MOD Diversity Chief
For those with a little more than an hour to spare, here's a suggestion that the so-called Diversity Chief is only about 90 years behind the curve:
It's a long way from the days when the Second Sea Lord's response to a request from a Service minister for details of how many non white serving personnel there were was to the effect that "We don't keep any such records, we don't need to, and we don't intend to".
Additionally, and looking at Alan West's comments in the Mail, it's interesting to recall that he was very prominent in making the case for integrating the WRNS into the Royal Navy.
Jack
It's a long way from the days when the Second Sea Lord's response to a request from a Service minister for details of how many non white serving personnel there were was to the effect that "We don't keep any such records, we don't need to, and we don't intend to".
Additionally, and looking at Alan West's comments in the Mail, it's interesting to recall that he was very prominent in making the case for integrating the WRNS into the Royal Navy.
Jack
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,837
Received 2,805 Likes
on
1,195 Posts
Here is one, Diversity Chief
As the head of the Indian tribes and Clans were normally male and French leaders as in Kings were always Male, surely by using that title she is in herself failing to be Diverse!
https://www.etymonline.com/word/chief
c. 1300, "head, leader, captain; the principal or most important part of anything;" from Old French chief "leader, ruler, head" of something, "capital city" (10c., Modern French chef), from Vulgar Latin *capum, from Latin caput "head," also "leader, chief person; summit; capital city" (from PIE root *kaput- "head"). Meaning "head of a clan" is from 1570s; later extended to headmen of Native American tribes (by 1713; William Penn, 1680s, called them kings). Commander-in-chief is attested from 1660s.
https://www.etymonline.com/word/chief
That's where you're wrong. If you were a major country (let's say the USA) facing a hypothetical massive shortage in a critical aviation role (let's say pilots) then the ability to recruit talent from all walks of life might be seen as vital.
If we in the UK were to have an underperforming recruitment organisation (hypothetically of course) can you not agree that the ability to recruit sufficient bums on seats of whatever gender or background might be vital to our ability to fulfil whatever role we choose for our defence organisation.
The military is an increasingly unattractive option in career terms and anything that we can do to broaden appeal gets my vote, notwithstanding the article that the OP pointed out which is probably (let's face it) a hatchet job by a rag.
If we in the UK were to have an underperforming recruitment organisation (hypothetically of course) can you not agree that the ability to recruit sufficient bums on seats of whatever gender or background might be vital to our ability to fulfil whatever role we choose for our defence organisation.
The military is an increasingly unattractive option in career terms and anything that we can do to broaden appeal gets my vote, notwithstanding the article that the OP pointed out which is probably (let's face it) a hatchet job by a rag.
Maybe that young person may find military life is not for them, if pronouns and gendered language are at the top of THEIR list.
And the Mail may be a bit of a rag, but at least they are shining a light on chaff like this. I don't see the Grauniad doing so.
There is an apocryphal story that when homosexuality was first accepted in the armed forces a senior naval officer was asked at a press conference how he felt about this change in policy. Allegedly, his response was "Fine, as long as they don't make it compulsory"!
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,614
Received 289 Likes
on
158 Posts
Any Mancunians in the house?
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bring back the veggie patch.
Many years ago I used to deal a lot with a big national telecommunications company. Over the years I eventually found out why sometimes things would get done and other times things would take forever - they had an ecosystem within their organisation called the "veggie patch" where all the not-so-useful and not-so-effective people would be sent. Best of all it was already brimming with diversity.
I've since concluded every big organisation needs a veggie patch. It also ticks a box.
Many years ago I used to deal a lot with a big national telecommunications company. Over the years I eventually found out why sometimes things would get done and other times things would take forever - they had an ecosystem within their organisation called the "veggie patch" where all the not-so-useful and not-so-effective people would be sent. Best of all it was already brimming with diversity.
I've since concluded every big organisation needs a veggie patch. It also ticks a box.
The MoD told the publication: 'We are committed to creating a welcoming and inclusive environment.'
I am reminded of the tale during the 39-45 unpleasantness when a bowler hatted gent walking down Whitehall was asked 'Which side is the War Office on?', and replied 'Ours, I hope.'
I somehow managed in 9 years of service to avoid my name appearing on a Form 252. My language at the time, if overheard nowadays would clearly have resulted in a plethora. Eheu fugaces labuntur anni
Take a Chill Pill
It doesn’t take much to get you lot all riled up does it?!
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
It doesn’t take much to get you lot all riled up does it?!
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
Weirdly, as the RAF got more “woke” I and my colleagues ended up deploying on more and more operations.
A damn sight more fighting-focused than the Cold War days, of which I was also a part.
But hey, what do I know.
PBA Target....perhaps the alternative strategy being utilized by the RAF is shrinking the force size to equalize the shortage of recruits rather than growing the numbers of recruits to meet the existing force structure.
Administrator
I mean, the recent review mad a big deal about army cuts not being cuts because the army hasn't been that size for a decade, so you're not wrong sasless. Does seem to be perhaps not quite the right approach however, although eventually the UK military will trend to a single mainframe AI with no personnel. If we're lucky we'll have some drones to go with the AI!
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Originally Posted by Thaihawk View Post
Rule number one, no poofters.
( am I still allowed to quote from a the sketch on Monty Python where this first appeared many decades ago)
Rule number one, no poofters.
( am I still allowed to quote from a the sketch on Monty Python where this first appeared many decades ago)
It doesn’t take much to get you lot all riled up does it?!
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
I am sure that you can see that there is also humour running through this thread. 'Back in the day' there were some behaviours that were inappropriate and out of order but some of what was said that today would be verboten was intended in good humour and was accepted as such. What we must never lose sight of is that we must always be able to criticise justifiably any poor performance and not be threatened with action due to the individual being from a 'diverse' background; I have seen this happen. The bottom line is that everyone deserves due respect and appropriate and fair interaction with others, irrespective of any 'group' within which they fall.
To quote from one of the greatest influences upon the English language, Monty Python's 'Life of Brian': "It's not so much the ability to have babies, Reg, it's the right to have babies"
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,837
Received 2,805 Likes
on
1,195 Posts
It doesn’t take much to get you lot all riled up does it?!
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
I think the outrage has gone on long enough.
I’m a serving Officer and it doesn’t bother me one bit. I agree it’s not the best way to spend the money (it may be pro rata and her work may be done in a few months). If it makes a few people happy then so be it. It will not change our fighting effectiveness for the worse so, for the sake of your blood pressure just let it slide and find something else to twist your knickers.
BV
Y-Fronts are also available upon request.
LOMCEVAK
You're right. I agree that we shouldn't try to put a stop to the humour that has been the glue that holds us all together.
I suspect, though, that this review will come and go and life will carry on which is why I, for one, will not waste any more time worrying about it.
BV
I suspect, though, that this review will come and go and life will carry on which is why I, for one, will not waste any more time worrying about it.
BV
Every time literally anything changes in the RAF:
Serving personnel: ok whatever
Veterans (who are 100% unaffected): THIS IS AN OUTRAGE THE END OF THE RAF WAY TOO PC NOW AINT MY RAF.
Serving personnel: ok whatever
Veterans (who are 100% unaffected): THIS IS AN OUTRAGE THE END OF THE RAF WAY TOO PC NOW AINT MY RAF.