Nice way for her to handle it Colin.
However, IMO, it would have been even better if the seniors on that ship had toured it before the arrival of the first female crew and had such displays removed, and indicated to all what was expected of them. I served on the first commissioned ship that had mixed gender crew (not COR, but PD in 1981), and we certainly did that, plus everyone coming onboard got the brief:
(1) this is an order so get on with it and keep your personal opinion to yourself; (2) all seaman to be treated the same - you give female seamen the same job as male ones and expect the same standards; (3) any harassment or inappropriate behaviour WILL be dealt with IAW regulations and laws. (4) have a good day.
[ At this juncture, I will note that I was amazed to see Canada's first female jet jockey mentioning on The National that there were penthouse posters all over the briefing room when she started and she was told it was normal part of such rooms - Which brainless squadron commander failed to have those removed BEFORE she even showed up? I am totally baffled.]
There are no reason not to continue in that direction: We have orders, rules and regulations dealing with this and it's an obligation for the chain of command to use them every time they are applicable. When the CoC does, there are no later problems. It is nipped in the bud.
We have had problems in the Navy, long ago, with officers/CoC not obeying clear orders they "did not believe in" and it lead to mutinies.
Dixit Lawyer L.C. Audette, a member of the Mainguy Commission, in an article published in 1982:
"On 28 July 1947, a year and a half before the mutinies. a message was issued from NSHQ to all ships ordering that "immediate steps" be taken to institute welfare committees and ensure that all classes of ratings were represented on them. There was no possible trace of ambiguity or equivocation in the message.
The executive officer in HMCS Magnificent was aware of this clear and unmistakable order, but because, in his own words, he "did not believe in the desirability" of welfare committees, there was no welfare committee in the ship. (…) In all three ships, the men were aware of their officers' disobedience of orders on this score and resented having no forum in which to plead. (…)
(…)
(…) What most surprised the three commissioners was the curious abandon with which the permanent force officer could disobey orders which he deemed undesirable, an unexpected characteristic which was displayed right to the very top. This attitude made some of the permanent officers fellow felons with the mutineers much more than either group realized, an aspect which never seems to have struck the insubordinate officers or the senior officers whose orders had been disobeyed."
In short, when the CoC does not take certain matters seriously or dismiss them as inconsequential instead of dealing with the matter IAW regulations and this "dismissal" is known in the service, it creates the very climate where the bad apples can ripen.
I don't believe that the problem is as widespread as the report makes it sound like, but shutting problems down right from the go by using the applicable regulations would eliminate many of the recriminations noted in the report.