Hello Sailor?!
AT,
Years ago when it was a sin to be other than heterosexual in the US military, the Navy's investigative arm classified those investigations under catagory 8G. They were proper criminal investigations per the SOP of the investigative service. The mere allegation was enough for an investigation and withdrawing all security clearances until the individual was cleared of any wrong doing. I have seen 12 agents assigned to a surviellance of a LTCDR A-6 pilot who was a decorated Vietnam combat pilot who unfortuately enjoyed wearing ladies garments.
In the bad old days, those agents would make covert entries into the suspect's home and search for incriminating evidence. A patent violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.
The reason for the case catagory.....fell under the Counter-Intelligence/Counter-Espionage catagory (Cat 8), with subfix (G) for Gay (I assume).
When I queried why we did these cases at all, particularly when there was no security clearance involved and pointed out the violation of the suspect's rights during the covert search....I was chastized for having a bad attitude.
Now days....it takes some sort of evidence to support the allegation and the issue is "did the member make an issue of his/her sexual orientation that brought attention to that orientation" and not merely being identified as being homosexual. That is a great difference which you have missed.
In the old days...all the cops had to do was demonstrate you "were" a homosexual and the hammer fell upon your head. That is not the case now.
I would suggest the old days is when the Black Mail issue was its strongest. That is exactly one of the arguments I made and was rebuffed. If no stigma is attached to that conduct then there is no risk of blackmail and by doing investigations we set up an environment whereby folks can be blackmailed.
You will also recall the current security concerns stem from Philby, Blount, and the damage that resulted from that penetration of the West's intelligence services by the Russians. Thus the concern is not without basis although linking the two issues directly is tenous at best.
Years ago when it was a sin to be other than heterosexual in the US military, the Navy's investigative arm classified those investigations under catagory 8G. They were proper criminal investigations per the SOP of the investigative service. The mere allegation was enough for an investigation and withdrawing all security clearances until the individual was cleared of any wrong doing. I have seen 12 agents assigned to a surviellance of a LTCDR A-6 pilot who was a decorated Vietnam combat pilot who unfortuately enjoyed wearing ladies garments.
In the bad old days, those agents would make covert entries into the suspect's home and search for incriminating evidence. A patent violation of their Fourth Amendment rights.
The reason for the case catagory.....fell under the Counter-Intelligence/Counter-Espionage catagory (Cat 8), with subfix (G) for Gay (I assume).
When I queried why we did these cases at all, particularly when there was no security clearance involved and pointed out the violation of the suspect's rights during the covert search....I was chastized for having a bad attitude.
Now days....it takes some sort of evidence to support the allegation and the issue is "did the member make an issue of his/her sexual orientation that brought attention to that orientation" and not merely being identified as being homosexual. That is a great difference which you have missed.
In the old days...all the cops had to do was demonstrate you "were" a homosexual and the hammer fell upon your head. That is not the case now.
I would suggest the old days is when the Black Mail issue was its strongest. That is exactly one of the arguments I made and was rebuffed. If no stigma is attached to that conduct then there is no risk of blackmail and by doing investigations we set up an environment whereby folks can be blackmailed.
You will also recall the current security concerns stem from Philby, Blount, and the damage that resulted from that penetration of the West's intelligence services by the Russians. Thus the concern is not without basis although linking the two issues directly is tenous at best.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sasless, I can't see that anything has actually changed for our American cousins. DoD policy is:
Therefore, unless a gay chap is absolutely celibate and never even socialises with other gay people, he is fair game for investigation, witch-hunting and dismissal. There have therefore been cases of people being seen entering a gay bar and that is considered to be behaviour, as you say
It is purely the threat of dismissal that creates the potential for blackmail or threat to security. Perhaps the USA would be doing rather better in Iraq if it hadn't thrown out 20+ Arabic linguists, among others.
“Policy on Homosexual Conduct in the Armed Forces”
The Department of Defense has long held that, as a general rule, homosexuality is incompatible with military service because it interferes with the factors critical to combat effectiveness, including unit morale, unit cohesion and individual privacy. Nevertheless, the Department of Defense also recognizes that individuals with a homosexual orientation have served with distinction in the armed services of the United States.
Therefore, it is the policy of the Department of Defense to judge the suitability of persons to serve in the armed forces on the basis of their conduct. Homosexual conduct will be grounds for separation from the military services. Sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter, and homosexual orientation is not a bar to service entry or continued service unless manifested by homosexual conduct.
The Department of Defense has long held that, as a general rule, homosexuality is incompatible with military service because it interferes with the factors critical to combat effectiveness, including unit morale, unit cohesion and individual privacy. Nevertheless, the Department of Defense also recognizes that individuals with a homosexual orientation have served with distinction in the armed services of the United States.
Therefore, it is the policy of the Department of Defense to judge the suitability of persons to serve in the armed forces on the basis of their conduct. Homosexual conduct will be grounds for separation from the military services. Sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter, and homosexual orientation is not a bar to service entry or continued service unless manifested by homosexual conduct.
"did the member make an issue of his/her sexual orientation that brought attention to that orientation"
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cosford
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AN
I take your point and it is well made but as a serving member of the forces I do not believe that there are witch hunts in this day and age. I know several people who have, to use that unfortunate cliche, come out and I can not see how it has harmed their careers. There is one male SNCO that I know of who now comes to work wearing size 10 court shoes and a skirt, who cares? Certainly anyone who works for me has nothing to fear as long as they do their job as well as the next person. I have a feeling from the tenor of your posts that you have experienced problems or prejudice in the past and you have my sympathy, but I am just naive enough to believe that the service has moved on. Please excuse my cheap jokes in an earlier post but the two Naval guys in question could have got married in Burton's finest and not brought attention to themselves. I don't really care, I think I have made that point, but several of my civilian friends find all this highly amusing and I get annoyed at the thought of our services being held up for ridicule. AN, SASless I thank you for some thought provoking coments and bid you goodnight. Time to open a bottle and chill out
I take your point and it is well made but as a serving member of the forces I do not believe that there are witch hunts in this day and age. I know several people who have, to use that unfortunate cliche, come out and I can not see how it has harmed their careers. There is one male SNCO that I know of who now comes to work wearing size 10 court shoes and a skirt, who cares? Certainly anyone who works for me has nothing to fear as long as they do their job as well as the next person. I have a feeling from the tenor of your posts that you have experienced problems or prejudice in the past and you have my sympathy, but I am just naive enough to believe that the service has moved on. Please excuse my cheap jokes in an earlier post but the two Naval guys in question could have got married in Burton's finest and not brought attention to themselves. I don't really care, I think I have made that point, but several of my civilian friends find all this highly amusing and I get annoyed at the thought of our services being held up for ridicule. AN, SASless I thank you for some thought provoking coments and bid you goodnight. Time to open a bottle and chill out
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Travelodge account holder
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2SL's Stonewall Speech
Without wishing to preach to the converted or ill-informed, please permit me to post 2SL's full speech below and you'll all be able to see what minute segments the Press grabbed hold of, expanded and proffered their own conclusions.
STONEWALL CONFERENCE – THU 16 MAR 06 - "SETTING THE STANDARD:
REAPING THE REWARDS OF A GAY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE"
I thought I would give you a quick snapshot this afternoon of the very real progress and change that has been made in the Royal Navy across a wide field of diversity issues. And this isn’t just change for change’s sake or to appear politically correct. Today the Royal Navy has men and women serving around the Globe – in the Gulf, the South Atlantic, the Caribbean, the Baltic, the Mediterranean, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, and Iraq – serving at sea, under the sea, in the air and on the land. Some are working in small teams, some with other nations, many in ships and submarines. As I speak we have some 4000 people deployed away from these shores on important tasks, often in adverse and sometimes hazardous circumstances.
The British Armed Forces have a proud tradition and a reputation for excellence. Our people are required to make a personal commitment not asked of those in most walks of life and they must have the full trust and respect of their colleagues to operate effectively in often difficult and dangerous circumstances. Whilst we are necessarily a hierarchical organisation, based on robust codes of discipline, our basic ethos is nevertheless all about teamwork and the need to get the very best out of that team. To do so, we have to make sure that the team is performing at peak efficiency – delivering what we call Operational Capability – and that in turn depends upon the quality of our individual men and women.
As in any organisation, those individuals need nurturing, so that they give of their best and are, in turn, rewarded for their effort. Nurture includes the freedom to be themselves and thus the Defence Diversity Mission is to create a culture that encourages and enables people throughout society to join us, and remain with us. To make their distinctive contributions and achieve their full potential; a culture that does not tolerate any form of intimidation, humiliation, harassment, bullying or abuse and that will ensure that each individual is treated fairly, with dignity and respect.
Our mission is to break down barriers of discrimination, prejudice, fear and misunderstanding. Not only is this morally right it is also for us in a fighting force the best way to deliver maximum operational effectiveness.
I intend to share with you over the next 5 or 10 minutes our experiences and thoughts on Sexual Orientation issues – and I’ll also mention the range of initiatives in which we are engaged concerning all aspects of Diversity & Equality in the workplace.
First of all, I should point out that the principles and benefits of Diversity are not entirely new for us. As long ago as 1419, King Henry V stated that: "No manner of man shall insult another because of the country he comes from, whether he is French, English, Welsh or Irish or from any other country…” clearly he had no idea about the strong passions engendered by the Rugby 6 Nations competition!
But also at the Battle of Trafalgar, the 200th anniversary of which the country celebrated only last year, HMS VICTORY's crew of 850 included people of 32 different nationalities (Admiral Nelson even managed to recruit 2 Swiss sailors, a nation not normally noted for maritime endeavour!).
There was said to be at least one woman onboard and Nelson, of course, was famed for inviting his Flag Captain Hardy to kiss him on his death bed. Perhaps he was ahead of his time in more ways than one! But he was certainly an inspirational leader who was able to gel a fighting force, from all walks of life, into a professional and efficient team that ultimately achieved such an important victory.
In the field of Sexual Orientation, the modern Royal Navy has come a long way since our less enlightened days pre-2000 when lesbians and gay men were not permitted to serve in the Armed Forces. This meant that a good number of highly capable and professional people were prevented from pursuing a challenging, stimulating and rewarding career. At the same time, of course, we in the Royal Navy were unable to capitalise on a rich source of talent and skill.
With the turning of the tide in 2000, and then the introduction of the Employment Equality Regulations 2003, a Sexual Orientation Working Group was established to conduct various strands of work – including reviewing Diversity & Equality policy, interaction with Gay media, and ways of increasing education and awareness of gay issues.
Shortly thereafter, Gay and Lesbian Social Groups were formed in Portsmouth and Faslane, to provide mutual support and companionship for Gay service personnel. However, RN policy tended to be along 'don't ask, don't tell' lines, with emphasis on the view that sexual orientation was very much a private matter. We hadn't quite worked out what to do if, having said we didn't want to know, we then found out!
We very soon came to realise that sexual orientation was not something that could just be put to one side because there is potentially a direct impact on operational efficiency. When people can’t give 100% to their job because they are being intimidated, or they are scared, or they are preoccupied with hiding their true identities rather than playing a full part in the team, operational efficiency is degraded.
In late 2004, the RN commenced an ever-strengthening relationship with Stonewall, eventually joining its Diversity Champions programme in February 2005. We also managed to achieve a first-time 75th position in their Workplace Equality Index last year, and I have every intention of moving up the scale this coming year. When I think of the big corporate names that did not make the list, I am even more proud of our initial achievement and this public recognition of our work.
Since then, policy has shifted towards creating an environment where Gays and Lesbians can now feel free to 'come out' if they wish, without fear of being harassed or bullied – and, I am pleased to say, in successive staff attitude surveys conducted since, responses from male and female personnel across the Navy indicate that a substantial majority have simply taken this in their stride.
Firstly, the advent of the Civil Partnership Act at the end of last year means that Service personnel in a registered partnership may now enjoy exactly the same benefits as married personnel, including Service Families Accommodation. Indeed, only 12 days ago, one of our sailors 'tied the knot' onboard the old ironclad warship HMS WARRIOR in Portsmouth.
Secondly, the tireless efforts of one of my officers in promoting and raising awareness of gay issues in the Royal Navy were recently recognised in the New Year Honours List. Yes, this was about his work for the Gay community, but it was also recognition of something we hold central to our ethos – Leadership.
And most recently, we held a conference for RN Gay & Lesbian at the end of January, attended by over 50 personnel – including a small number from the RAF and Army. A range of issues were debated over the 2-day event, with support from my Diversity and Equality policy team, and feedback has indicated that attendees benefited and enjoyed themselves immensely.
Meanwhile, work is now underway to explore the establishment of more comprehensive support and contact networks for the Service Gay community perhaps drawing on our experience of support networks already in place, including a highly successful one for disabled Civilian employees and another for Service and civilian women.
As for other initiatives on the drawing board my Policy Team is currently investigating the feasibility of utilising drama-based training resources, to reach some of those whose culture and behaviour need to be brought into line with 21st Century thinking. We believe that such training can be a powerful and innovative medium that can easily be adapted into Service scenarios.
I am also pleased to be able to confirm that my Diversity Team is working with Gay officers and Stonewall to investigate an overt Service presence at the forthcoming EuroPride festival in London.
I am heartened by the fact that a significant number of RN Lesbian & Gay personnel are very keen to march in uniform in the main parade and share in the celebration – firstly, because they wish to demonstrate their pride in wearing their uniform as members of their Armed Service, but also because they are keen to give a strong personal signal that the Royal Navy is an inclusive employer of choice that welcomes and actively champions diversity in its workforce.
I said that I would mention examples of other areas of diversity and equality work where we are making progress.
- We have a strengthening relationship with Black and Ethnic Minority Community Leaders in the Portsmouth area which has resulted in a jointly-owned Action Plan, providing a range of initiatives aimed at raising the profile of the RN and MOD Civil Service across the BME community.
- Benchmarking programmes continue apace – for example, for the past 2 years, all 3 Armed Services have been in the top 5 of public sector organisations under the purview of the Race for Opportunity organisation.
- To ensure reflection of the multi-faith society in which we all live, the Muslim Civilian Chaplain to the Armed Forces, Imam Asim Hafiz was the first Armed Forces Chaplain of another faith to lead prayers during a Royal Navy parade recently. Imam Asim was recruited along with a Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh Chaplain to fulfil a tri-Service role following a national recruiting campaign last year.
In sum, my RN Diversity Policy team is constantly reviewing and refining policy to ensure that no stone is left unturned in the goal of ensuring that all Service personnel can work in an environment which is free from harassment, intimidation and bullying and where they are treated at all times with dignity and respect. There is no doubt that young people entering the Armed Forces will adapt more readily to the military ethos and ways of working if their fellow sailors, soldiers and airmen reflect and welcome the diversity of the society from which they have been recruited.
Of course, changing workplace culture is a challenge in any big organisation – the RN numbers over 40,000 men and women from all walks of life – and there will always be those who harbour some ill-founded prejudice or other. I therefore regard continuous education as crucial in ensuring that all our people understand and put into practice our Diversity & Equality policies. Professional training is constantly under review to ensure that every opportunity is taken to reinforce the message.
The Navy works because it works as a team, and that team now includes gay and lesbian personnel. It was only 7 years ago that the MOD was taken to the European Court of Human Rights to overturn the ban on gays serving in the military and only 5 years later that the Royal Navy joined Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme and appeared in their Lesbian and Gay Recruitment guide. Times are changing, and very much for the better in my view.
There is still much work to be done, but I am determined that the Royal Navy will continue to forge ahead. We now have good, robust policies in place for a whole range of issues, and extensive work continues in conjunction with organisations like Stonewall and the Equal Opportunities Commission to resolve others.
Our headmark remains constant: the Royal Navy strives to be a top-class employer, looking for top-class people, and embraces diversity and equality in the work place. I am proud of our commitment to inclusiveness and I personally will continue to champion it.
STONEWALL CONFERENCE – THU 16 MAR 06 - "SETTING THE STANDARD:
REAPING THE REWARDS OF A GAY-FRIENDLY WORKPLACE"
I thought I would give you a quick snapshot this afternoon of the very real progress and change that has been made in the Royal Navy across a wide field of diversity issues. And this isn’t just change for change’s sake or to appear politically correct. Today the Royal Navy has men and women serving around the Globe – in the Gulf, the South Atlantic, the Caribbean, the Baltic, the Mediterranean, Sierra Leone, Afghanistan, and Iraq – serving at sea, under the sea, in the air and on the land. Some are working in small teams, some with other nations, many in ships and submarines. As I speak we have some 4000 people deployed away from these shores on important tasks, often in adverse and sometimes hazardous circumstances.
The British Armed Forces have a proud tradition and a reputation for excellence. Our people are required to make a personal commitment not asked of those in most walks of life and they must have the full trust and respect of their colleagues to operate effectively in often difficult and dangerous circumstances. Whilst we are necessarily a hierarchical organisation, based on robust codes of discipline, our basic ethos is nevertheless all about teamwork and the need to get the very best out of that team. To do so, we have to make sure that the team is performing at peak efficiency – delivering what we call Operational Capability – and that in turn depends upon the quality of our individual men and women.
As in any organisation, those individuals need nurturing, so that they give of their best and are, in turn, rewarded for their effort. Nurture includes the freedom to be themselves and thus the Defence Diversity Mission is to create a culture that encourages and enables people throughout society to join us, and remain with us. To make their distinctive contributions and achieve their full potential; a culture that does not tolerate any form of intimidation, humiliation, harassment, bullying or abuse and that will ensure that each individual is treated fairly, with dignity and respect.
Our mission is to break down barriers of discrimination, prejudice, fear and misunderstanding. Not only is this morally right it is also for us in a fighting force the best way to deliver maximum operational effectiveness.
I intend to share with you over the next 5 or 10 minutes our experiences and thoughts on Sexual Orientation issues – and I’ll also mention the range of initiatives in which we are engaged concerning all aspects of Diversity & Equality in the workplace.
First of all, I should point out that the principles and benefits of Diversity are not entirely new for us. As long ago as 1419, King Henry V stated that: "No manner of man shall insult another because of the country he comes from, whether he is French, English, Welsh or Irish or from any other country…” clearly he had no idea about the strong passions engendered by the Rugby 6 Nations competition!
But also at the Battle of Trafalgar, the 200th anniversary of which the country celebrated only last year, HMS VICTORY's crew of 850 included people of 32 different nationalities (Admiral Nelson even managed to recruit 2 Swiss sailors, a nation not normally noted for maritime endeavour!).
There was said to be at least one woman onboard and Nelson, of course, was famed for inviting his Flag Captain Hardy to kiss him on his death bed. Perhaps he was ahead of his time in more ways than one! But he was certainly an inspirational leader who was able to gel a fighting force, from all walks of life, into a professional and efficient team that ultimately achieved such an important victory.
In the field of Sexual Orientation, the modern Royal Navy has come a long way since our less enlightened days pre-2000 when lesbians and gay men were not permitted to serve in the Armed Forces. This meant that a good number of highly capable and professional people were prevented from pursuing a challenging, stimulating and rewarding career. At the same time, of course, we in the Royal Navy were unable to capitalise on a rich source of talent and skill.
With the turning of the tide in 2000, and then the introduction of the Employment Equality Regulations 2003, a Sexual Orientation Working Group was established to conduct various strands of work – including reviewing Diversity & Equality policy, interaction with Gay media, and ways of increasing education and awareness of gay issues.
Shortly thereafter, Gay and Lesbian Social Groups were formed in Portsmouth and Faslane, to provide mutual support and companionship for Gay service personnel. However, RN policy tended to be along 'don't ask, don't tell' lines, with emphasis on the view that sexual orientation was very much a private matter. We hadn't quite worked out what to do if, having said we didn't want to know, we then found out!
We very soon came to realise that sexual orientation was not something that could just be put to one side because there is potentially a direct impact on operational efficiency. When people can’t give 100% to their job because they are being intimidated, or they are scared, or they are preoccupied with hiding their true identities rather than playing a full part in the team, operational efficiency is degraded.
In late 2004, the RN commenced an ever-strengthening relationship with Stonewall, eventually joining its Diversity Champions programme in February 2005. We also managed to achieve a first-time 75th position in their Workplace Equality Index last year, and I have every intention of moving up the scale this coming year. When I think of the big corporate names that did not make the list, I am even more proud of our initial achievement and this public recognition of our work.
Since then, policy has shifted towards creating an environment where Gays and Lesbians can now feel free to 'come out' if they wish, without fear of being harassed or bullied – and, I am pleased to say, in successive staff attitude surveys conducted since, responses from male and female personnel across the Navy indicate that a substantial majority have simply taken this in their stride.
Firstly, the advent of the Civil Partnership Act at the end of last year means that Service personnel in a registered partnership may now enjoy exactly the same benefits as married personnel, including Service Families Accommodation. Indeed, only 12 days ago, one of our sailors 'tied the knot' onboard the old ironclad warship HMS WARRIOR in Portsmouth.
Secondly, the tireless efforts of one of my officers in promoting and raising awareness of gay issues in the Royal Navy were recently recognised in the New Year Honours List. Yes, this was about his work for the Gay community, but it was also recognition of something we hold central to our ethos – Leadership.
And most recently, we held a conference for RN Gay & Lesbian at the end of January, attended by over 50 personnel – including a small number from the RAF and Army. A range of issues were debated over the 2-day event, with support from my Diversity and Equality policy team, and feedback has indicated that attendees benefited and enjoyed themselves immensely.
Meanwhile, work is now underway to explore the establishment of more comprehensive support and contact networks for the Service Gay community perhaps drawing on our experience of support networks already in place, including a highly successful one for disabled Civilian employees and another for Service and civilian women.
As for other initiatives on the drawing board my Policy Team is currently investigating the feasibility of utilising drama-based training resources, to reach some of those whose culture and behaviour need to be brought into line with 21st Century thinking. We believe that such training can be a powerful and innovative medium that can easily be adapted into Service scenarios.
I am also pleased to be able to confirm that my Diversity Team is working with Gay officers and Stonewall to investigate an overt Service presence at the forthcoming EuroPride festival in London.
I am heartened by the fact that a significant number of RN Lesbian & Gay personnel are very keen to march in uniform in the main parade and share in the celebration – firstly, because they wish to demonstrate their pride in wearing their uniform as members of their Armed Service, but also because they are keen to give a strong personal signal that the Royal Navy is an inclusive employer of choice that welcomes and actively champions diversity in its workforce.
I said that I would mention examples of other areas of diversity and equality work where we are making progress.
- We have a strengthening relationship with Black and Ethnic Minority Community Leaders in the Portsmouth area which has resulted in a jointly-owned Action Plan, providing a range of initiatives aimed at raising the profile of the RN and MOD Civil Service across the BME community.
- Benchmarking programmes continue apace – for example, for the past 2 years, all 3 Armed Services have been in the top 5 of public sector organisations under the purview of the Race for Opportunity organisation.
- To ensure reflection of the multi-faith society in which we all live, the Muslim Civilian Chaplain to the Armed Forces, Imam Asim Hafiz was the first Armed Forces Chaplain of another faith to lead prayers during a Royal Navy parade recently. Imam Asim was recruited along with a Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh Chaplain to fulfil a tri-Service role following a national recruiting campaign last year.
In sum, my RN Diversity Policy team is constantly reviewing and refining policy to ensure that no stone is left unturned in the goal of ensuring that all Service personnel can work in an environment which is free from harassment, intimidation and bullying and where they are treated at all times with dignity and respect. There is no doubt that young people entering the Armed Forces will adapt more readily to the military ethos and ways of working if their fellow sailors, soldiers and airmen reflect and welcome the diversity of the society from which they have been recruited.
Of course, changing workplace culture is a challenge in any big organisation – the RN numbers over 40,000 men and women from all walks of life – and there will always be those who harbour some ill-founded prejudice or other. I therefore regard continuous education as crucial in ensuring that all our people understand and put into practice our Diversity & Equality policies. Professional training is constantly under review to ensure that every opportunity is taken to reinforce the message.
The Navy works because it works as a team, and that team now includes gay and lesbian personnel. It was only 7 years ago that the MOD was taken to the European Court of Human Rights to overturn the ban on gays serving in the military and only 5 years later that the Royal Navy joined Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme and appeared in their Lesbian and Gay Recruitment guide. Times are changing, and very much for the better in my view.
There is still much work to be done, but I am determined that the Royal Navy will continue to forge ahead. We now have good, robust policies in place for a whole range of issues, and extensive work continues in conjunction with organisations like Stonewall and the Equal Opportunities Commission to resolve others.
Our headmark remains constant: the Royal Navy strives to be a top-class employer, looking for top-class people, and embraces diversity and equality in the work place. I am proud of our commitment to inclusiveness and I personally will continue to champion it.
Oh FFS, just drop it. Live and let live.
And to hell with all the heavy-handed diversity-policy quangos and their PC bolleaux.
I may have worked with gay personnel in the past - I neither know nor do I now care.
I admire your way of dealing with such claptrap, An T. I have an equal disdain of tsuch - and also the lunacy of the many enviro-fundamentalist policies of the nanny state Bliarite Republic.
Yellow road diggers' jackets on the flight line - of course. Most assuredly! But body armour in hostile operational theatres - err no. There is a 'managed risk' policy for that, it seems.
And to hell with all the heavy-handed diversity-policy quangos and their PC bolleaux.
I may have worked with gay personnel in the past - I neither know nor do I now care.
I admire your way of dealing with such claptrap, An T. I have an equal disdain of tsuch - and also the lunacy of the many enviro-fundamentalist policies of the nanny state Bliarite Republic.
Yellow road diggers' jackets on the flight line - of course. Most assuredly! But body armour in hostile operational theatres - err no. There is a 'managed risk' policy for that, it seems.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone would think that the Armed Forces had just realised woken up to this gay thing....which has been around at least since Leonidas and the Spartans earned their epitaph at Thermopylae. I bet no one would have dared call into question their "operational effectiveness".
The eminently sensible UK policy implemented in 2000 was long overdue, but it is of concern that it may be inflated by the single-issue rights industry (not just limited to the very diverse group of people collectively known as "gay" - is labelling by one's sexual preference really appropriate?) to the detriment of this policy of openess (if preferred to privacy - an individual's choice) and non-discrimination.
It is interesting that role-playing sessions are being considered, when the scenario-based guidance on ROE previously given as a part of CCS has been removed in case it can be used by a defendant as a justification for opening fire. Beagle's point made with regard to the skewed approach to safety and rights at home vs in theatre is most appropriate.
The eminently sensible UK policy implemented in 2000 was long overdue, but it is of concern that it may be inflated by the single-issue rights industry (not just limited to the very diverse group of people collectively known as "gay" - is labelling by one's sexual preference really appropriate?) to the detriment of this policy of openess (if preferred to privacy - an individual's choice) and non-discrimination.
It is interesting that role-playing sessions are being considered, when the scenario-based guidance on ROE previously given as a part of CCS has been removed in case it can be used by a defendant as a justification for opening fire. Beagle's point made with regard to the skewed approach to safety and rights at home vs in theatre is most appropriate.
Gentleman Aviator
penetration of the West's intelligence services by the Russians.
ooh err missus.....slightly more seriously, ISTR regulations (QRs?) on wearing uniform in public which specifically prohibit:
a. Occasions where fancy dress is worn
AND/Or
b. Occasions where alcohol is consumed in public
...isn't the Gay Pride March likely to be both????
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Teeteringhead,
Good banter, I'll come to your point in a moment
SASless:
In the case of sexuality, conduct and proclivity are NOT normally mutually exclusive. I identify as homosexual, and would find it very difficult to totally suppress my sexuality. As An T said, you're suggesting that homosexuals should be celibate and make no reference to their private life. I wonder if you'd care to try that? Such suppression would, in my opinion, be considerably more harmful to unit cohesion than personnel who are honest and open about their sexuality. Who wants to work with someone who is depressed and anxious because they have to keep their relationship with their partner a total secret? I'd rather work with someone who acknowledges his home life, is not overt about it, and who will not whinge at banter. Sad to say, DADT - in addition to banishing some very, very talented personnel from the US forces - is probably creating a significant mental health problem for the gay personnel who want nothing more than to serve their country and be happy.
Now, Teeteringhead, the Snr Personnel Exec group is currently studying a widely-supported proposal for gay personnel to participate in the 2006 EuroPride parade in London. I am privy to the outcomes of some of the discussions, and 2SL's comments are now a matter of record.
SPEG is studying QRs and relevant Service law very closely indeed. There is no QR stating that uniform is not to be worn in the presence of other people wearing fancy dress - I think you're recalling a QR that states that uniform cannot itself be worn as fancy dress unless it is of a clearly obsolete and unofficial pattern.
The QRs causing the most consternation are those concerning political activities by Service personnel. Under the Crown Servants Act it is an offence for military personnel or other servants of the Crown to declare, display or otherwise support any specific political objective where such activity is likely to cause a conflict of interests or to bring the Crown into disrepute. Furthermore, under QRs it is an offence for personnel to attend overtly political events in uniform. EuroPride concludes with a rally which is deemed by the SPEG to be political in nature - personnel will therefore NOT be allowed to attend the rally in uniform.
The question the SPEG is considering is whether the march prior to the rally is in direct support of political action, or whether it is simply a Mardi Gras-style pride parade with no specific objectives. That question will be settled in due course.
Another difficulty raised by a member of the SPEG is the risk of personnel becoming targets for abuse, at the parade, at work and in civvy street, for wearing uniform in support of the current settlement for gays in the forces. Some people - I suspect mostly Sun readers - actually believe that gay personnel are now being positively favoured wrt housing policy and promotions. I think it's a rather ephemeral risk, though, and I certainly don't think it will prove to be a show-stopper.
Good banter, I'll come to your point in a moment
SASless:
"... but at least we take the view that it is "conduct" and not "proclivity" that is un-acceptable."
Now, Teeteringhead, the Snr Personnel Exec group is currently studying a widely-supported proposal for gay personnel to participate in the 2006 EuroPride parade in London. I am privy to the outcomes of some of the discussions, and 2SL's comments are now a matter of record.
SPEG is studying QRs and relevant Service law very closely indeed. There is no QR stating that uniform is not to be worn in the presence of other people wearing fancy dress - I think you're recalling a QR that states that uniform cannot itself be worn as fancy dress unless it is of a clearly obsolete and unofficial pattern.
The QRs causing the most consternation are those concerning political activities by Service personnel. Under the Crown Servants Act it is an offence for military personnel or other servants of the Crown to declare, display or otherwise support any specific political objective where such activity is likely to cause a conflict of interests or to bring the Crown into disrepute. Furthermore, under QRs it is an offence for personnel to attend overtly political events in uniform. EuroPride concludes with a rally which is deemed by the SPEG to be political in nature - personnel will therefore NOT be allowed to attend the rally in uniform.
The question the SPEG is considering is whether the march prior to the rally is in direct support of political action, or whether it is simply a Mardi Gras-style pride parade with no specific objectives. That question will be settled in due course.
Another difficulty raised by a member of the SPEG is the risk of personnel becoming targets for abuse, at the parade, at work and in civvy street, for wearing uniform in support of the current settlement for gays in the forces. Some people - I suspect mostly Sun readers - actually believe that gay personnel are now being positively favoured wrt housing policy and promotions. I think it's a rather ephemeral risk, though, and I certainly don't think it will prove to be a show-stopper.
Gentleman Aviator
I agree with the sentiments in your post entirely t_e, but will it not in practice be difficult to separate march from rally??
And are not marches themselves political in a sense? Would I have been allowed to join the Countryside March in uniform? I think not.
All that said, I know that 2SL is a top bloke (having served with him briefly in the past) and if they (whoever the "they" might be) want to approve it, then it will happen. (I'm sure AMP and AG are good guys too!)
Make it so!
And are not marches themselves political in a sense? Would I have been allowed to join the Countryside March in uniform? I think not.
All that said, I know that 2SL is a top bloke (having served with him briefly in the past) and if they (whoever the "they" might be) want to approve it, then it will happen. (I'm sure AMP and AG are good guys too!)
Make it so!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very interesting post by Tablet Eraser that has ramifications beyond the EuroPride activities, as it shows the current way of thinking at a high level.
Essentially, public participation of Service personnel in the EuroPride march is a legitimate activity associated with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which brings with it the requirement upon the state to respect aspects of private life including sexual identity and sexuality and corresponding rights to develop relationships with whom one chooses.
Article 11 of the same Act grants the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions. This right is also being exercised with participation in the EuroPride march.
Both Article 8 and Article 11 allow for the imposition of lawful restrictions, most commonly with regard to the Armed Forces. Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the Armed Forces and the ban on gays serving (arising through court actions brought by those dismissed on the basis of their sexuality) have directly led to the removal of the discriminatory ban, which is recognised as having breached human rights.
There is growing pressure at all ranks to establish a Federation - along the lines of the Police Federation, with a bar on strike action - that will represent Armed Forces personnel on matters of conditions of service. This has been debated extensively on the ARRSE website http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...c/t=30482.html with questions asked in Parliament and in the media.
If the powers-that-be are considering allowing participation in legitimate non-partisan activities like EuroPride - which are associated firmly with human rights - then perhaps this is indicative of how the relationship between the Armed Forces and society should develop. Fundamental rights asserted by the rest of society should not be denied to Service personnel unless there is a clear conflict with operational effectiveness. The arguments against gays serving openly in the military have been ridiculed (the DADT policy is completely discredited) and most of these arguments were based upon stereotypical and prejudiced interpretations of operational effectiveness and morale.
The gay personnel who have taken a public stand on an issue that can still (sadly) cause controversy deserve the recognition they have received. Their experiences and knowledge would be invaluable in advancing further human rights, in particular the right to association and the right to join a Federation. This would also serve two further purposes - it would help dispel any misconceived notion that gay personnel were simply interested in "their own rights" and it would ensure that a Federation was truly representative.
The views of those involved in the EuroPride deliberations with regard to the establishment and role of a Federation would be of great interest in the Federation debate.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...c/t=30482.html
Essentially, public participation of Service personnel in the EuroPride march is a legitimate activity associated with Article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which brings with it the requirement upon the state to respect aspects of private life including sexual identity and sexuality and corresponding rights to develop relationships with whom one chooses.
Article 11 of the same Act grants the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions. This right is also being exercised with participation in the EuroPride march.
Both Article 8 and Article 11 allow for the imposition of lawful restrictions, most commonly with regard to the Armed Forces. Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the Armed Forces and the ban on gays serving (arising through court actions brought by those dismissed on the basis of their sexuality) have directly led to the removal of the discriminatory ban, which is recognised as having breached human rights.
There is growing pressure at all ranks to establish a Federation - along the lines of the Police Federation, with a bar on strike action - that will represent Armed Forces personnel on matters of conditions of service. This has been debated extensively on the ARRSE website http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...c/t=30482.html with questions asked in Parliament and in the media.
If the powers-that-be are considering allowing participation in legitimate non-partisan activities like EuroPride - which are associated firmly with human rights - then perhaps this is indicative of how the relationship between the Armed Forces and society should develop. Fundamental rights asserted by the rest of society should not be denied to Service personnel unless there is a clear conflict with operational effectiveness. The arguments against gays serving openly in the military have been ridiculed (the DADT policy is completely discredited) and most of these arguments were based upon stereotypical and prejudiced interpretations of operational effectiveness and morale.
The gay personnel who have taken a public stand on an issue that can still (sadly) cause controversy deserve the recognition they have received. Their experiences and knowledge would be invaluable in advancing further human rights, in particular the right to association and the right to join a Federation. This would also serve two further purposes - it would help dispel any misconceived notion that gay personnel were simply interested in "their own rights" and it would ensure that a Federation was truly representative.
The views of those involved in the EuroPride deliberations with regard to the establishment and role of a Federation would be of great interest in the Federation debate.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/...c/t=30482.html
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Middle East
Age: 51
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, I would love to join the march, there's nothing I love more then a good march but, I think my A-line uniform skirt may limit my pace a bit, don't want to be stuck at the rear and miss all the action. Hmmmm.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what's next?
Striking of a new LSGCM - Long Suffering Gay Complicity Medal
Will it be a pink ribbon or an ear stud to be worn on AOC's parades - or have AOC's AFI's been replaced by Gay Parades ?
Loving many, Trusting a few, Just checking who's in my canoe!
Striking of a new LSGCM - Long Suffering Gay Complicity Medal
Will it be a pink ribbon or an ear stud to be worn on AOC's parades - or have AOC's AFI's been replaced by Gay Parades ?
Loving many, Trusting a few, Just checking who's in my canoe!
