Women on subs...

Armistead · 10-28-10, 01:25 AM

See they're finally gonna let women serve in our nuclear sub fleet. What made me choke is it cost $300,000 to convert on bunk in a nuclear sub.
Guess they had to add seperate spacing, basically 3 women added per sub, think a total of 9. About 2 million per woman in total cost to bring em aboard......They talked of the cramped quarters, ect., saying that has nothing to do with it...wonder if they would've changed their mind on a WW2 boat.

I saw the interview with a few, one would scare the hell out of Halsey, one, well, room in my bunk for her anytime.....

Anyone here served on a nuc. I assume they don't hot bunk?

I guess it's about time.

ETR3(SS) · 10-28-10, 01:37 AM

I was on an Ohio. Hot racking still goes on on the 688s not sure about the Seawolf or Virginia class though. I personally don't like women in the military as it is, let alone on a submarine.

Armistead · 10-28-10, 01:40 AM

Yea, that seems to be the concenus from the men on the sub, but my, how times are a changing. I would think sexual tension is bad enough? How long were your patrols?

JREX53 · 10-28-10, 08:49 AM

The sub crews will be either all men or all women. There will be no mixed crews. That was decided last year or the year before.

I think this was reported in the Navy Times or News.

Jim

Armistead · 10-28-10, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JREX53

The sub crews will be either all men or all women. There will be no mixed crews. That was decided last year or the year before.

I think this was reported in the Navy Times or News.

Jim

You're kidding, if they were gonna wait for a all woman crew to man a nuclear sub, would never happen.

The women officers are in training now and will go on duty next year.

The CNN report.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/22...-s-submarines/

ETR3(SS) · 10-28-10, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

Yea, that seems to be the concenus from the men on the sub, but my, how times are a changing. I would think sexual tension is bad enough? How long were your patrols?

Every time we went out we planned on it being a minimum of 90 days. Usually ended up in the 70-80 days range though. Sexual tension isn't too bad now as everybody brought their own "entertainment." Put women on board, officer or not, and it's going to get worse. And they will get pregnant which will prevent them from deploying for two years (not sure on the time, haven't been pregnant in the Navy). And then somebody has to fill their spot which means somebody on shore duty just got put back on sea duty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JREX53

The sub crews will be either all men or all women. There will be no mixed crews. That was decided last year or the year before.

I think this was reported in the Navy Times or News.

Jim

If they were doing segregated crews this wouldn't be causing the big stir that it is. They are doing integrated crews. Now I'll say this, if the Admirals and the SECNAV were really interested in equality for women they would let them join the SEALs as well. Political maneuvering, happens in the military too.

timmyg00 · 10-28-10, 09:47 AM

What kills me about this is the idea that ANY accomodations at all must be made based on gender, not only on submarines, but in any branch of the military. On shore bases or rear bases, that's different... Sure, you can designate separate sections of barracks etc. for each gender. However, once you are on a front-line unit, such as a ship, that separation needs to go out the window. The mission comes first, and your comfort and privacy come second. So, my take on this is that "You joined the military. It's a sacrifice. Deal with it." Accomodations for privacy should not be made, especially in these budget-conscious times. What this all amounts to is a multi-million-dollar social engineering project.

TG

WarlordATF · 10-28-10, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmyg00

What kills me about this is the idea that ANY accomodations at all must be made based on gender, not only on submarines, but in any branch of the military. On shore bases or rear bases, that's different... Sure, you can designate separate sections of barracks etc. for each gender. However, once you are on a front-line unit, such as a ship, that separation needs to go out the window. The mission comes first, and your comfort and privacy come second. So, my take on this is that "You joined the military. It's a sacrifice. Deal with it." Accomodations for privacy should not be made, especially in these budget-conscious times. What this all amounts to is a multi-million-dollar social engineering project.

TG

This i completely agree with. I have no problems with Women doing anything a Man can do, However there should be no special treatment. Once they complete training they are Soldiers,Sailors,Marines or Airmen (Wonder how long that term will last?) and they should expect to all be treated the same. The only special requirement i would give them is access to things like tampons on the Boat and that would not cost 2 million per Woman!

Armistead · 10-28-10, 12:39 PM

Those tight hallways, what happens when someone brushes up against one of the females in passing.

I have no doubt many females have smart brains and could work this. Still, we have to think cost. If females want this all ships should ignore gender, bunk together, ect. If war breaks out, what's a woman gonna do, dig her a seperate foxhole and use her government issued combat potty. They should all train and serve as if combat is going on, moreso with all the wars we get into.

It doe's pizz me off that you see so many of these women later with lawsuits against male officers. Outright sexual abuse not wanted is wrong, but so many times it's minor sexuality you'll find anywhere you put men and women together. The kicker is they always end up with a very progressive
liberal lawyer that says men have to ignore all sexuality in these situations.
We have to accept that's not possible, but many a career has been ruined over it.

One of my customers is a large retailer..famous name. Any employee I send over there must take a two hour class on sexual harrassment. They have rules such as...never look directly at a woman, if two females pass and one says "hi" you must respond to both, no riding alone with a single female in the elevator, must wait for another or take another. The kicker, most the women that work here model for them. Most are perfect tall models and they all walk around in skirts to their butts....Many tease all the workers there knowing the rules.

Thrair · 10-28-10, 12:41 PM

Israel has experimented with women on front line roles. The determination they made was that while some women could meet and/or exceed the qualifications for a front-line soldier, there was an impact on the men they worked with. Specifically, the male soldiers tended to react impulsively if a female solider was injured near them.

Apparently while it's relatively easy to train men to kill, it is very difficult to train them to ignore the protective instincts.

So it's a touchy subject, overall. I'm kind of torn. It's not an easy issue to handle.

Side note, I think we could have female SEALs, but it would probably be best if male and female seals were placed in separate teams.

rein1705 · 10-29-10, 12:56 PM

i can see men and women serving together on surface ships down to DD escort or smaller but i don't think it will work out aboard a sub because of the long term deployments. I'm not saying that their not capable or that men and women can not work together like that but i just see somebody messing it up and tanking the whole program as unavoidable.

Alky · 10-29-10, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

See they're finally gonna let women serve in our nuclear sub fleet. What made me choke is it cost $300,000 to convert on bunk in a nuclear sub.
Guess they had to add separate spacing

And yet it's ok to put gay men in with straight. Maybe it should just be co-ed, no special accommodations, let everyone get distracted regardless of sexual preference

10-29-10, 02:16 PM

Hmm...why am I suddenly hearing the theme to Love Boat???

I'll be here all week!! Don't forget to tip your waitress!!

Captain1966 · 10-29-10, 04:45 PM

Hey! Women served on subs in WWII.

Here is the proof:

Platapus · 10-29-10, 06:09 PM

"we sunk a truck!"

10-28-10, 01:25 AM	#1
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Women on subs... See they're finally gonna let women serve in our nuclear sub fleet. What made me choke is it cost $300,000 to convert on bunk in a nuclear sub. Guess they had to add seperate spacing, basically 3 women added per sub, think a total of 9. About 2 million per woman in total cost to bring em aboard......They talked of the cramped quarters, ect., saying that has nothing to do with it...wonder if they would've changed their mind on a WW2 boat. I saw the interview with a few, one would scare the hell out of Halsey, one, well, room in my bunk for her anytime..... Anyone here served on a nuc. I assume they don't hot bunk? I guess it's about time.

10-28-10, 01:37 AM	#2
ETR3(SS) Ocean Warrior Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Between test depth and periscope depth Posts: 3,021 Downloads: 175 Uploads: 16	I was on an Ohio. Hot racking still goes on on the 688s not sure about the Seawolf or Virginia class though. I personally don't like women in the military as it is, let alone on a submarine. __________________ USS Kentucky SSBN 737 (G) Comms Div 2003-2006 Qualified 19 November 03 Yes I was really on a submarine.

10-28-10, 08:49 AM	#4
JREX53 Frogman Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 300 Downloads: 353 Uploads: 13	The sub crews will be either all men or all women. There will be no mixed crews. That was decided last year or the year before. I think this was reported in the Navy Times or News. Jim __________________ Jim

10-28-10, 09:47 AM	#7
timmyg00 中国水兵 Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: The People's Republic of Massachusetts, USA Posts: 282 Downloads: 42 Uploads: 0	What kills me about this is the idea that ANY accomodations at all must be made based on gender, not only on submarines, but in any branch of the military. On shore bases or rear bases, that's different... Sure, you can designate separate sections of barracks etc. for each gender. However, once you are on a front-line unit, such as a ship, that separation needs to go out the window. The mission comes first, and your comfort and privacy come second. So, my take on this is that "You joined the military. It's a sacrifice. Deal with it." Accomodations for privacy should not be made, especially in these budget-conscious times. What this all amounts to is a multi-million-dollar social engineering project. TG __________________ ET1/SS, SSN-760 USSVI Marblehead Base (MA) *Naval Historical Sites - Photo Galleries*

10-29-10, 12:56 PM	#11
rein1705 Samurai Navy Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: somewhere in the Past. Posts: 582 Downloads: 541 Uploads: 0	i can see men and women serving together on surface ships down to DD escort or smaller but i don't think it will work out aboard a sub because of the long term deployments. I'm not saying that their not capable or that men and women can not work together like that but i just see somebody messing it up and tanking the whole program as unavoidable. __________________ "Diesel Pig" Not so long ago...

10-28-10, 01:40 AM	#3
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Yea, that seems to be the concenus from the men on the sub, but my, how times are a changing. I would think sexual tension is bad enough? How long were your patrols?

10-28-10, 12:39 PM	#9
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Those tight hallways, what happens when someone brushes up against one of the females in passing. I have no doubt many females have smart brains and could work this. Still, we have to think cost. If females want this all ships should ignore gender, bunk together, ect. If war breaks out, what's a woman gonna do, dig her a seperate foxhole and use her government issued combat potty. They should all train and serve as if combat is going on, moreso with all the wars we get into. It doe's pizz me off that you see so many of these women later with lawsuits against male officers. Outright sexual abuse not wanted is wrong, but so many times it's minor sexuality you'll find anywhere you put men and women together. The kicker is they always end up with a very progressive liberal lawyer that says men have to ignore all sexuality in these situations. We have to accept that's not possible, but many a career has been ruined over it. One of my customers is a large retailer..famous name. Any employee I send over there must take a two hour class on sexual harrassment. They have rules such as...never look directly at a woman, if two females pass and one says "hi" you must respond to both, no riding alone with a single female in the elevator, must wait for another or take another. The kicker, most the women that work here model for them. Most are perfect tall models and they all walk around in skirts to their butts....Many tease all the workers there knowing the rules.

10-28-10, 12:41 PM	#10
Thrair Helmsman Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 102 Downloads: 16 Uploads: 0	Israel has experimented with women on front line roles. The determination they made was that while some women could meet and/or exceed the qualifications for a front-line soldier, there was an impact on the men they worked with. Specifically, the male soldiers tended to react impulsively if a female solider was injured near them. Apparently while it's relatively easy to train men to kill, it is very difficult to train them to ignore the protective instincts. So it's a touchy subject, overall. I'm kind of torn. It's not an easy issue to handle. Side note, I think we could have female SEALs, but it would probably be best if male and female seals were placed in separate teams.

10-29-10, 02:16 PM	#13
NoGoodLandLubber Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Hmm...why am I suddenly hearing the theme to Love Boat??? I'll be here all week!! Don't forget to tip your waitress!!

10-29-10, 04:45 PM	#14
Captain1966 Swabbie Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 12 Downloads: 56 Uploads: 0	Hey! Women served on subs in WWII. Here is the proof:

10-29-10, 06:09 PM	#15
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,361 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	"we sunk a truck!" __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.