|
Originally Posted by trim it out
(Post 11148268)
It's actually a good thing that there is more than one type of footwear on issue. The realisation that different manufacturers cater to different types of feet/environments giving people the choice to wear what is comfortable and appropriate. There are currently three colours of flying boot available on issue/in service AFAIK (black/brown/tan?) so realistically even the colour doesn't matter, but maybe a tan pair of desert flying boots aren't appropriate given the UK temperate climate at this time of year.
|
Originally Posted by pba_target
(Post 11148344)
Lucky if you can get a pair of any colour from stores these days, so people just have to wear what they've got!
|
Originally Posted by LOMCEVAK
(Post 11148340)
Or perhaps aircrew should now become known as 'real aviators' ......
|
Donkey's.
This simply reminds me of the fable of The Old Man and The Donkey; so busy trying to please everyone that you end up pleasing nobody at all.
|
Personally I don't see why they couldn't have reversed the early-2000s abolition of the ACW/LACW/SACW ranks (which was considered an 'empowering' move at the time, but by the standards of today looks like it 'erased' women - there's a lesson there about the perils of trying to keep up with social scientific trends), allow individuals the freedom to switch between the gendered ranks as often as they like, and replace the catch-all term 'airmen' with 'airmen and airwomen'. As a bonus, the act of saying 'soldiers, sailors, airmen and airwomen' implicitly advertises the RAF's openness to both sexes. Yes, this wouldn't address non-binary or asexual people, but trying to please everyone - especially those of an activist mindset - is a very difficult thing to do.
|
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.
|
Originally Posted by LS8C1
(Post 11148419)
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.
Did you see all the excitement on social media over the fake notice that came out about "aircrew" eagles going on SAC/Cpl rank tabs too? Lots of frothing at mouths. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....31f76f3cb3.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....738652dd45.jpg |
LS8C1
All valid points but it is not about what you think, or any serving/Ex member of the RAF.
It is about the global perception of the RAF as an effective fighting force and a credible deterrent. All of that is suffering badly because of this pointless PC crap. |
Originally Posted by Wyler
(Post 11148455)
All valid points but it is not about what you think, or any serving/Ex member of the RAF.
It is about the global perception of the RAF as an effective fighting force and a credible deterrent. All of that is suffering badly because of this pointless PC crap. |
Originally Posted by downsizer
(Post 11148342)
So you've all filled in the survey on MODNET then? Because it affects you all?
|
Originally Posted by Wyler
(Post 11148455)
All valid points but it is not about what you think, or any serving/Ex member of the RAF.
It is about the global perception of the RAF as an effective fighting force and a credible deterrent. All of that is suffering badly because of this pointless PC crap. |
"back in the day", Airmen made sense. Society has changed - 1 in 5 of the RAF is not male, so airmen seems inaccurate and innapropriate.
As usual the "of course there's no such thing as discrimination (mainly because I'm a middle class white male)" brigade are out in force getting worked up about a change that makes no impact or difference to their lives, but may make a meaningful difference to those who are serving now. To those who say "but standards and in my day" - firstly, the operative phrase is 'your day' - that was then, this is now. Thank you for your service, but let those who are serving now express a view on what they want - your views are an irrelevance. Secondly, the RAF is always changing and has done since it was formed. The RAF you served in was so different to the one you joined, the one you learned about as a kid, and the one you left as to be a never permanent organisation - don't assume that because things were done a certain way once, that this continues to make sense. Finally, you may wish to reflect on the impact your words have - you may want to get all angry and hit the keyboard moaning about snowflakes and diversity and how it was better when you were in - but please remember that in moaning, you are directly attacking the people who serve now. I personally think they deserve more respect than being insulted by yesterdays men who are unhappy with the idea of a very simple change. |
Originally Posted by Jimlad1
(Post 11148467)
"back in the day", Airmen made sense. Society has changed - 1 in 5 of the RAF is not male, so airmen seems inaccurate and innapropriate.
As usual the "of course there's no such thing as discrimination (mainly because I'm a middle class white male)" brigade are out in force getting worked up about a change that makes no impact or difference to their lives, but may make a meaningful difference to those who are serving now. To those who say "but standards and in my day" - firstly, the operative phrase is 'your day' - that was then, this is now. Thank you for your service, but let those who are serving now express a view on what they want - your views are an irrelevance. Secondly, the RAF is always changing and has done since it was formed. The RAF you served in was so different to the one you joined, the one you learned about as a kid, and the one you left as to be a never permanent organisation - don't assume that because things were done a certain way once, that this continues to make sense. Finally, you may wish to reflect on the impact your words have - you may want to get all angry and hit the keyboard moaning about snowflakes and diversity and how it was better when you were in - but please remember that in moaning, you are directly attacking the people who serve now. I personally think they deserve more respect than being insulted by yesterdays men who are unhappy with the idea of a very simple change. |
The feminine form of the noun "Aviator" is "Aviatrix".
That should settle this woke nonsense. Mind you, some of them think that grammar is some sort of fascist construct. |
The USAF is sticking with the generic term "Airmen" for all ranks, Air Force Speciality Codes (AFSCs) and genders.
The US Space Force recently adopted the term "Guardians". |
trim it out
Planes? Whatever next? |
Re IBN 101/21 in post 28, isn’t ‘ Reaper/Protector Mission Intelligence Coordinators and Cabin Crew’ a tautology?
Batco |
I seem to remember that we deleted SAC(W) etc sometime ago for what was given as almost the same reason as this change. Are saying that the decision was wrong?
|
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:16. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.