Money

A life on the gender-neutral ocean wave is not for me


Move over, the shipping forecast! The latest hot take from the nautical world comes direct from North Ayrshire’s Scottish Maritime Museum. This week the management announced they would no longer be referring to ocean-going vessels as “she” and would instead use gender-neutral pronouns. This was in response to two cases of vandalism where the words “she” and “her” were scratched out on some expensive information signs in the museum.

On BBC Radio 4’s Today programme Admiral Lord West, a retired naval chief, explained why the museum’s move is controversial. “It is an insult to a generation of sailors. A ship is like a mother.” He added: “I think the world has gone mad. I thought Brexit was bad enough. I think we’ve got to be careful letting tiny little pressure groups change things.”

Should a ship be a “she” or an “it”? And does it really matter? This strange question, it turns out, has been hotly debated for some time. Lloyd’s List, purveyor of shipping news to the world since 1734, announced back in 2002 that it would no longer be calling ships “she” and would use “it”. At the time, a Royal Navy spokesman told The Daily Telegraph that the navy would continue to call ships “she” to respect a historic tradition. “They are female because originally the ship was the only woman allowed at sea and was treated with deference and respect — and because they are expensive.” (All right, he spoilt it a bit at the end there.)

The quote sums up the problem. On the one hand, we have a tradition, and one built on arguably noble ideas: that the ship is the “mother” of the sailors and there to protect them; that the first ships ever to be built were dedicated to goddesses; that ships should be treated with reverence and care. And, of course, this is where the controversy lies. We are supposed to reject such gendered stereotypes nowadays. It may well be perceived as patronising to suggest women are expensive, unpredictable, mercurial, need careful handling, are liable to catch light when doused in rum, etc.

It’s hard to know how to respond to this. Especially for a woman like myself who, when given sufficient intake of the right kind of rum (or, say, M&S mojito in a can), actively prides herself upon having the mermaid-like profile of a ship’s figurehead. For me, the detail that leaps out from the incident at the maritime museum is that the curators have no real idea about the motivations of the vandal (it was apparently the second time the signs had been scratched this year).

They have assumed that they understand the intention of this “pressure group” while in fact knowing nothing. That does not seem a good enough reason to make the change, even if it will please those who fiercely resent being included in the same gender category as a rusty old tugboat. But it is possible to hold two contradictory ideas in the mind at once. Yes, the appellation stems originally from an old-fashioned way of thinking about women. But merely changing the words cannot erase that tradition. Better to preserve it, acknowledging the fuddy-duddy thinking of the past, while continuing to question it.

Meanwhile, there are plenty of transport-themed references that are genuinely and seriously offensive to women and deserve to be erased for good. Men are never referred to as “bikes” or “rides” or told that they look like “the back end of a bus”. But an ocean-going liner, a romantic pirate ship, a picturesque Swallows and Amazons sailboat? That’s a comparison I am happy to take.

In fact, for my nautical equivalent of a spirit animal, I demand to be twinned with Roman Abramovich’s luxury superyacht, Eclipse. May God bless her and all who sail in her, especially if I can be one of them. And I’m happy to bring my own mojitos. (All ships are expensive. Not all women.)

The writer is author of ‘How to Own the Room: Women and the Art of Brilliant Speaking’



READ SOURCE

Leave a Reply

This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you accept our use of cookies.