Submarine investigation under way after female officers filmed

[Platapus]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/04/politics/navy-submarine-investigation/index.html?hpt=us_c2

Navy criminal investigators are looking into who secretly filmed female officers of a submarine crew while they were showering and changing clothes aboard the boat's unisex bathrooms, a U.S. Navy official confirms to CNN. An incident report filed with the Navy last month alleges at least three female officers were videotaped at various times over a year long period. The recordings might then have been distributed to some members of the crew.
The incidents took place on board the USS Wyoming, which is currently on deployment, The Navy does not discuss the exact locations of its submarines when they are at sea. For now, no one has been taken into custody or removed from the boat, the official said.


...



What happened to shipmates looking out for each other?


Why aren't the CPOs onboard getting to the bottom of this "their" way?


I thought that submarine crews were different.



I hope they do a full investigation and get to the bottom of this. This unacceptable at any level.

[Oberon]

In before "it was only good old fashioned fun" or "if they can't take this kind of pranking they shouldn't have joined" or "just goes to show how women on a submarine is a bad idea" or whatever misogynistic excuse is thought up by the usual crowd.

[Skybird]

Boys and girls locked in one room.

Great idea. :shifty:

Ideology does not change nature. While polite behaviour is not genetically determined, hormones and there effects are. And not always the first can keep the latter in check.

Its like putting a naked female onto a busy crossroad and then complaining that cars drive slow and drivers get distracted.

Females in the military, okay, I'm all for it. Let them shoot in tanks, let them become snipers and combat troops if they pass the physical tests (by male standards!), let them fly fighter jets and drop bombs, I'm all for it. But certain things I am simply against. Mixed crews on small boats is one such thing. Infantry qualifications running double standards in the sports tests is another.

At least they got not physically raped, which would be difficult to cover on a boat, I assume. But I read some weeks ago that the case numbers of sexual attacks against women in the US military are much higher than gets known to the public - and are rising.

Genderism, political correctness. For reason's sake - to hell with that.

Oberon: read my sig.

[Oberon]

Must be my reasonophobia again. :03: :roll::roll::roll:

[Jeff-Groves]

Damn it! Ya don't film the Officers! Just the enlisted Females!
I'm sure that's covered in the secret manual!
:stare:

[ETR3(SS)]

What happened to shipmates looking out for each other?We still do. This was one individual.


Why aren't the CPOs onboard getting to the bottom of this "their" way?Because they know better. This is far to big of an issue to be handled by the Goat Locker and if they tried to keep it low key it would be their ass. COs and COBs have lost their commands by doing it "their" way.


I thought that submarine crews were different. We are, but like everything everywhere you will have a few bad apples.

A lot of us were waiting for the first incident to happen because we knew there would be one. Thankfully it wasn't a sexual assault.

[em2nought]

Navy can't blame this one on the gay guy in the number two turret, that's for certain. :D

[Jimbuna]

Not just the US Navy but the RN and heaven only knows how many others as well.

Royal Navy's first female captain is stripped of her command over claims of affair with married officer

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/royal-navys-first-female-captain-4022836

[Armistead]

Boys and girls locked in one room.

Great idea. :shifty:

Ideology does not change nature. While polite behaviour is not genetically determined, hormones and there effects are. And not always the first can keep the latter in check.

Its like putting a naked female onto a busy crossroad and then complaining that cars drive slow and drivers get distracted.

Females in the military, okay, I'm all for it. Let them shoot in tanks, let them become snipers and combat troops if they pass the physical tests (by male standards!), let them fly fighter jets and drop bombs, I'm all for it. But certain things I am simply against. Mixed crews on small boats is one such thing. Infantry qualifications running double standards in the sports tests is another.

At least they got not physically raped, which would be difficult to cover on a boat, I assume. But I read some weeks ago that the case numbers of sexual attacks against women in the US military are much higher than gets known to the public - and are rising.

Genderism, political correctness. For reason's sake - to hell with that.

Oberon: read my sig.

I have to agree, you're gonna have this when you mix men and women, no amount of rules trump Mother Nature. I was knew a girl that was a police officer that went to a national police convention in another state at a beach. She partied and drank like most did, but terribly drunk, ended up sleeping with a higher up same dept. She was told to remember "what happens at Myrtle Beach stays at Myrtle Beach." Seems it happened a lot with numerous others, finally came out and made the papers when one complained....

[Oberon]

Perhaps rather than limit what women can and can't do because men can't keep it in their pants, perhaps we should encourage men to actually gain some self-control.

I know, I know, my reasonophobia again. :dead:

[Dowly]

So... is this video online somewhere? :hmmm:

[Rhodes]

So... is this video online somewhere? :hmmm:

Try the X Cricetus cricetus site, they do normally have those kind of entertainment. So I heard/read it...:oops::hmm2:

[Tango589]

Try the x Cricetus cricetus site, they do normally have those kind of entertainment. So I heard/read it...:oops::hmm2:
Lol.

[nikimcbee]

So... is this video online somewhere? :hmmm:

:har::up: Down Periscope.

[Skybird]

Perhaps rather than limit what women can and can't do because men can't keep it in their pants, perhaps we should encourage men to actually gain some self-control.

I know, I know, my reasonophobia again. :dead:
Indeed, reasonophobia. Because you simply ignore some simple facts from reality in order to insist on an ideal for principle reasons.

Consider this: the rule in Islam that women should cover all up, originally came from Muhammad's anger about women relieving themselves shamelessly even under the eyes of foreign men being nearby, watching them. He ruled they should do it behind a cover, or with a blanket put about themselves, to block male vision. Later, this was perverted into the demand that women should not show any hair or uncovered skin, since a single square-inch of uncovered skin already would provoke males and would serve as an incentive for males to lose their mind and jump onto these provoking females. Conclusion in Islamic logic: an uncovered women is a naked women and thus almost asks for getting raped.

Of course, that later development is sexist nonsense. Not to mention the male bigotry.

But by refusing that enslaving dress code of burkhas and veils and the like, can one conclude that women should feel encouraged to walk in public as lightly dressed as they would be if working in a pool-dance bar? Hardly.

Where your reasonophobia sets in is when you simply ignore that mutual attraction between both sexes, and the role that sights, physical arbitrary contacts, smells, pheromones and hormones play, are a part of human reality that nobody can avoid. You cannot make these factors non-existing. It just does not work that way.

That still does not make most civilised men charging into anythign female that has not climbed on the tree when counting one-two-three. But it happens - occassionaloly. And the more situations you create and the longer or more intense or extreme said situations become, the more such exceptions from the rule that civilised standards keep biological drives in check, you provoke. Life aboard a submarine I would consider to be a situation being anything but "ordinary". The tight physical boundaries of the environment are fact. The isolation is more or less total, and lasts for weeks, sometimes months. Privacy is almost non-existent.

Not to mention the all-male culture that the war machine always has been.

If you want females on u-boats, then have all-female crews. I'm fine with that, if the qualification of the crew is the same like for a male crew. Whether that calculates well for the ministry, in money and personell needed (you need replacements for every single post, and a sufficient stream of future female cadets) is something different, and due to the personell "logistics" would almost mean to maintain not one but two submarine navies in your military. Unreasonable, since from a military standpoint it doe snot matter to have an all-female crewed submarine. What counts is to have that submarine. So why paying twice if you can have the same boat much cheaper?

To make it all a bit more pointy and to add to the contrast, so that what I mean maybe becomes clearer, imagine a bus that is crowded, and most passengers being men (this is from social-psychological examination done already in the early 80s, btw). Imagine a few young women squeezed into the standing crowd. It cannot be avoided that bodies touch bodies, shoulders, hips, stomachs, backs. Smells of hair and skin, perfume, pheromones fill the air. The chemistry does its intended natural magic. Now tell the men they should behave (that is what you demand, and want to leave it to).

Still you will see that the number of cases about sexual harassment or attempts to sexually approach the women, does not stay the same (compared to the social environment outside the bus), but rises. And you will see that the number of such incidents somewhat correlates with the social culture you look at. You will have such incidents more often in Latin-American societies, India, and Japan, for example. Less often in let's say Scandinavian countries. You can tell the men as long as you want, Oberon, to stay calm and act polite and with self-restraint: the more often you allow women getting into this situation, the more incidents you will get as a turnout. But you accept that, for the sake of just demanding the ideal principally commanding what reality should turn into. But it won't.

And that is where your reasonophobia sets in once again indeed. Reality does not obey ideology or ideal. In the end, humans are animals like any other, with a thin layer of civilization-paint on their skin. We call that cosmetics. But our actions and thoughts are much more hidden from our "free will", are more driven by genetics, traditions (often basing on said biological realities), hormones, than we are usually ready to admit. It hurts our ego to admit that we are not to that degree masters of our "free will" and "free mind" as we usually dream to be.

In some situations, this concept of total equality just does not work well, because we are not all equal, but different - OBVIOUSLY. And this difference sometimes, in some contexts and under some circumstances, is better served when accepting it instead of denying it. As I said, I have no problem with female infantry, fighter and bomber pilots, generals. But I have a problem with double standards for the physical fitness training. Women as combat divers (physically weaker than males of same training standard, and much more prone to exhaustion from low temperatures). Women not serving in huge naval environments like carriers or cruisers, but in small encapsuled entities like submarines.

And i would go even further today. I say new modern ultra-feminism with quota demands and genderistic rejection of any sexual differences, is not about "equality" (which only means anything reasonable and meaningful when meaning equality before the law) nothing else but brutal female egoism WITH A STRONG EGOISM-LOBBY.

Equality before the law - yes, I'm all for it. And that is the only conception of "equality between men and women" that makes sense to me.

[Betonov]

Why prevent women from serving alongside men.

Because some men can't handle themselves ???

They can't handle their own hormones and they're supposed to run a weapon platform able to obliterate my country.
Keep women in and weed the pervs out.

[Schroeder]

Keep women in and weed the pervs out.
How exactly does one do that BEFORE something happens?

[Oberon]

So basically you're saying that you have no self-restraint?

[Oberon]

How exactly does one do that BEFORE something happens?

You don't, but equally you don't blame it on the women for being there in the first place. :03:

It's pretty simple, if serving members of the USN, or RN for that matter, are unable to show self-restraint then they should be put somewhere in a position where they are not in charge of thousands of dollars/pounds of killing equipment.

It's not exactly difficult to show self-restraint after all, in fact compared to Basic Training it's probably the easiest thing on the course, I mean if you feel that amorable on board a boat then locate a video from x-Cricetus cricetus and rub it out. In other words the exact same thing that submariners have been doing for the past century, and I have no doubt that women submariners will face the same problems as their male counterparts on patrol and have to find their own method of relief.

Non-consensual voyeurism is a criminal offense, and should be treated as such, no matter where the location.

[MH]

So basically you're saying that you have no self-restraint?

You probably are quite a monk...also have no idea how it is with bunch of young people in military...
Yet I also disagree with Skybird.
Im all for equality , things like this will happen...not necessary due to male misconduct as well...just take it as part of life and a consequence.

[Oberon]

You probably are quite a monk...

Ha! I wish!

No, I have a roving eye, just like any other male, and I am not immune to hormonal and deep seated genetic traits. However, equally I don't go around filming women without their consent, I don't grope, or rape, or do anything to a woman that is against her will. It's not really rocket science. :haha:

[Schroeder]

You don't, but equally you don't blame it on the women for being there in the first place. :03:

No one did. So far people blamed it on hormones and age old parts of the male brain.


It's pretty simple, if serving members of the USN, or RN for that matter, are unable to show self-restraint then they should be put somewhere in a position where they are not in charge of thousands of dollars/pounds of killing equipment.
You'll only find that out after something has happened.


It's not exactly difficult to show self-restraint after all, in fact compared to Basic Training it's probably the easiest thing on the course,
Er...not sure I can follow. Let me tell you that there are people with a very strong sexual drive and even I noticed certain desires after just two weeks in a military exercise.:dead:


Non-consensual voyeurism is a criminal offense, and should be treated as such, no matter where the location.
On that we can agree.


You probably are quite a monk...
My thought exactly.:haha:

[Oberon]

No one did. So far people blamed it on hormones and age old parts of the male brain.

Indeed, but using this as an excuse for the reason why women should not serve on submarines is punishing the woman for the actions of the men.

You'll only find that out after something has happened.Sadly this is true, just like in any event or crime. Which is a double edged sword really, preventative crime fighting is a very hit and miss affair which will often find innocents guilty as much as it does the guilty.

Er...not sure I can follow. Let me tell you that there are people with a very strong sexual drive and even I noticed certain desires after just two weeks in a military exercise.:dead:But did you immediately go and find a woman and rape her? I doubt it. Therefore you controlled your desires, you showed self-restraint.

On that we can agree.All I ask for is male self-restraint, just as I would ask for female self-restraint. If it's consensual then by all means, go crazy, but if it's not consensual then it shouldn't happen.

But what do I know? I suffer from reasonophobia because I believe in equality in not just the law, but in all things in life. Apparently that's a bad thing.

[Aktungbby]

Alright! Since I'm the only one with practical experience here:yep:: On my now legendary 3-week treks into the mosquito hell of the Minnesota/Canadian/Quetico Wilderness we had cameras. When a lady paddler wished to put into shore for a quick call-of-nature we naturally forbeared :03:of foto-ops...inasmuch as a lady with a paddle (and a full bladder:oops:) is to be regarded with respect...especially as she will be doing most of the cooking of the evening meal:/\\!! And I always had one of the bigger ladies for superior paddling and pack-portaging(3-5 miles) to begin with-being a (pragmatic) skinny wimp in my teens:smug:! Considering that the captain is all powerful aboard a modern sub, cannot all the crew cameras be confiscated prior to the voyage; after all, it's his career on the line if I'm not mistaken?:hmmm: Cameras are verboten in most Federal buildings-especially after 9-11; and I've even told TV news cameramen to turn 'em off unless with written authorization by a building manager-I cannot believe a Federal :up: sub is a big stretch from basic SOP. On my recent trip to DC: you still cannot photo the Pentagon; No camera-no problem- KISS..

[Betonov]

Oberon pretty much explained everything the way I would have :up: (better actually)

But yes, you don't have to be a monk to show self restraint. Some common courtesy or basic chivalry. And not act like a teenager on board a superweapon.

[Schroeder]

Oberon pretty much explained everything the way I would have :up: (better actually)

But yes, you don't have to be a monk to show self restraint. Some common courtesy or basic chivalry. And not act like a teenager on board a superweapon.
And that's the problem, some of them are teenagers.

Well, why am I the devils advocate here? Because I once served with 19 year olds in the army. No, we didn't rape or molest people (there actually were no women in our unit at that time so that's not really a surprise:O:) but the armed forces are a mirror of society and we don't only have the well behaved guys and girls there but also the silly, the immature and the outright criminal ones. Now put these guys in a steel tube for months with very few women and you're asking for trouble. It's not the women's fault just as it's not the fault of candy to be sweet. Some soldiers are like little boys. Tell a boy he can't have the candy that is on display on a table for weeks and wait for what will happen. Big surprise one morning it will be gone. I know it's not fair or just or anything but it's unfortunately a fact that we can't discuss away as much as we would like to. Women on submarines will always "inspire" some of the males with weaker character to commit offenses like that.

[Oberon]

Tell a boy he can't have the candy that is on display on a table for weeks and wait for what will happen. Big surprise one morning it will be gone. I know it's not fair or just or anything but it's unfortunately a fact that we can't discuss away as much as we would like to. Women on submarines will always "inspire" some of the males with weaker character to commit offenses like that.

Indeed, but the answer isn't to ban candy.
This sort of thing is going to happen, and I think the women who have gone into the submarine service are only no illusions that there's going to be trouble. Just as there was trouble when women were first allowed to serve on ships, or in the army...but we've moved on and progressed.
I'm not denying that there's going to be problems, but I'm also not suggesting that women should be barred from serving on submarines because of it.

[Buddahaid]

Real women can handle their own problems like men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-2r3zzZYgA

Whoever the guilty one(s) are they are too stupid to be in uniform. I mean really did they think they would get away with it? Maybe they wanted out.

[Jeff-Groves]

To explain this as 'Well' it's our genetic make up as Males' is the biggest lie I've seen in a while.
Useing that line of thought? We're geneticlly inclined to be raceist.
I don't buy into that BS. That line is an excuse and even when you type it you know your a liar!
I'm with Oberon on the thought that if you can't control yourself?
You are questionable on all levels.

I hope they hang the bastards in front of the Pentagon!
If some sick screw did that to my Wife?
I'd have no problem makeing sure they paid a price even God would cringe at.

[Tango589]

Real women can handle their own problems like men.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-2r3zzZYgA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-2r3zzZYgA)

One of the best sequences I have seen in a long time!:up:

Whoever the guilty one(s) are they are too stupid to be in uniform. I mean really did they think they would get away with it? Maybe they wanted out
Unfortunately, a combination of raging hormones and stupidity is a recipe for disaster. Maybe they should be putting Bromide in the tea to cool the ardour. (Although this may not be fool-proof. As Spike Milligan said "The only way to stop a British soldier feeling randy is to load Bromide into 300lb shells and fire it at him from the waist down").

[Oberon]

Wow...reasonophobia seems to be contagious...

Time to call in Dustin Hoffman!

http://s3.amazonaws.com/magazine.good.is/assets/538652/original/DI-Outbreak-1.jpg

[Buddahaid]

Wow...reasonophobia seems to be contagious...

Time to call in Dustin Hoffman!

http://s3.amazonaws.com/magazine.good.is/assets/538652/original/DI-Outbreak-1.jpg

Wouldn't you be suffering from reasonophylia?

[Oberon]

Wouldn't you be suffering from reasonophylia?

Possible, best ask Dr Skybird, he's the one that made the diagnosis:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=216526

[Schroeder]

To explain this as 'Well' it's our genetic make up as Males' is the biggest lie I've seen in a while.
Useing that line of thought? We're geneticlly inclined to be raceist.
I don't buy into that BS. That line is an excuse and even when you type it you know your a liar!

So you call me a liar, fine.
Then please explain to me why there is much more porn catering to men than for women. Why are you hard pressed to find female customers for male prostitutes? Could it be because the male sex drive is stronger than that of women? Why is rape so common in wars? Why are most sex offenders men, is it just because they are physically stronger?
Some men have a very strong sexual drive.
That doesn't mean they "have" to rape, molest or whatever but it definitely gives motivation to carry out such acts. It's not good, it's not right, it needs to be punished but it will happen!
If you think that's a lie and I'm a liar fine.

[Wolferz]

To rape a woman because she can run faster with her skirt up than a man can with his pants down. Basic physics.:know:

Remember kids,
A woman has to be in the mood.
A man only has to be in the room.



I rapes easy.:up::D

[Sailor Steve]

This is an interesting discussion which delves into psychology and physiology as well as legalties. It's fine that it gets a little heated but let's please refrain from name-calling. Just because someone believes something different from you doesn't mean he's willfully distorting facts, or even that he's wrong.

Please keep it civil.

[Onkel Neal]

I find the whole incident depressing as hell. What's wrong with people?

[nikimcbee]

So you call me a liar, fine.
Then please explain to me why there is much more porn catering to men than for women. Why are you hard pressed to find female customers for male prostitutes? Could it be because the male sex drive is stronger than that of women? Why is rape so common in wars? Why are most sex offenders men, is it just because they are physically stronger?
Some men have a very strong sexual drive.
That doesn't mean they "have" to rape, molest or whatever but it definitely gives motivation to carry out such acts. It's not good, it's not right, it needs to be punished but it will happen!
If you think that's a lie and I'm a liar fine.


:agree: I look at this from a chemistry point of view. You are putting two volatile chemicals that react with each other together and telling them; "don't react with each other." We're just animals and animals like to smurf. So since we're hell bent on having co-ed subs, maybe we need to totally re-think this? Shorter patrol times maybe? Maybe put crews together who don't get along, then they won't want to smurf each other? Or, the flip side, a couples only sub? Get rid of the sexual tension altogether?

It's job security for JAG though.

[nikimcbee]

To rape a woman because she can run faster with her skirt up than a man can with his pants down. Basic physics.:know:

Remember kids,
A woman has to be in the mood.
A man only has to be in the room.



I rapes easy.:up::D

:hmmm: Physics vs chemistry...

[Jeff-Groves]

So you call me a liar, fine.
Then please explain to me why there is much more porn catering to men than for women. Why are you hard pressed to find female customers for male prostitutes? Could it be because the male sex drive is stronger than that of women? Why is rape so common in wars? Why are most sex offenders men, is it just because they are physically stronger?
Some men have a very strong sexual drive.
That doesn't mean they "have" to rape, molest or whatever but it definitely gives motivation to carry out such acts. It's not good, it's not right, it needs to be punished but it will happen!
If you think that's a lie and I'm a liar fine.
I must say I'm sorry to you Schroeder. I didn't mean it to say you were the liar.
Just as a general statement.
I don't buy into the 'Boys will be Boys' excuse. That may be the root of the whole issue.
Males dominated for so long it's become a genetic trait?
Nope. I can never be convinced of that.
What I see is much worse. It's a continuation of covering up a genetic flaw.
If the Male of our species are that easily corrupted? And others make excuses and say "It's in our Nature" and cover it up?
I have little hope for the future as it's pretty bleak and grisly.

[Schroeder]

Apology accepted. I don't like that thought either and rape or other sexual crimes aren't justifiable and have to be punished hard. It's just that stuff like this always seem to happen and putting women aboard submarines changes the (for a lack of a better word) "environmental conditions" in favor of this to happen.
I don't say women shouldn't serve aboard subs but I would warn them about the (in my opinion) higher risk of getting sexually "exploited" (again for a lack of a better word) under such conditions.
I'm afraid I've watched and read to many news to still believe in self restraint. Even if a person is capable of it they have to want to restrain themselves and I often see a lack of wanting this:down: