9 ms·

This 2012 article mentions that the Royal Navy might have female submariners "next year". It happened in 2014: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/female-submari

by avar 3y ago

This 2012 article mentions that the Royal Navy might have female submariners "next year". It happened in 2014: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/female-submariners-make-history https://www.gov.uk/government/news/female-submariners-make-h... And here's the next article I found on the subject, from last year, looks like it's not going so well: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-officers-sexually-and-mentally-harassed-on-submarines-in-british-royal-navy/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-o...

msla 3y ago
Working link: https://www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-officers-sexually-and-mentally-harassed-on-submarines-in-british-royal-navy/ https://www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-officers-sexually-and-...
hilbert42 3y ago
Years ago I did a bit of speleology so I'm not afraid of confined spaces but as a male I'd be scared to spend time on a submarine in cramped conditions and in mixed company. I reckon I'd be under constant stress in case I accidentally said something out of place unlike in all-male work environments I've worked in the past where banter and certain types of comment pass without thought. The nature and politics of the times has to make this such a volatile work environment especially when one can't 'go home' during off hours. I've also worked in mixed company. Decades ago, I worked in a somewhat crowded building of some hundreds of people. My office was small and in an isolated part of the building and I shared it with three young attractive women who were part of my staff. Whilst I also had male staff they worked in other sections of the building. Working with these women in close quarters was very different to working in an all-male environment which I had been used to previously. I enjoyed their company and we got along well together, and I was always well behaved and there were no complaints about my behavior. In fact, as their superior, they'd gang up and bully me—they ruled the office, not me. Times have changed, there's absolutely no way I would accept working in that situation today as it'd be just too risky. Similarly, I wouldn't expect my employer to allow me to work for eight hours per day under such risky conditions. Sure, women have rights to equality and I'd never deny them that right, but it seems to me that mixed company on a submarine is an 'explosive' environment and it's inevitable there will be trouble. (A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural.) One has to feel some sympathy for all of those submariners.
- pbj1968 3y ago
  Or you just shut off the lizard brain and don’t think about your coworkers that way.
  - hilbert42 3y ago
    It has nothing to do with lizard brain whatsoever. If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. The chances of me being believed would be negligible. I have always been courteous to coworkers, especially women. Your comment has just validified my point about today's politics. Decades ago no one would have thought in those terms let alone wrongly accused someone of them. Just for clarification's sake, when I mentioned I'd be worried about accidentally saying something out of place I wasn't referring to me making sexual innuendos but rather that these days innocent comment is so easily assumed to be offensive or taken the wrong way. It's why so many of us now simply say nothing, as it's safer to do so. Your hair-trigger assumption again proves my point.
    - mjmsmith 3y ago
      Better to say nothing and risk being thought a lizard brain than to say "A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural", and remove all doubt.
      - hilbert42 3y ago
        Perhaps so, but if I'm not stating facts then what else do we attribute the subsequent trouble to as outlined in those links? What's worse risk of being shot as the messenger or saying nothing and letting situations get more out of hand? I've always preferred the former but as I've witnessed here many prefer to remain silent.
    - nvy 3y ago
      >If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. Tell me you don't have military experience without telling me you don't have military experience. This statement is patently absurd.
norgie 3y ago
Just in case anyone else hasn't heard of "Opindia" before (the second link): > OpIndia is an Indian right-wing news website that frequently publishes misinformation. Founded in December 2014, the website has published fake news and Islamophobic commentary on many occasions. OpIndia is dedicated to criticism of what it considers "liberal media", and to support of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Hindutva ideology. According to University of Maryland researchers, OpIndia has shamed journalists it deems opposed to the BJP, and has alleged media bias against Hindus and the BJP. In 2019, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) rejected OpIndia's application to be certified as a fact checker. IFCN-certified fact checkers identified 25 fake news stories and 14 misreported stories published by OpIndia from January 2018 to June 2020. from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  Im skeptical about this take. Wikepedia moderation is left wing and has repeatedly published misinformation.
  - norgie 3y ago
    I imagine you find yourself running into “left wing” stuff a lot right?
    - Gareth321 3y ago
      They're not wrong. Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has been very vocal about its ideological descent into left-wing populism. He's used words like "propaganda." I used to moderate the Men's Rights page. Eventually I was blocked by some senior moderators (who also heavily moderated the Feminism page, incidentally). You can go and review the difference between those pages yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism The Men's Rights page now includes criticism of the movement in the summary section. Note how that is entirely absent in the Feminism page. Over the years they've stripped more and more useful information out of the Men's Rights page. Especially anything which portrays the movement in a positive light. Almost anything without a citation, for example. While this is technically within Wikipedia's rules, this level of scrutiny isn't applied to the Feminism page. Not even close. Take a look at the section for suicide on the Men's Rights page: > Studies have also found an over-representation of women in attempted or incomplete suicides and men in complete suicides. I mean, what the fuck? On a page for men's issues like suicide, the person who moderates the Feminism page added stuff about attempted suicide for women. Many other sections contain a similar tone of, "but women also..." The real cheery on top is the byline at the very top of the article directing people elsewhere with a hyperlink. Because how dare you research a movement which isn't pro-feminist: > Not to be confused with the pro-feminist Men's liberation movement. You'll note no similar byline on the Feminism page, directing people to pro men's rights feminist movements. I could go on, but you get the picture. Over the years I've heard from dozens of people who have experienced similar issues, and have either been blocked, banned, or constructively cut out of moderating the pages they've been passionate about for so many years. ALL of them cite the same reason: ideology. Wikipedia long ago abandoned truth. Ideological compliance is now baked into the complex moderation structure. You would be horrified to learn how much is deleted and suppressed now. Just take a look through the moderation logs of any politically contentious pages for a seriously eye opening experience.
nonethewiser 3y ago
And 3 years later in 2017 there are drugs and sex problems. > Nine service personnel on a nuclear submarine have been discharged from the Royal Navy after testing positive for drugs. > The revelations come after claims earlier this month of inappropriate sexual relationships among some of those on board HMS Vigilant, one of four Vanguard Class submarines which maintain the UK's nuclear deterrent and is armed with Trident missiles. > The submarine has recently been embroiled in controversy over allegations of an onboard relationship between a male and female. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/navy-nuclear-submarine-sex-drugs-cocaine-hms-vigilant-trident-vanguard-women-in-armed-forces-a8024506.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/navy-nuclear...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- littlestymaar 3y ago
  So you think women brought drugs on submarines?
  - Hendrikto 3y ago
    That‘s not what he said at all. More stress means more temptation to take drugs.
    - littlestymaar 3y ago
      Sigh. For women to be the prominent factor of stress when working in a f*king nuclear submarine, you'd have to have serious communication issues with the opposite gender…
      - Ekaros 3y ago
        How old most of these crews are on average? How well prepared to environment are they?
      - mikrotikker 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by avar 3y ago

msla 3y ago

Working link: https://www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-officers-sexually-and-mentally-harassed-on-submarines-in-british-royal-navy/ https://www.opindia.com/2022/11/women-officers-sexually-and-...

hilbert42 3y ago

Years ago I did a bit of speleology so I'm not afraid of confined spaces but as a male I'd be scared to spend time on a submarine in cramped conditions and in mixed company. I reckon I'd be under constant stress in case I accidentally said something out of place unlike in all-male work environments I've worked in the past where banter and certain types of comment pass without thought. The nature and politics of the times has to make this such a volatile work environment especially when one can't 'go home' during off hours. I've also worked in mixed company. Decades ago, I worked in a somewhat crowded building of some hundreds of people. My office was small and in an isolated part of the building and I shared it with three young attractive women who were part of my staff. Whilst I also had male staff they worked in other sections of the building. Working with these women in close quarters was very different to working in an all-male environment which I had been used to previously. I enjoyed their company and we got along well together, and I was always well behaved and there were no complaints about my behavior. In fact, as their superior, they'd gang up and bully me—they ruled the office, not me. Times have changed, there's absolutely no way I would accept working in that situation today as it'd be just too risky. Similarly, I wouldn't expect my employer to allow me to work for eight hours per day under such risky conditions. Sure, women have rights to equality and I'd never deny them that right, but it seems to me that mixed company on a submarine is an 'explosive' environment and it's inevitable there will be trouble. (A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural.) One has to feel some sympathy for all of those submariners.

pbj1968 3y ago
Or you just shut off the lizard brain and don’t think about your coworkers that way.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  It has nothing to do with lizard brain whatsoever. If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. The chances of me being believed would be negligible. I have always been courteous to coworkers, especially women. Your comment has just validified my point about today's politics. Decades ago no one would have thought in those terms let alone wrongly accused someone of them. Just for clarification's sake, when I mentioned I'd be worried about accidentally saying something out of place I wasn't referring to me making sexual innuendos but rather that these days innocent comment is so easily assumed to be offensive or taken the wrong way. It's why so many of us now simply say nothing, as it's safer to do so. Your hair-trigger assumption again proves my point.
  - mjmsmith 3y ago
    Better to say nothing and risk being thought a lizard brain than to say "A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural", and remove all doubt.
    - hilbert42 3y ago
      Perhaps so, but if I'm not stating facts then what else do we attribute the subsequent trouble to as outlined in those links? What's worse risk of being shot as the messenger or saying nothing and letting situations get more out of hand? I've always preferred the former but as I've witnessed here many prefer to remain silent.
  - nvy 3y ago
    >If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. Tell me you don't have military experience without telling me you don't have military experience. This statement is patently absurd.

norgie 3y ago

Just in case anyone else hasn't heard of "Opindia" before (the second link): > OpIndia is an Indian right-wing news website that frequently publishes misinformation. Founded in December 2014, the website has published fake news and Islamophobic commentary on many occasions. OpIndia is dedicated to criticism of what it considers "liberal media", and to support of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Hindutva ideology. According to University of Maryland researchers, OpIndia has shamed journalists it deems opposed to the BJP, and has alleged media bias against Hindus and the BJP. In 2019, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) rejected OpIndia's application to be certified as a fact checker. IFCN-certified fact checkers identified 25 fake news stories and 14 misreported stories published by OpIndia from January 2018 to June 2020. from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpIndia

nonethewiser 3y ago
Im skeptical about this take. Wikepedia moderation is left wing and has repeatedly published misinformation.
- norgie 3y ago
  I imagine you find yourself running into “left wing” stuff a lot right?
  - Gareth321 3y ago
    They're not wrong. Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger has been very vocal about its ideological descent into left-wing populism. He's used words like "propaganda." I used to moderate the Men's Rights page. Eventually I was blocked by some senior moderators (who also heavily moderated the Feminism page, incidentally). You can go and review the difference between those pages yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism The Men's Rights page now includes criticism of the movement in the summary section. Note how that is entirely absent in the Feminism page. Over the years they've stripped more and more useful information out of the Men's Rights page. Especially anything which portrays the movement in a positive light. Almost anything without a citation, for example. While this is technically within Wikipedia's rules, this level of scrutiny isn't applied to the Feminism page. Not even close. Take a look at the section for suicide on the Men's Rights page: > Studies have also found an over-representation of women in attempted or incomplete suicides and men in complete suicides. I mean, what the fuck? On a page for men's issues like suicide, the person who moderates the Feminism page added stuff about attempted suicide for women. Many other sections contain a similar tone of, "but women also..." The real cheery on top is the byline at the very top of the article directing people elsewhere with a hyperlink. Because how dare you research a movement which isn't pro-feminist: > Not to be confused with the pro-feminist Men's liberation movement. You'll note no similar byline on the Feminism page, directing people to pro men's rights feminist movements. I could go on, but you get the picture. Over the years I've heard from dozens of people who have experienced similar issues, and have either been blocked, banned, or constructively cut out of moderating the pages they've been passionate about for so many years. ALL of them cite the same reason: ideology. Wikipedia long ago abandoned truth. Ideological compliance is now baked into the complex moderation structure. You would be horrified to learn how much is deleted and suppressed now. Just take a look through the moderation logs of any politically contentious pages for a seriously eye opening experience.

nonethewiser 3y ago

And 3 years later in 2017 there are drugs and sex problems. > Nine service personnel on a nuclear submarine have been discharged from the Royal Navy after testing positive for drugs. > The revelations come after claims earlier this month of inappropriate sexual relationships among some of those on board HMS Vigilant, one of four Vanguard Class submarines which maintain the UK's nuclear deterrent and is armed with Trident missiles. > The submarine has recently been embroiled in controversy over allegations of an onboard relationship between a male and female. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/navy-nuclear-submarine-sex-drugs-cocaine-hms-vigilant-trident-vanguard-women-in-armed-forces-a8024506.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/navy-nuclear...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
littlestymaar 3y ago
So you think women brought drugs on submarines?
- Hendrikto 3y ago
  That‘s not what he said at all. More stress means more temptation to take drugs.
  - littlestymaar 3y ago
    Sigh. For women to be the prominent factor of stress when working in a f*king nuclear submarine, you'd have to have serious communication issues with the opposite gender…
    - Ekaros 3y ago
      How old most of these crews are on average? How well prepared to environment are they?
    - mikrotikker 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]