The British Army do not buy any armour specifically designed for women

[Widerthanathinblueline]

I followed with interest the discussion of the book 'Invisible Women' by Caroline Criado Perez.

Out of interest I made a Freedom of Information request to the British Army to see if they buy any armour designed specifically for women.

Here is the answer:

No armour is currently purchased specifically for men or women.
Under section 16 of the Act (Advice and Assistance), I can advise you that while our body armour is not currently gender-specific, it comes in a wide variety of sizes which can be configured in a
multitude of combinations to fit and protect different body shapes. Future procurement reviews of body armour will consider options tailored towards each gender.

Use of 'gender' rather than sex there is slightly annoying. I have to say I am surprised about the answer. Obviously 'unisex' armour is going to be designed around a male bode shape rather than a female one.

Due to breasts, hip differences and carrying angle differences I would have thought that female specific designs would be useful. Given the implication in the last sentence I presume that is true.

The Army is roughly 8% women.

Does anyone have any specific information about whether this is a problem or not?

Bloody hell. Well done for getting that info out of them.

I was interested to see the BBC news cover this topic on facebook.

They said women are not a niche group of men. I thought......how apt.

There's a lot of angry men telling them off for even mentioning it. Unsurprisingly.

In general, almost all kit or uniform is gender neutral with the exception of skirts really. They used to design different trousers and shirts for females, but this is being predominantly phased out. The newer MTP isn’t at all flattering on women tbh but the new body armour is tailored to each body type so should fit women as well as men. I’ve never worn it but been told it’s much better on the hips and push less pressure on the back.

The gender ratios do mean that women aren’t always catered for as a minority, but the “powers that be” are much more concerned about having kit that is fit for purpose now. And sometimes having less females means better access to certain things, I certainly never struggled for a shower or decent kit (as a smaller less common size it’s usually available).

Why particular indignation on behalf of the army ladies though? Is it a focus in the book?

(The RN is 11% and I’m not sure on the RAF %)

By gender neutral, do we really mean designed for men and women have to wear it anyway?

I haven't read the book yet (I am hopeful for Mother's Day) but in the discussions I saw that problems with stab vests meant for various reasons sometimes female police officers found them difficult. I asked on here and the police officers seemed to think that bit was out of date, and the police do have vests that are designed to fit women. So I wondered about the army instead.

As I said, I don't know anything about it. But given the difference in body shape I find it odd that a 'male version with facility to adjust' (which is what a unisex version is) would be as good as a 'female version with facility to adjust'. But I am prepared to be corrected!

I haven’t actually had to wear the new updated versions but it’s more of a spinal board with attachments if that makes sense. So it can accommodate many shapes.

The route into acceptance is quite long (hence usually outdated by the time it’s brought in), the defence scientists trial everything in climatic chambers with a 50/50 split (in the one trial I’ve seen) but use extremely fit uni students. At a guess they don’t often trial on busty curvy ladies but they may do. Then comes the real world, they send the kit to a trial unit for feedback and monitor how it feels to users. This feedback is analysed then kit is amended, retested then brought in.

There are times when I have shaken my head at what people (MOD) assume about female military, often it comes from a place of little to no experience and not asking. You would be pleased to hear about the horrible maternity uniform (Army hates it) or the time a male civilian thought changing the white shirt material should be thinner for some reason.... back to the body armour though. It is meant to actually work for females but the basis is probably male then adjusted to fit females

The physio told me to get new boots last year, I went to the clothing store and for the first time in nearly 20 years, I was offered women's boots! The fit is narrower which is much more comfortable.

As others, I've not tried the new body armour but the old one was dreadful "gender neutral" or not, it didn't fit.

New short bergans are awful tho, no idea what shape they're supposed to fit.

Thanks for publicising this OP!!

Women police officers fought the unisex body armour tooth and nail.

And won.

The reason why they won was because women officers had representation and were consulted.

They brought evidence of breast injuries. They were able to speak about those women who had undergone breast reduction surgery, so that they could do their job.

It comes down to the basic right of women to be consulted about matters that affect them, and to be treated fairly.

Whats the crack wit this..never catering to women thing. This week we have this, and also the totally ridiculous situation where there would be an 'all woman' spacewalk, except they had not enough for women eiter

Thanks for the info, and for the insight from those in the know.

On a similar theme. All female space walk abandoned due to insufficient suits of the correct size.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/technology-47555567/ai-judge-to-settle-small-claims-disputes-and-other-news

What affects even more women is that the design of car seat belts , and incidentally car seats/head rests etc, is based on the size of a man so do not offer the same protection as they do to a man's body. And since women tend to be shorter and sit closer to the steering wheel this means injuries to women from airbags are also more frequent.

Apparently they didn't even bother to have women sized and shaped test dummies for many many years.

As the song says, it's a man's world........

It really does depend on what type of kit. Some, such as webbing, can be almost endlessly reconfigured, so it fits everyone.

Body armour is an interesting one, simply because all ballistic plates are flat because that is how they offer best protection (it's inherent in the physics of stopping bullets, not something that can be wished away) There would be outcry if women were given a different shape which was not as good but fitted a bit better - staying alive being the whole point. So it is looking at a range of options that will hold a flat plate against a curvier person. The potential to adjust on current versions is generally fine.

And if the standard issue ballistic plate is relatively bigger against the female body, then great. The more of you it covers the better.

I think the military issue meets different standards to police (greater bullet stopping, police more Kevlar stab type?)