship. The PO in charge of the firebase was managing it and a LS didn't like what was being ordered and started arguing with them trying to take control from the PO (more like the LS screaming in the face of the PO and the PO having to scream back). This lost valuable time due to both of them yelling back and forth at each other. Fortunately the fire was relatively small and was controlled quickly, but could have resulted in worse happening. Nothing ever came out of that when the LS should have been charged.

War has proven that short hair which is natural colours and clean shaven, with short fingernails is the best standard from a occupational health and safety standpoint. We can choose to ignore it but the fact we need to adjust the standards constantly (cut your nails if you go in the field, put on a scarf if your hair is bright, shave off your beard if your doing the gas hut, etc.) instead of just maintaining the best practice is stupid. If it isn’t what you would do in a operational context why aren’t we training as we would fight?

I don't think the previous standard would have survived a charter challenge because it was a variety of different standards depending on who you are based of race, sex, or religion. All that meant was they just had to make a singular standard for all. Didn't have to have lime green hair as part of it, or abandon any pretense of having a dress standard.

Does this mean we can all do a class action on the military for any previously serving member being oppressed under the previous dress regulations?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

All you'll get is an apology from trudeau.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I know personally it just adds to the CAF being a joke and for me it makes me want to be in less rather than more.

How does this make the CAF a joke?

Society has a expectation for what the military is. Their view is much closer to something along the lines of full metal jacket, than the pot smoking, lime green long haired, long fingernailed hippie. That view matters whether or not people choose to acknowledge that. Part of the reason I think many become disenchanted with the CAF is because we are eroding our military ethos.

Values form military ethos. I hope appearance isn’t part of the values you prioritize over other, more important ones like courage and integrity. The word “appearance” isn’t part of duty with honour.

There is an expectation, described within Duty with Honour, that the CAF is a reflection of Canadian society. This will crack the door more open to the whole Canadian society who, despite having a non-conventional appearance, may live by the same values the CAF promotes.

I have seen what happens when we don't properly enforce discipline, this everyone has a say mentality is one that will get people killed. Simple example being we had a fire on ship. The PO in charge of the firebase was managing it and a LS didn't like what was being ordered and started arguing with them trying to take control from the PO (more like the LS screaming in the face of the PO and the PO having to scream back). This lost valuable time due to both of them yelling back and forth at each other. Fortunately the fire was relatively small and was controlled quickly, but could have resulted in worse happening. Nothing ever came out of that when the LS should have been charged.

We can still enforce discipline. The standard is just different. It will force people, that traditionally focused their discipline enforcement on dress, to shift to more meaningful areas of discipline related to core military competencies and values. The “easy” button won’t be there anymore.

War has proven that short hair which is natural colours and clean shaven, with short fingernails is the best standard from a occupational health and safety standpoint. We can choose to ignore it but the fact we need to adjust the standards constantly (cut your nails if you go in the field, put on a scarf if your hair is bright, shave off your beard if your doing the gas hut, etc.) instead of just maintaining the best practice is stupid. If it isn’t what you would do in a operational context why aren’t we training as we would fight?

I am assuming you are against women in the field as well, who typically have long hair? I am unsure how having natural colour hair has anything to do with occupational health and safety of an aircraft maintainer deployed on operation or a sailor on a ship.

As I have said in many circles, this will be a non-event (like the PONYTAILFORGEN, BEARDFORGEN, and WEEDFORGEN). I doubt, in the long run, that a significant number of people will start sporting bright blue hair. The biggest impact we’ll see is a couple of guys (I use guys because short hair was targeted at guys in the old policy) will have slightly longer hair because they don’t go to the barber shop as often. Big deal…

I challenge you to wargame this policy and come up with scenarios (realistic scenarios - not far fetched ones) where this policy would actually be an issue.

 

[Haggis]

The desire to be a member of the military balancing on long hair and nails and men wearing dresses is important.

They're called Highlanders and it's a kilt!

 

[Jarnhamar]

They're called Highlanders and it's a kilt!

In 2022 it's called cultural appropriation

 

[OldSolduer]

In 2022 it's called cultural appropriation

That’s so 2018…

 

[ArmyRick]

Accommodating people who "must" wear bright coloured hair, long fingernails or dresses in DEU does NOT have the focus to be in the CAF. And this is where I think the CAF has failed on this recent policy change.

You join the CAF because you want to serve your country.
You join the CAF because you want to crew a tank, fly a jet or sail on a warship.
You join the CAF because you see it as an honourable profession that pays and has benefits.
You join the CAF because you want to see more of your country and the world.
You join the CAF to protect Canadians, the weak and vulnerable here and abroad.

If you want to join the CAF, get your head straight. Uniforms and uniformity has a point BEYOND operational necessity. Take DEUs for example, their is ZERO operational use to them. However we wear that uniform as part of a TRADITION and RECOGNITION to the queen, the government and people of Canada. Its high time we boot this liberal government out and tell our CAF hierarchy to get their priorities straight.

I have no issue adjusting some minor uniformity for religious and/or cultural ways I am ok with. However adjusting dress regulations for whiny "I want a ponytail and bright green hair" type mentality is weak and lacks integrity.

Where does it stop? When will the CAF put its foot down and say our traditions, culture and operations come first?

The Canadians who seriously want to serve the CAF need to grow the F up and make sacrifices. You may be asked to sacrifice your own life someday. If you can't give up some minor issue like hair colour, I doubt you have the fortitude to give up your life. Too much of a "me, me, me" mind set. Frankly this whole country has far too many younger generation who grew up in the safety and sheltered life that Canada provides.

Serving in the CAF is about country and service before self. Mission before self. Your soldiers before self. End story.

In my 2 years managing troublesome PAT/PARS at Meaford, I got a first hand look at people who were not mentally suitable for service in the CAF. Believe me, I got a long list of horror stories of the wrong stuff. Challenge me on this if you want. And yes I turned around the attitudes of a few.

All these changes will drive more high quality service members out and further discourage ideal candidates from joining.

And for those telling off the dinosaurs, do so at your own peril. Know why I never insulted my superiors when I joined? I wasn't in the Medak pocket or Cypres in '76.

 

[Eaglelord17]

How does this make the CAF a joke?
I am assuming you are against women in the field as well, who typically have long hair? I am unsure how having natural colour hair has anything to do with occupational health and safety of an aircraft maintainer deployed on operation or a sailor on a ship.

As I have said in many circles, this will be a non-event (like the PONYTAILFORGEN, BEARDFORGEN, and WEEDFORGEN). I doubt, in the long run, that a significant number of people will start sporting bright blue hair. The biggest impact we’ll see is a couple of guys (I use guys because short hair was targeted at guys in the old policy) will have slightly longer hair because they don’t go to the barber shop as often. Big deal…

I challenge you to wargame this policy and come up with scenarios (realistic scenarios - not far fetched ones) where this policy would actually be an issue.

This is just a addition as to why it is becoming a joke. There isn’t much that instills me with pride in this organization. We are unable to do our job (protect Canada) without significant assistance of foreign forces (mainly the US). We are poorly equipped with aging equipment which has no intentions of being replaced. We have a ton of out of shape troops whose uniforms I have to wonder if ‘Woods’ (the tent company) made them. We constantly are lowering our standards instead of trying to bring the standards up. We have toxic work environments where people are afraid to speak their mind or make a joke for fear of it being taken wrong. Can you explain to me how our military isn’t much of a joke?

Yes I am against anyone having long hair in the field, even women, it works fine for the low intensity conflicts we have fought for the last while, but for a higher intensity one we should default to the easiest to maintain length (i.e. short). I have had long hair and short hair and can tell you that the amount of effort needed to maintain long hair is wasted effort when it could be spent on other things in war.

As to hair colour, it can make you more visible on top of the maintenance issues. It can have security issues, as are we going to reissue IDs every time someone changes hair colour? Or if it significantly fades? Plus even in your sailor or aircraft maintainer they are all CAF members and can be posted anywhere or do anything the CAF requires of them. They may at some point be called upon to be armed and have to fight someone. Lets pause getting shot at for a second, need to put my scarf on.

Another factor is how relations are viewed by both our public and foreign dignatories, militaries, and their public in case of us fighting on another nations soil. Having a professional appearance matters, as much as some of us like to pretend it doesn’t.

Your probably right about most people not taking advantage of it, its more the fact some can and will push it right to its limits like some people always will.

 

[mariomike]

This thread and this topic are comedy gold.

Especially after 30 pages.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I challenge you to wargame this policy and come up with scenarios (realistic scenarios - not far fetched ones) where this policy would actually be an issue.

Instagram generation joins the CAF and quickly realizes that while they can look however they want, they can't behave however they want. Culture shock leads to "I have mental health issues" trips to the CDU with restrictive MELs. Other people pick up the slack and continue to get burned out. Best case people who shouldn't have joined VR. Worst case they mark time over 5-6 years going through the medical system for medical releases. Can't get more people into units to alleviate the manning issues because of injured people tied to PY positions.

We should have put effort into fixing RMC first.

 

[Furniture]

All these changes will drive more high quality service members out and further discourage ideal candidates from joining.

And for those telling off the dinosaurs, do so at your own peril. Know why I never insulted my superiors when I joined? I wasn't in the Medak pocket or Cypres in '76.

How exactly will this drive out "high quality" members? If you're actually a high quality member why would someone else's blue hair, or ponytail bother you?

As for disrespecting, remember that the people pushing this stuff from the top are the ones that went through years of war in Afghanistan, maybe they actually do understand the real operational impact of morale, and the lack of impact from non-safety related dress...

 

[btrudy]

Accommodating people who "must" wear bright coloured hair, long fingernails or dresses in DEU does NOT have the focus to be in the CAF. And this is where I think the CAF has failed on this recent policy change.

Welcoming people who want to wear their hair brightly coloured (along with the other changes) will simply mean that the range of people who will not feel excluded or alienated due to the personal appearance regulations is broadened. Inherent inclusivity is a good thing; you know, part of that whole "Respect the Dignity of All Peoples" thing which is literally the most important part of the CAF ethos should include respecting the choices that people want to make with regards to their own personal appearance.

You join the CAF because you want to serve your country.
You join the CAF because you want to crew a tank, fly a jet or sail on a warship.
You join the CAF because you see it as an honourable profession that pays and has benefits.
You join the CAF because you want to see more of your country and the world.
You join the CAF to protect Canadians, the weak and vulnerable here and abroad.

Frankly, it's disappointing that we need to repeat this point since a lot of people here don't seem to get it, but there's literally nothing about wanting to have bright purple hair that has any effect on any of these things.

If you want to join the CAF, get your head straight. Uniforms and uniformity has a point BEYOND operational necessity. Take DEUs for example, their is ZERO operational use to them. However we wear that uniform as part of a TRADITION and RECOGNITION to the queen, the government and people of Canada. Its high time we boot this liberal government out and tell our CAF hierarchy to get their priorities straight.

First off, this isn't a "liberal government" change. It's a bottom-up initiative which was prompted by a briefing note drafted up by the Defence Women's Advisory Organization.

2ndly, yeah, no duh we wear the uniform for those reasons. Which is why we're not getting rid of the uniform.

I have no issue adjusting some minor uniformity for religious and/or cultural ways I am ok with. However adjusting dress regulations for whiny "I want a ponytail and bright green hair" type mentality is weak and lacks integrity.

I fail to see how there this can be construed as "weak". As for integrity, my view is the opposite. Making these changes is simply the right thing to do from a moral standpoint. Removing regulations that infringed upon people's Charter right to freedom of expression is a good thing.

Where does it stop? When will the CAF put its foot down and say our traditions, culture and operations come first?

Well, for operations, completely. Nothing in these orders impact the ability to ensure that personal appearance choices don't impact operational capability.

And for traditions and culture: we'll put out foot down and say they're important when it's recognized that they're bringing more benefit than harm. I mean, my dude, we created an entirely new L1 organization headed by a full-ass Lieutenant-General devoted to culture change. You know why that's the case? Because we've recognized that many aspects of our military culture are broken and toxic and need to be fixed.

The Canadians who seriously want to serve the CAF need to grow the F up and make sacrifices. You may be asked to sacrifice your own life someday. If you can't give up some minor issue like hair colour, I doubt you have the fortitude to give up your life. Too much of a "me, me, me" mind set. Frankly this whole country has far too many younger generation who grew up in the safety and sheltered life that Canada provides.

The people who serve the CAF should be expected to make sacrifices, when there's a good reason for those sacrifices. Adhering to some white cis straight Christian male 1950s aesthetic ideal is not a good reason to expect someone to sacrifice. It's not that they can't give up some minor issue like hair colour, it's that there's no damned good reason to ask them to do it in the first place.

 

[Jarnhamar]

are the ones that went through years of war in Afghanistan, maybe they actually do understand the real operational impact of morale, and the lack of impact from non-safety related dress...

Maybe. But appeals to authority can be tricky sometimes.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I couldn't care less what the color of one's hair is, the length of the fingernails or hair is, or if they chose to wear a skirt or pants on parade.

Just show up and give me 110% effort. That's all I ask.

As for me, my hair was already driving my fellow C2s and the C1s nuts. Specifically, our gendered hair regulations became moot and outdated once we crawled out of the cave and realized women can do any job a man can, with long hair.

I like the changes. Brings it on.

 

[btrudy]

As to hair colour, it can make you more visible on top of the maintenance issues. It can have security issues, as are we going to reissue IDs every time someone changes hair colour? Or if it significantly fades?

Given that we don't reissue IDs for literally any other hair changes, including someone deciding to literally get rid of their hair completely, I really don't see how this is a concern.

Plus even in your sailor or aircraft maintainer they are all CAF members and can be posted anywhere or do anything the CAF requires of them. They may at some point be called upon to be armed and have to fight someone. Lets pause getting shot at for a second, need to put my scarf on.

If they're posted to an operational theatre where there's a threat, they'll put the scarf on (I'm sure most will simply decide to dye a subdued colour instead). If you're talking about something happening where you go from zero to armed, well putting the scarf on takes a hell of a lot less effort than issuing everyone firearms. Friendo can take the 45 seconds to throw their hair scarf on while in line waiting for ammo.

 

[Jarnhamar]

some white cis straight

Did you know 99.7% of Canadians are CIS?

 

[desindarfur]

I'm not against change, I just prefer, improvement.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I'd like to point out that in the RN/RCN it wasn't even a hundred years ago that seamen wore their hair long and in a ponytail. The ponytails disappeared shortly before WWII, but hair could be worn long (touching the shoulders) until unification, when Army hair styles took over.

And in the RCAF, if you didn't have long hair flowing in the wind while flying your Sopwith Camel, then you had a nice long white silk scarf doing it.