Navy Preps Subs for First Female Officers

[Feuer Frei!]

http://images.military.com/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=image%2Fjpeg&blobheadervalue2=inline%3Bfilename%3Dsubmarines-women-399.jpg&blobkey=id&blobnocache=false&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1210003587841&ssbinary=true

For Ensign Peggy LeGrand, the biggest concern about serving on a submarine is not spending weeks at a time in tight quarters with an entirely male crew. What worries her is the scrutiny that comes with breaking one of the last gender barriers in the U.S. military."I have a feeling more people will be focused on us. Our mistakes and successes will be magnified more than they deserve," said LeGrand, a 25-year-old Naval Academy graduate from Amarillo, Texas.
LeGrand is among a small group of female officers who are training at sites including Groton, Conn., to join the elite submarine force beginning later this year. While the Navy says it is not treating them any differently from their male counterparts, officials have been working to prepare the submarine crews - and the sailors' wives - for one of the most dramatic changes in the 111-year history of the Navy's "silent service."


The initial class of 24 women will be divided among four submarines, where they will be outnumbered by men by a ratio of roughly 1 to 25. The enlisted ranks, which make up about 90 percent of a sub's 160-sailor crew, are not open to women although the Navy is exploring modifications to create separate bunks for men and women.
The female officers, many of them engineering graduates from Annapolis, are accustomed to being in the minority, and so far they say they hardly feel like outsiders. The nuclear power school that is part of their training, for example, has been open to women for years because the Navy in 1994 reversed a ban on females serving on its surface ships, including nuclear-powered vessels.
At the U.S. Navy's submarine school in Groton, where eight women were among dozens who recently completed the 10-week officer basic course, Ensign Kristin Lyles said the presence of the first class of females bound for submarine duty was not even remarked upon at this month's graduation ceremony.


A submarine group spokesman, Lt. Brian Wierzbicki, said the Navy would not facilitate photographs or interviews with the female submariners because it does not want to distract them from training or make them feel different from their male peers.
The female officers will report to their submarines starting in late November or early December. All of the vessels are guided-missile attack submarines or ballistic-missile submarines, which are relatively large by submarine standards. They are the USS Wyoming and USS Georgia, based in Kings Bay, Ga., and the USS Maine and USS Ohio, with their home port in Bangor, Wash.
On submarines with corridors barely wide enough for sailors to brush past one another, the six female officers on board will all share a stateroom. Their shifts will be divided so that women are assigned to each sub's two rotating crews. The lone bathroom for officers will have a reversible sign, letting men know that it's in use by women and vice versa.


Although Holland said commanders would be reluctant to have women on their subs, he said the Navy pulled off a more daunting challenge last year by outlawing smoking on submarines. The crews can adapt, he said.
The Navy reversed the ban on women in submarines in April 2010. In the fall, when officials announced the first subs selected to take on female officers, senior leaders held town hall meetings with the crews and their families to address their concerns. Wierzbicki, the Navy spokesman, said training has been provided to the crews and commanding officers to prepare them for the change.
Submarines had been the last class of military vessel off-limits to women. Navy officials say one lesson they learned from integrating surface ships is to make the transition gradually. The Navy wants to make sure it is aware of any potential issues that might arise, according to Lt. Cmdr. Jean Sullivan, chief of the naval personnel's office of women's policy.


The Navy is looking into bringing women aboard the smaller, Virginia-class attack subs, which would require reconfigurations to accommodate men and women together.
LeGrand said the diverse missions of the attack subs would be appealing, but the larger submarines are just fine with her.
As a semi-professional cyclist, she's hoping to serve on a sub large enough to bring aboard a stationary bike.


SOURCE (http://www.military.com/news/article/navy-preps-subs-for-first-female-officers.html)

[Platapus]

What worries her is the scrutiny that comes with breaking one of the last gender barriers in the U.S. military."I have a feeling more people will be focused on us. Our mistakes and successes will be magnified more than they deserve," said LeGrand, a 25-year-old Naval Academy graduate from Amarillo, Texas.

I would agree. This also happened when the military opened up EOD to women in the 1980's. Any mistake they made was amplified and offered as "proof" that women were unfit for EOD duty. Their successes were denigrated due to presumed "special treatment". It was frustrating and embarrassing to witness how they were treated.

It was no wonder many of them left, not because they could not hack the job, but because they could not hack the jerks.

I wish these women the best of luck and hope the submarine service treats them better than other units in the past. :salute:

[CaptainMattJ.]

first woman on a submarine?

I thought Frau already held that title :hmmm:

[Anthony W.]

Best of luck to her... But - hot DAYUM. If I were in a giant steel tube for 6 months at a time with a bunch of men, and a woman showed up... It'd either be heaven or hell.

Here's hoping she doesn't screw up - cause I know if she does she'll take hell more so than a man would.

No more good ol' boys clubs...

[Bubblehead1980]

terrible idea

[Feuer Frei!]

terrible idea
Why?

[Snestorm]

Why?

Let's reverse that.
What makes it a good idé?

[Jimbuna]

first woman on a submarine?

I thought Frau already held that title :hmmm:

Avon Lady...just to name one and there are more :yep:

[Feuer Frei!]

Let's reverse that.
What makes it a good idé?
Well, i won't go into the obvious reasons why it's a good idea for Men AND Women to serve together, side by side.
However, why should the job description discriminate against gender?
And really, that's what it comes down to. Can you do the job? Yes? Ah ok, you can do the job, and you are a woman? No problem!
I don't really see any reason to debate wether it is a good idea, or a bad idea for that matter. Unless of course the debater against has something against women in the work force.
Why else would someone debate this?

[Osmium Steele]

Integrating the officer corps first is smart. There is still a marked line of separation between officers and enlisted, even in the close confines of a boat, though not as marked a line as the Brits. Get crews accustomed to having women onboard.

The real test will be integrating enlisted men and women.

I mean, there is just not enough room in the fan room, and too many sharp edges. :O:

[Snestorm]

Well, i won't go into the obvious reasons why it's a good idea for Men AND Women to serve together, side by side.
However, why should the job description discriminate against gender?
And really, that's what it comes down to. Can you do the job? Yes? Ah ok, you can do the job, and you are a woman? No problem!
I don't really see any reason to debate wether it is a good idea, or a bad idea for that matter. Unless of course the debater against has something against women in the work force.
Why else would someone debate this?

There are too many things that begin as a "Right", and become transformed into a Requirement. The women of my family do not appreciate Feminists, who act as though they are representative of all women. They are very happy being women, and have no desire to prove what good men they can be.
Women hold the most important job in the world. Motherhood.

Women are special, and worhy of protection.
Corrupt politicians that send them out to fill body bags, and body parts bags, are not.

[Tribesman]

Unless of course the debater against has something against women in the work force.

Was that a good shot or a lucky hit?

[Feuer Frei!]

There are too many things that begin as a "Right", and become transformed into a Requirement. The women of my family do not appreciate Feminists, who act as though they are representative of all women. They are very happy being women, and have no desire to prove what good men they can be.
Women hold the most important job in the world. Motherhood.

Women are special, and worhy of protection.
Corrupt politicians that send them out to fill body bags, and body parts bags, are not.
Indeed, i think there are some valid points made.
But in regards to Women who do not fit the mould of mother hood, don't want to fit in the mould of mother hood and/or have desires of ambition in the work force, and not for reasons of competing with men and to see who is superior in navigating a submarine through a live fx or parking it perfectly in a sub pen, then i say, let those women have the freedom to do as they want.
And they are fully aware that they will be treated as equal in the job, with the same privilidges. That is what they ask for, that they are treated the equal.
In fact, encourage this, support and learn, for that will go a long way towards killing this inequality BS that still, to this day exists all over the world.
It is high time that the Chauvinists and egotistical A-Holes of the global work forces wake up and smell the (roses) Scent of a Woman!

[Osmium Steele]

They are very happy being women, and have no desire to prove what good men they can be.
Women hold the most important job in the world. Motherhood.

Women are special, and worhy of protection.


While I share your chivalrous attitude toward women, and understand from whence it comes, you want to be careful with the above argument.

It is the same argument used by muslim men the world over to explain why women must remain covered or indoors, uneducated and pregnant. What they, and their prophet call protection, we call repression.

Women make great pilots in the fly-by-wire era, even combat pilots, though I'm not sure the U.S. has had a female pilot enter a dogfight as yet. This doesn't preclude motherhood. The two are not neccesarily mutually exclusive.

Women have been allowed on surface ships for 20+ years now. American submarine sailors are generally better educated, more tolerant, and gentler than your average sailor. The various jobs on a boat do not require the increased physicality of the male of the species. Not even torpedoman or A-gang. This experiment will probably work just fine.

Besides, my eleven year old is psyched that she can follow in daddy's footsteps. (until she discovers boys, that is :damn::damn::damn:)

[Feuer Frei!]

Was that a good shot or a lucky hit?
Luck does not exist. So it has to be a good shot :O:
But, i fear that it won't be fatal.

[frau kaleun]

Women make great pilots in the fly-by-wire era, even combat pilots, though I'm not sure the U.S. has had a female pilot enter a dogfight as yet. This doesn't preclude motherhood. The two are not neccesarily mutually exclusive.

And being a woman does not = being a mother; you can't equate the two. Not every woman chooses to have children. Not every woman *can* have children, for that matter.

Of course the fact that "fatherhood" is also a job (and one would assume a very important one) never seems to lead to the assumption that men are unfit for certain professions simply because there is a possibility that they may one day be fathers.

[Stealhead]

Does not the Swedish Navy already have female crew members on their subs? Also I am not sure that Platapus has the correct date I knew an E-9 female EOD in the USAF and she had been in the USAF(and in EOD) since 1975 all though the dates that women where allowed to perform certain jobs might vary by branch.I just recall this E-9 because she was the second female ever to become EOD in the USAF the other completed the course a few weeks before she did.

I think ability depends more on the person than the sex honestly.I have no doubt that there are women that can perform the work even that elite forces do.

[Osmium Steele]

Of course the fact that "fatherhood" is also a job (and one would assume a very important one) never seems to lead to the assumption that men are unfit for certain professions simply because there is a possibility that they may one day be fathers.

QFT! :yeah:

[MaddogK]

Wonder how many maxi pads will be required for a 90 day deployment and how they will be disposed of given the environmentalists. Can you imagine their cycle in synch, if the entire crew were women?

OB/GYN onboard ? Not likely.

Extra onboard water processing capability for bathing ? We all know how women need to remain cleaner than guys.

I don't believe the women will be afforded extra priveliges, but I DO think the guys will be surrendering some of theirs. The guys also will see the ladies praised for doing the same jobs the guys did, without praise.

This is a bad idea but I really do wish the ladies the best of luck.

Tankers will be the next target for the feminists, mark my words.

[Osmium Steele]

I tried to ignore the ignorance and misogyny, I really did.

Wonder how many maxi pads will be required for a 90 day deployment and how they will be disposed of given the environmentalists.

TDU

Can you imagine their cycle in synch, if the entire crew were women?

That's right. Set up the straw men, and knock 'em down.

OB/GYN onboard ? Not likely.

Nor a urologist.

We all know how women need to remain cleaner than guys.

We do? We ALL do?

I don't believe the women will be afforded extra priveliges, but I DO think the guys will be surrendering some of theirs. The guys also will see the ladies praised for doing the same jobs the guys did, without praise.

What privileges exactly? And hell, I saw other guys get praised for doing jobs I did without praise. Nothing new there. Just another straw man.

[sidslotm]

I suppose the world is a changing place, but women in combat or war does not sound like a good idea to me, sorry.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I don't have anything against having women in military as long as in particular career path fitness requirements are same for everyone. Its not fair if others have to do more work because one is physically unable to do his/her share of it.

[MaddogK]

I tried to ignore the ignorance and misogyny, I really did.


Spoken like a true civilian.

As most of my comments were 'cut and paste' from a military sites 'sub forces' forum that I've been posting on for years I can tell you the majority of sailors who will be effected do NOT welcome this change, as well many studies show this isn't the best idea, but everyone knows it will happen and will try to make it work. As for me, I'm retired and can state my opinion without fear of retribution from the military, and It's my opinion that the Sub forces will suffer in this attempt to appease a few women whose feelings got hurt because they weren't allowed to join a 'special' club. I'll leave you with this post from a sub crewman whose opinion is common with his cohorts, and reflects my feelings as well.

I served on a ssn from 69 to 71. The mission is tough enough trying to qualify, get squared away in your division, and figure what the hell is going on. Anyone who has made patrols understands
what is expected of you and the enviroment you must live in, and work in. There is already enough
stress and tension on board. Things can get a little testy on long patrols.
It's not like you can go to the fantail to blow off some steam and get away from things for awhile. Most people are clueless about what being confined is all about.
Even today I believe there are enviroments in the military where having men and women serve in
in such a confined atmosphere is not a good fit at all. This is bad juju.
If they want women on the boats it needs to be an all female crew.
I don't care about being politicaly correct. What I care about is these guys going out on patrol and coming home safe with the least amount of problems.
Don't get me wrong the women in the military do an outstanding job, but this throwing common sense out the window, just to make a point

...And another:
When it was initially proposed to place women on submarines too, the Department of the Navy commissioned a lengthy and comprehensive study from outside of the Navy that commenced in February 1995 and concluded that due to the inherent nature of undersea warfare and the increased demands placed on submariners, women would be a detriment to the natural cohesiveness and combat effectiveness of all male submarine crews which are on a higher state of operational readiness and fighting trim than surface warriors on surface ships, again due to the nature of undersea warfare. Also, the old lie that submarines are the safest place to be and surface ships are targets is just that, an old lie.

In a war with a technologically advanced maritime enemy, the U.S., even in victory, will likely suffer extraordinary casualties among surface vessels and submarines alike. Even when I served aboard submarines in the Cold War, we correctly believed we would suffer a 50% loss of submarines at the outbreak of a maritime war. Certainly ASW capabilities have improved even more so since my time in submarines.

In answer to your question, what is the difference in women serving on surface ships and women serving aboard submarines? The difference is that women will not fit into the fighting cohesiveness of the submarine crew due to the challenging nature of submarines and undersea warfare which greatly exceeds those of surface ships. The similarities are that the fighting effectiveness of submarines will suffer even more than the fighting effectiveness of surface ships. The irony is that victory over a technologically advanced enemy will depend on submarines as the determining factor with all other forms of naval warfare as contributing factors. In other words, submarines are our ace in the hole and they should not be part of any experiment in social engineering when previous studies presented a model destined to fail, or at the very least, a model that showed serious compromise of the existing level of combat effectiveness of submarines and their crews.

[Osmium Steele]

Spoken like a true civilian.

Failed out of the gate...

Cdr. Michael Feeley pinned dolphins to my chest aboard the USS Phoenix in 1988.

And I'm not surprised you quoted a fossil from the vietnam era nor that the most recent study you could quote to support your argument was from 16 years ago.

Similarly reputable studies, in decades passed, "demonstrated" that blacks could not integrate into combat military units. Readiness and cohesion would suffer.

Ditto Philipinos.

Ditto women on surface ships, combat support units, etc.

Same tired arguments, same pack of bias filled lies.

All , given time and opportunity, demonstrably false.

[Lord Justice]

As for me, I'm retired and can state my opinion without fear of retribution from the military, Indeed you may, you are old school, however, one does not escape the naval board of Justice in this quarter. :shifty:

[nikimcbee]

Good time to be an HR lawyer.:shifty:

[Lord Justice]

Good time to be an HR lawyer.:shifty:There is always time to conform to the dictates of reason and justice. :yep:

[MaddogK]

And I'm not surprised you quoted a fossil from the vietnam era nor that the most recent study you could quote to support your argument was from 16 years ago.

Similarly reputable studies, in decades passed, "demonstrated" that blacks could not integrate into combat military units. Readiness and cohesion would suffer.



Nope, quoted the first study I found today, while looking for different study that helped form my view, and as history is littered with more recent 'reputable studies' that discredit older 'reputable studies', I'll enjoy reading the future 'reputable studies' that discredit the current 'reputable studies', hopefully before irreparable damage has been done.

:up:

[Anthony W.]

Allow me to say this...

As sexist as it may sound, I would be in favor of an all male military.

[CaptainMattJ.]

if woman want to throw themsleves into a suffocating, long metal tube filled with nuclear warheads, powerful torpedoes, and live there for months on end, usually without seeing sunlight for weeks, and surround themselves with a bunch of young male sailors who, in the same predicament, are very desperate, then who are we to stop them?

either they just want to prove themselves, which is highly unnecessary, or they are crazy enough to want to do it. if the latter is true, then hell, they have enough balls to qualify as a man anyway.

[Anthony W.]

Either they just want to prove themselves, which is highly unnecessary, or they are crazy enough to want to do it. if the latter is true, then hell, they have enough balls to qualify as a man anyway.

If they're just trying to prove themselves, I have no respect.

Yeah, if they're insane enough to want to do it, they get an honorary man card.

[MH]

Nope, quoted the first study I found today, while looking for different study that helped form my view, and as history is littered with more recent 'reputable studies' that discredit older 'reputable studies', I'll enjoy reading the future 'reputable studies' that discredit the current 'reputable studies', hopefully before irreparable damage has been done.

:up:

Putting aside the issue of women and men living in the same tube....
When choosing a person for an job i believe that US navy takes into account vast range of parameters.
As long as a man or a woman can fit into those requirement in mental and intellectual scope there should be no problem for a given person to preform the job.
As far as physical training its not always necessary for the training to be equal.
Its more of a issue what this training needs to achieve.It may vary from person to person.
Certainly when it comes to technical side military service.

[Madox58]

It seems to me many Females are doing deadly Services now as they have done in the past.
Terrorist stuff, The UnderGround dureing both World Wars, South East Asia, etc, on and on.
Not to mention the IDF's Service Requirements.

Mostly I see the 'It's a Man thing' BS as the problem.
My Second Wife broke my nose.
My current Wife broke the nose of a Guy that Bouncers were holding me back from.
She also put a chair whooping on a Guy that assaulted one of her friends!
:rock:

I'd fight beside her or any Female like her anyday!

[Platapus]

Also I am not sure that Platapus has the correct date I knew an E-9 female EOD in the USAF and she had been in the USAF(and in EOD) since 1975


You are absolutely correct. During the 1970's there were phases where women were allowed and then not. It seemed to follow a political tide pattern. I should have included this period in my post.

Good catch. Thanks for keeping me honest. :salute:

[Tchocky]

It's my belief that women and seamen don't mix, sir.

[Madox58]

Women and SeaMen do mix.
That may be the issue.
:haha:

[Platapus]

...I can tell you the majority of sailors who will be effected do NOT welcome this change, as well many studies show this isn't the best idea...

I believe the same arguments were made against allowing the Negros in the service.. and also the same arguments when women were allowed to serve in the regular services... and the same arguments about allowing homosexuals to serve openly... same arguments, the only thing that changes is the target.

Military does not like change.

But guess what?

1. The military is not a democracy. In my 20 years in, I was never asked to vote on a change.
2. Command does not ask the military member what their feelings are concerning changes in policy. Whether I agreed or disagreed with an policy was simply irrelevant. I learned that the hard way when I first was in. :D
3. In a few generations, the military adapts rather well to these "unpopular" changes.

It was not all that long ago (about 2 generations) when the idea that a Negro officer being in charge of White troops would destroy morale and unit cohesion. Well if I were to say that today, I would be laughed out of the unit, if not put on report.

It will be OK. There will be members who will choose not to adapt. They will separate, and things will OK. :yep:

[TLAM Strike]

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/3050/orpkondor28projektu2072nj0.jpg
See this? This is a Kobben class submarine. For reference its about the size of a WWII Type II U-Boat (yea the small one). Back in the 1980's the Royal Norwegian Navy decided to allow women on submarines. In '95 they got themselves a woman captain, Capt. Solveig Krey (pictured)

http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/864/solveig20krey20i20peris.jpg

They put her on THAT!

If a women can do her job with 23 men for a prolonged patrol in a space smaller than a single wide trailer, I think we can squeeze a few in on one of our big nucs.

[frau kaleun]

If they're just trying to prove themselves, I have no respect.


Riiiight. Cuz no dude ever joined the military, or volunteered for some particular branch of the service, in order to "prove" himself. :shifty:

[Madox58]

What She Said!!!
:yeah:

I have always said I joined the Army and jumped out of AirCraft to
PROVE to myself and others I was as bad as bad could be!
(And make myself feel better then I was feeling about myself at that time)

So why can't a Female do the same?

And Anthony W.
For your information?
Most of my Wife's Girl Friends would beat you into the ground if you spoke that crap around them!
You lead a sheltered life little Man.
:nope:

[Lord Justice]

What She Said!!!
:yeah:

I have always said I joined the Army and jumped out of AirCraft to
PROVE to myself and others I was as bad as bad could be!




And Anthony W.
For your information?
Most of my Wife's Girl Friends would beat you into the ground if you spoke that crap around them!
You lead a sheltered life little Man.
:nope:For my part it was not for want of badness, more so of elite and respect status ( 2 para ). As for the gentleman lacking refinement or tact, I make no doubt has other credits better suited.

[Madox58]

Bad = Elite
Where I'm from.
If your the best Skate Boarder?
Your the Baddest Skate Boarder.

I was the first and am still the only one from my family to be AirBorne!
That first step, and everyone after, that changed my life in a way I can not explain.

But I'm sure you understand that.
:salute:

[Lord Justice]

Bad = Elite
Where I'm from.
If your the best Skate Boarder?
Your the Baddest Skate Boarder.

I was the first and am still the only one from my family to be AirBorne!
That first step, and everyone after, that changed my life in a way I can not explain.

But I'm sure you understand that.
:salute:I am sensible to the facts. :salute:

[Madox58]

I am sensible to the facts. :salute:
Drive on Trooper!
:salute:

[Stealhead]

I have to agree with privateer here we tend to forgot or ignore that there have been some pretty bad ass women doing some seriously dangerous things in wars in the past.

I read in a book written by a WWII Red Army junior officer the best part is the section where he tells of the time he was attached to a unit that had all female snipers.He said that these girls had never been in combat before only training and they had a little bit of trouble at first with killing(an sniper sees their victim personally)So they would try to encourage their protective instinct by having the women think of the Russian soldiers as their children and they had to kill the Germans to protect them that helped them to become better snipers and they had less trouble taking the shot.Then one of the girls slipped and slid down a muddy slope and got shot by a German machine gun after that the killer instinct got unleashed against the Germans.Anyone given the right motivation can be a deadly fighter I mean have you guys seen two(or more) women truly fight? They are much more violent than men I mean it is freaking brutal.

We all have the stereotype about women yet we ignore the stereotype about men as well.I have seen plenty of men fight over the years and what do you often see?They will spend half the time backing away from their foe rather than closing in because they either fear suffering harm or causing harm deep down(why most Armies first teach hand to hand before longer range violence) .I know until I was 13 years old I was a complete push over one day some punk picked me out and I threw a paper back book in his face when he tried to hit me(which stunned him for all of 5 seconds) then he stared to beat my ass and I did nothing to defend myself luckily it was at school and he got stopped.After that day I realized that I had to be willing to fight and use violence if there was no other recourse.So I trained myself by practicing Tae Kwon Do and actually fighting back when my older brother messed with me.A human being is either trained or un-trained in something it does not matter the sex of the person they merely need to have the will(sometimes that is all they need) and some training(of some form of the two you could also call training experience for example a person who learns to fight on the streets)

[Jimbuna]

I learned an opinion changing lesson over ten years ago...was called to a 'disturbance' in a bar in Newcastle City Centre, my oppo was a Woman PC about 5'2", very petite and wouldn't say "boo" to a mouse or so I thought.

As I pulled up outside one window was broken and drinkers were spilling out onto the pavemenent so I told my oppo to wait in the car (big mistake).

Upon entering I saw two large male thugs knocking seven kinds out of each other, they saw me approach and disengaged from one another and bestowed upon me their joint attention.

Instead of drawing my baton I foolishly (hindsight is a wonderful thing) reached for my radio to summon back up...next thing I knew the radio was knocked out of my hand and I found myself pinned to the wall by the two of them.

After what seemed like an eternity one of the thugs suddenly fell to the floor in a heap then a second or two later the other one followed suit, only then did I realise why...there was a small petite brunette about 5' 2" tall standing with a smug look right across her face and a baton in her hand.

I never belly-ached about sharing a vehicle with a female colleague again.