First woman commander of Navy warship is sent home over 'affair with male officer' on board - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Bazsil;45506032]um yes you very well can control it???[/QUOTE] I can assure you - you can't.

[QUOTE=David29;45506043]I can assure you - you can't.[/QUOTE] i can assure you -- there's a difference between not wanting to and not being able to unless it was meant that the navy cant control it, not the people involved, in which case sorry i read wrong

you place a guy and a gal together for six months aboard some boring navy ship what exactly did you think was going to happen?

[QUOTE=Monkah;45506105]you place a guy and a gal together for six months aboard some boring navy ship what exactly did you think was going to happen?[/QUOTE] I'd think that the CO would know better than to fraternize.

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;45505206]Well why hasn't the Royal Army sent both home but not kept one on board, too me that's indifferent and fails to live up to the strict policies put in place for equality[/QUOTE] Probs because he was of inferior rank, but honestly his career is probably over too

[QUOTE=Handsome Matt;45505007]doesn't really make sense anymore with gays and lesbians reallyyyyy, same with prisons and most other things in my opinion.[/QUOTE] Lol "anymore" are gays and lesbians a new thing?

[QUOTE=David29;45505317]Technically it's Sex and the Frigate. Relationships are allowed in all branches of the forces. However, let me throw a scenario at you: HMS Portland is out at sea. The ship's Commander is having a relationship with a member of the crew - the pilot of the ship's Lynx helicopter - and gets very attached to him. Then one day the Lynx goes down in a severe storm during a patrol away from the ship: two things then could potentially happen: 1. In desperation, the Commander, despite knowing that it would be senseless - and even dangerous - to order a search and rescue mission, sends out another helicopter to look for it. This then results in another helicopter being lost. 2. The Commander does nothing, knowing it would unprofessional to make a reckless decision based on feelings. The pilot is never found. Overwhelmed with grief, the Commander is unable to operate effectively and makes a number of poor decision that leads to a member of the ships crew being injured. So, to refine my original point: relationships are allowed in situations where they will not have an impact on the ability of one or both members to carry out their duties effectively and without emotional interference.[/QUOTE] /Thread

What did anyone expect would happen? Tons of horny marines and a woman surrounded by said sexy muscular marines. It was inevitable.

Although banning relationships completely would be a bit far, I do think a relationship with a subordinate is a horrible idea- too much potential for abuse/disaster .

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;45505030]hahahahhahahahhahahha you have no clue do you? lmao I bet you figure were all celibate monks.[/QUOTE] didn't u listen? soldiers r not humans!!

[QUOTE=David29;45505317]So, to refine my original point: relationships are allowed in situations where they will not have an impact on the ability of one or both members to carry out their duties effectively and without emotional interference.[/QUOTE] The difference in power also seems like something that could be abused.

[QUOTE=fruxodaily;45505044]Actually I reckon the man should of been sent off to because he also breached those rules If they get back together outside of the military, there's not much they can do[/QUOTE] Lower rank, which means he does have a rank shield. The no fraternising with lower ranks is in a way a rule to protect them from exploitation to an extent. [QUOTE=fulgrim;45507505]Although banning relationships completely would be a bit far, I do think a relationship with a subordinate is a horrible idea- too much potential for abuse/disaster .[/QUOTE] And that's why relationships aren't banned in general, not counting relationships inside of the chain of command.

So you can only shag the same rank for to keep pure breeding.