New Dress Regs 🤣

[markppcli]

There are some industries where there is indeed an expected standard of uniform-like dress and one isn’t reimbursed the cost of suits/ties/shirts/shoes/etc. and the cost isn’t insignificant. Any money I spent in the CAF for either consumables (like polish) or some servicing/alterations to issued clothing to make it fit more professionally, particularly when interacting with public (Govt or citizens) pales to the (does some quick math…) thousands and thousands (probably into 5-digits) invested for conducting work in private industry.

Should issued uniforms fit properly and the CAF member not be out of pocket by an impactful amount? Yes. That said, holding stocks in half-inch increments to ensure as modification-free issue as possible likely isn’t the answer either. There needs to be a reasonable mid-ground where the majority of the costs are borne by the organization, but modest cost by the member, if they do chose to optimize their appearance, isn’t unreasonable.

I agree, my point was about some one saying the other member was a bad soldier / person / unemployable because they were unwilling to spend the money to have their DEUs tailored when base tailors exist.

 

[Brad Sallows]

“trans people aren’t worth x”

Which statement was it? Were they in effect called worthless, or was the statement in effect that it wasn't worthwhile to actively recruit them?

Some stuff is done at own expense. Haircuts. Polish and associated tools. Cleaning. Insignia addition and removal, when access to a tailor was inconvenient for some folks and turnaround was ... slow. Yes, there's a lot of peer pressure to go beyond issue stuff. I suppose some people don't sweat the small sh!t and some lose their sh!t over it.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I agree, my point was about some one saying the other member was a bad soldier / person / unemployable because they were unwilling to spend the money to have their DEUs tailored when base tailors exist.

Yea,...that all came about from one post that person made,....of course it did.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Saying “trans people aren’t worth x” is a bigoted statement.

For the sake of argument can you show me the source for the definition of bigot you're using?

 

[Good2Golf]

I agree, my point was about some one saying the other member was a bad soldier / person / unemployable because they were unwilling to spend the money to have their DEUs tailored when base tailors exist.

I agree and will give @btrudy the point that at least they have made the conscious decision not to personally invest more in their issue uniform because the CAF should provide something 100%. That’s a personal choice, and one I don’t necessarily disagree with…in a perfect world. And at least it is a logical principled choice, as opposed to some members who couldn’t be bothered to look good in a uniform (even without spending any of their own money), because they couldn’t be bothered to at least get the ‘least ill-fitting’ issue clothing available.

 

[markppcli]

For the sake of argument can you show me the source for the definition of bigot you're using?

a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

 

[markppcli]

Yea,...that all came about from one post that person made,....of course it did.

Look, you’re the moderator. It’s your job to set the tone of discussion. Do you think this comment is really the tone we ought to take here ?

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I’d be stunned if at 36 I wasn’t one of the youngest here, and I’m aware of maybe one female member. Anyways none of this really matters what’s happening is happening.

I'm a year younger than you

Was a member of the Armed Forces since 2004. I was recruited as a "Hillier Youth".

I released four weeks ago

 

[Brad Sallows]

because they couldn’t be bothered to at least get the ‘least ill-fitting’ issue clothing available

Always a challenge in the Res F. I remember watching the supply person at CFS Lolo pawing through stacks of used combats to equip me for SYEP. From a little later in time, I remember my first parade boots - both same size, but different sole pattern, just enough to notice when wearing them. I remember my first DEU jacket being "close enough".

 

[markppcli]

I'm a year younger than you

Was a member of the Armed Forces since 2004. I was recruited as a "Hillier Youth".

I released four weeks ago

Ah that’s just your first release, give it time trust me.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Look, you’re the moderator. It’s your job to set the tone of discussion. Do you think this comment is really the tone we ought to take here ?

I'm confused ......where the heck are we going now??

 

[PuckChaser]

I'm confused ......where the heck are we going now??

Probably to PM if there's still an issue so we can stay on topic?

 

[Jarnhamar]

a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

Thanks, that's what I seen pop up too.

Obstinately-stubbornly adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion

I believe someone posted sources highlighting the increased medical requirements and increased mental health issues with trans memebers. Hard to say Colin's opinion was in spite of reason when he's arguing the science of the issue.

Unreasonably- in a way that is not guided by or based on good sense.

Same thing. He's not being unreasonable, he's basing his opinion off something quantitative. There is also the context of "actively" which seems to have been overlooked.

The bigger problem is calling people bigots when the author of the comment cannot differentiate between an uncomfortable or unpopular opinion and true bigotry per the defined dictionary definition. It becomes cancel culture very easily.

 

[FSTO]

I agree, my point was about some one saying the other member was a bad soldier / person / unemployable because they were unwilling to spend the money to have their DEUs tailored when base tailors exist.

Hmm, I may have to walk back my comment a bit. But I’ll maintain that folks who pull “I don’t do anything more than my job description” are ones I never expect to surprise me with going the extra mile to achieve a collective goal.

 

[OldSolduer]

The bigger problem is calling people bigots when the author of the comment cannot differentiate between an uncomfortable or unpopular opinion and true bigotry per the defined dictionary definition. It becomes cancel culture very easily.

You are wise for one so young - well put.

 

[btrudy]

Hmm, I may have to walk back my comment a bit. But I’ll maintain that folks who pull “I don’t do anything more than my job description” are ones I never expect to surprise me with going the extra mile to achieve a collective goal.

I don't think I'm alone in being selective about which things I'll "go the extra mile for". I save that for things I consider important, and how well a uniform that I'd never actually choose to wear if I had a choice fits generally isn't one of them. The CAF as a whole has largely put too much emphasis on aesthetics, to a degree that it detracts from our actual mandates IMHO.

 

[FSTO]

I don't think I'm alone in being selective about which things I'll "go the extra mile for". I save that for things I consider important, and how well a uniform that I'd never actually choose to wear if I had a choice fits generally isn't one of them. The CAF as a whole has largely put too much emphasis on aesthetics, to a degree that it detracts from our actual mandates IMHO.

I control what I can control, my appearance, how my decisions affect the officers and sailors in my ship/station, how my staff work is received by my peers and superiors. I cannot control what directives come out of the Minister’s, CDS, and or CRCN offices I can only follow them to the best of my ability.

 

[TacticalTea]

Saying “trans people aren’t worth x” is a bigoted statement. Doesn’t mean the speaker is inherently a bigot, just that they have some perspectives. Calling out that comment as bigoted and then being attacked for it is exactly what happened. Frankly anyone that’s still in the CAF and was part of that exchange should try hard to remember the bystander training they clicked through.

Why? I made the same point when somebody else said it, but if you're gonna say it's bigoted, you ought to explain why. You can't just go around cancelling people and thoughts because they ''feel'' wrong.

Edit: Wowzer, this thread is rolling fast. Someone already made this point and got an answer before I pressed ''post reply''.

 

[OldSolduer]

If any of you think that you're not judged by your appearance in a uniform you are sadly mistaken. Civvies can see the wrinkled DEU or disheveled slovenly appearance.

 

[TacticalTea]

If any of you think that you're not judged by your appearance in a uniform you are sadly mistaken. Civvies can see the wrinkled DEU or disheveled slovenly appearance.

Great point.

The things that Chiefs have typically lost their minds about - badges in the wrong spots, medals in the wrong order, not wearing a hat, imperfect hair, imperfect shoes - are, funnily enough, not the things that members would be negatively judged upon. The latter, being more noticeable to non-military folks, would be fashion fails like oversized jackets, awfully fitted shirts, and tight pants that squeeze your ass and package into disturbingly suggestive forms.

Those will make you look ridiculous to the uninitiated. So will some funny styles that'll come out of HAIRFORGEN, yet those will also be met with a shrug as they won't be in violation of policy anymore.