What is going on at the top??
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Narfalk
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really know why people are getting so heated about this. Myself as a serving pilot in the military know I fly planes. Our new 'aviators' who support the mission know they don't fly planes. Someone who's in the flying branch must have a fair few insecurities if they're worried that those in ground roles have been given a title that may somehow make others think they get airborne as part of their job. As a qualified serving pilot you should have nothing to prove to anyone. Which does make me wonder who the majority of people commenting on this thread are.
genderless noun, ideal
The etymology from Olde English for a male and female is werman for a male, and wifman for a female. Look it up if you don’t believe that. The wer , or sometimes wir, means male and is still used in words like werwolf (or werewolf as it now spelt) which literally meant manwolf. As for wif, that means woman and so wifman is a woman person. So the word man actually means person which is why we still have gender neutral terms such as human, mankind or gendered terms like woman - all with the word man in them!
Link to one of hundreds of articles on the subject: https://www.dailywritingtips.com/wer...man-and-woman/
So a person who is working in the air environment is … drum roll … an Airman!
Now I maybe Aircrew, that some would correctly call an Aviator, but that is because I am male. If I was female, or identified as one, then I would be an Aviatrix - as per one of our most famous Aviatrixes of them all, Ms Amy Johnson. Aviatrix ? Amy Johnson Arts Trust
Women have had a tough enough time over some of the gender politics recently, surely we’re not about to cancel out the word Aviatrix that belongs to the brave female Pilots and Navigators over the past 100 years or so. Bonkers…
In fact, the ideal genderless noun contains … drum roll … man!
…..
Women have had a tough enough time over some of the gender politics recently, surely we’re not about to cancel out the word Aviatrix that belongs to the brave female Pilots and Navigators over the past 100 years or so. Bonkers…
…..
Women have had a tough enough time over some of the gender politics recently, surely we’re not about to cancel out the word Aviatrix that belongs to the brave female Pilots and Navigators over the past 100 years or so. Bonkers…
Why aviatrix? Aviator is not a Greek root and I believe the word was not coined until 1927. Predated by aviatrice and aviatress so they have seniority.
As for Aeronaut - well naut is from nautes in Ancient Greek, which means sailor. So to me, an Air Sailor is more likely to be a flyer or operator too?
PS. Trenchard, Henderson, Sykes, et al went around this buoy many times in 1918/1919 on the formation of the RAF and Airman was chosen at that point as a person of the air. So really who are we to change that?
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: Not in Lala land
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just had to register again after many moons away as I couldn't believe the woke idiocy I have recently read regading rank/title/gender pronouns being foisted on the service I loved and am now sadly becoming ashamed of.
Last Christmas's CinC 'effort' was cringeworthy, 70 Sqn boss blubbing on national TV and being given a 'that's OK type hug' by one of his SNCO's (WHAT???) a disgrace, vegan boots and now a Gender Network just confuse everybody and give those of a determination that there's other than male/female genders something toget all upset about.
Can I suggest those who wish to foist this 'progressive nonsense' on a once proud service call themselves 'AirEunuch' as it seems to adequatelty describe those who have none with which to stand against this rapid descent into ridicule.
Imagine the next war/conflict which will undoubtedly be lost because so much time will be wasted on hurt feelings there won't be time to fight....there will be more disciplinary hearings over 'hurt feelings' because someone calls another by the wrong gender, aircraft will potentially be lost because a pilot uses one of the the two gender ID's to his/her wing'person' instead of 'Ze', 'Per' and 'Hir' who then throws a hissy fit, crew cohesion falls apart because a crew 'person' takes umbrage at not being recognised as a non binary 'tomato'! Chaos will reign because no one will be able to remember who the hell is what......male/female/trans/'Ze', 'Per' and 'Hir' or any one of the other 90+ pronouns that are being made available for nutjobs to align with.
Serving today must be a daily nightmare with lunatics running the outfit.
Last Christmas's CinC 'effort' was cringeworthy, 70 Sqn boss blubbing on national TV and being given a 'that's OK type hug' by one of his SNCO's (WHAT???) a disgrace, vegan boots and now a Gender Network just confuse everybody and give those of a determination that there's other than male/female genders something toget all upset about.
Can I suggest those who wish to foist this 'progressive nonsense' on a once proud service call themselves 'AirEunuch' as it seems to adequatelty describe those who have none with which to stand against this rapid descent into ridicule.
Imagine the next war/conflict which will undoubtedly be lost because so much time will be wasted on hurt feelings there won't be time to fight....there will be more disciplinary hearings over 'hurt feelings' because someone calls another by the wrong gender, aircraft will potentially be lost because a pilot uses one of the the two gender ID's to his/her wing'person' instead of 'Ze', 'Per' and 'Hir' who then throws a hissy fit, crew cohesion falls apart because a crew 'person' takes umbrage at not being recognised as a non binary 'tomato'! Chaos will reign because no one will be able to remember who the hell is what......male/female/trans/'Ze', 'Per' and 'Hir' or any one of the other 90+ pronouns that are being made available for nutjobs to align with.
Serving today must be a daily nightmare with lunatics running the outfit.
Aviatrix, Aviatrice and Aviatress - all feminine nouns of the male noun Aviator. Which is why we agree.
As for Aeronaut - well naut is from nautes in Ancient Greek, which means sailor. So to me, an Air Sailor is more likely to be a flyer or operator too?
PS. Trenchard, Henderson, Sykes, et al went around this buoy many times in 1918/1919 on the formation of the RAF and Airman was chosen at that point as a person of the air. So really who are we to change that?
As for Aeronaut - well naut is from nautes in Ancient Greek, which means sailor. So to me, an Air Sailor is more likely to be a flyer or operator too?
PS. Trenchard, Henderson, Sykes, et al went around this buoy many times in 1918/1919 on the formation of the RAF and Airman was chosen at that point as a person of the air. So really who are we to change that?
Yes all sailors “operate” but only one of them steers but they are all part of a crew and they all have their part to play. In fact, in a ship, while operating is the goal, it is the last priority, the greater priorities being to float and to move. Having served in both colours of blue, I find there are a lot of parallels between a ship and a Station. To get an aircraft into the air is at the end of a long chain of tasks, all of which have to be performed by members of the “crew”. In my experience, many aircrew do not appreciate just how far that chain extends.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calling every member of the RAF an 'aviator' is as silly as calling every NHS worker a 'doctor', everyone in education a 'professor', and everyone in catering a 'chef'.
Saintsman
I'm aware of a currently serving officer being taken aside by the SWO and being advised that he should have had a heart to heart chat with the 2 airmen that the officer had reprimanded for slouching along jackets open, hands in pockets and no cap, never mind not saluting an officer. Discipline is way down the tubes now.
Sorry, but 'Aviator' does not sound as intimidating as 'Airman' when its shouted out by the SWO (though they are probably not allowed to do that anymore in case it upsets someone...).
"When I was at university, our faculty had one Professor - the boss."
All shal prizes I'm afraid - just look at the CofE - more bishops than attendees
All shal prizes I'm afraid - just look at the CofE - more bishops than attendees
Ninthace Your sailor has a role in the operation of the ship? Where you say that everyone doesn’t steer the ship, then I completely agree, but if you have an operating role on the ship then you are by definition not a passenger. Now I presume that a ship/boat is seen as an equivalent of an aircraft, so therefore only nauts should be those that operate the aircraft in some way or another? If you have an operating role on the ship then you are a sailor, if you don’t then you are a passenger. I would offer that a RAF Station has more in common with a Royal Naval Base and Dockyard rather than a ship?
avioniker speak for yourself. There are plenty of baby Pterosaurs that are equally not in agreement with these suggestions. When this survey comes out then maybe it will be a surprise to all (one way or another). I see it like a referendum when often the most unexpected results upset the elite…
avioniker speak for yourself. There are plenty of baby Pterosaurs that are equally not in agreement with these suggestions. When this survey comes out then maybe it will be a surprise to all (one way or another). I see it like a referendum when often the most unexpected results upset the elite…
When the RAF was formed, one of the proposals for top brass ranks was something like: 1st , 2nd, 3rd Avion.
Now we shall have Leading Aviator, Senior Aviator, Senior Technician Aviator, Chief Technician Aviator, Master Aviator and Warrant Officer Aviator. Cor! what a lot to remember!
Old Duffer
Now we shall have Leading Aviator, Senior Aviator, Senior Technician Aviator, Chief Technician Aviator, Master Aviator and Warrant Officer Aviator. Cor! what a lot to remember!
Old Duffer
Was the old system broken? How many people have complained? If the answers are no, and very few, why change? Genuine question.
Tinkering with the non-essential removes effort available to tackle bigger issues.
Tinkering with the non-essential removes effort available to tackle bigger issues.
