Women on submarines

[playswithairplanes]

Febreeze is an Atmospheric Contaminant... Geeze doesn't anybody pay attention to the Atmospheric Control Manual anymore? 

[drayer54]

More like a 12,000 ton 20-knot capable "slow approach", but with 4 dedicated Twitter and Facebook terminals, and small gift shop just forward of the NFO tank (gotta be able to buy some Febreeze for the bunks when you run out!) it would be such a party! Just watch your step, so you don't slip on all the stuffed unicorns on the deck from angles-n-dangles 

Where do we sign up for this force? Do they have a swimming pool and McDonalds too?

Febreeze is an Atmospheric Contaminant... Geeze doesn't anybody pay attention to the Atmospheric Control Manual anymore? 

Ships are only bearable because of Febreeze. As long as our recruiters continue to bring in swamp things, this manual is on the back burner.

[HydroDave63]

Where do we sign up for this force? Do they have a swimming pool and McDonalds too?
Ships are only bearable because of Febreeze. As long as our recruiters continue to bring in swamp things, this manual is on the back burner.

1. The swimming pool will be the justification for the future Patricia S. Schroeder class of SSGN having a electro-mechanical lockout of 5 degrees on any control plane.

2. NOOOOOO McDonald's. What, are you from Texas or something?!? A slim sailor is a happy sailor. At least a sailor that the khakis are happy to look at.

3. Playswithboeings has a point. No Febreeze, but I'm certain the the gift shop forward of the NFO will sell generously-sized potpourri sachets woven with Fair-Trade organic raw silk. Or you can borrow some lavender bath beads from the coners

[spekkio]

I was never on a submarine, how feasible is it to "build in" a separate berthing for women blue shirts?

Depends on how exclusive you need the berthing to be.

It's feasible if you had about 21-30 of them and they were all relegated to 21 man.

It's going to be interesting when the first green E-2 makes a fully qualified E-5 hot rack because she's not allowed to share berthing with men, or when a lone female officer takes up an entire stateroom to herself, resulting in two empty racks and 4 more people hot racking. That won't create dissent on a submarine at all.

Or, you could set up some makeshift curtains to "separate" berthing in a pinch, but I doubt that would satisfy the PC crowd.

The only way to logistically integrate women on submarines is to get rid of the exclusive berthing restriction. But then that opens up a whole new can of worms to maintain "good order and discipline."

[Mike_Koehler]

Depends on how exclusive you need the berthing to be.

It's feasible if you had about 21-30 of them and they were all relegated to 21 man.

Our percentages of "hot racking" was such that almost all of 21 man was hot bunking..... may have been 2 or 3 racks that weren't. So figure 3+(9*3)= 39 women. But that was a long time ago on an old pig boat.

Mike

[730SMAG]

Oddly enough, my concern about women on submarines is less logistical and more physical.

I don't know about the other guys with fish, but I personally will have a hard time believing the legitimacy of any DC checkout for someone who can't one-hand and haul a submersible pump from ERUL to ERLL and back, drag a full coil of firehose in an SCBA, put the gronk on a bandit kit, etc.  Anyone who physically cannot perform every DC role, up to and including dragging a 280-pound guy in an SCBA and FFE out of a compartment, should not be on a submarine.

Berthing can be solved.  Medical needs can be dealt with.  Politics can be handled.  Women are going on submarines, simple as that; there's nothing we can really do about it.  All we can really hope for is that they're qualified to be there.  And part of that qualification is being able to support the ship during a casualty. 

Admittedly, I come from the slow boat fleet, so, it's not that hard for us to go "meh, designate one 9-man bunkroom for women and call it good," and we never really had hot-racking issues as far as space goes, between MC2L, MC3L and MCLL berthing spaces.  Boomers have the room, but from everything I've seen about 688's and Virginias, they physically cannot support segregated berthing.

[drayer54]

Oddly enough, my concern about women on submarines is less logistical and more physical.
I don't know about the other guys with fish, but I personally will have a hard time believing the legitimacy of any DC checkout for someone who can't one-hand and haul a submersible pump from ERUL to ERLL and back, drag a full coil of firehose in an SCBA, put the gronk on a bandit kit, etc.  Anyone who physically cannot perform every DC role, up to and including dragging a 280-pound guy in an SCBA and FFE out of a compartment, should not be on a submarine.

Not to fear! This has been tested before and is currently working onboard our surface ships as we speak.  When I was onboard the Mighty Warship Eisenhower, we had a Nucleus Fire Party. The NFP was responsible for all damage control efforts outside of the engineering spaces. In the engineering spaces, the Nukes were the first responders who would turn over DC efforts to the NFP. ie.  Nukes were taking IA's and initial DC actions while the NFP was in route with full FFE's and their own equipment. Yes, we didn't even get out of our racks if the fire wasn't in the plant. We have a designated group who is focused on DC. The overwhelming majority of the people on this team were indeed females.

They had all of the same responsibilities and took the same actions while facing the same casualties. I was on our drill team and had a chance to watch them in action several times and they did just as good of a job as their male counterparts. The fire on CVN-73, back in 2008 wasn't combated by a bunch of big strong men. This has been tested and it would work just fine. You would have to get used to hearing, "Hey, can you go downstairs and open that valve, she is on watch." That is definite downside.
Now if you wanted to make the case that to stand watch in a plant that you had to pass a nuke version PRT, I'd be all for it. I would propose swinging a combined exhaust/relief valve and then running from the 7th deck to the 2nd deck through two Zebra set hatches and then donning an SCBA. It would be an immense waste of time in already loaded work environment, but then again, so is our current process.

Agree with it or not, the navy is starting to not sort out sailors by gender or sexual preference in every environment.

[730SMAG]

Not to fear! This has been tested before and is currently working onboard our surface ships as we speak.  When I was onboard the Mighty Warship Eisenhower, we had a Nucleus Fire Party. The NFP was responsible for all damage control efforts outside of the engineering spaces. In the engineering spaces, the Nukes were the first responders who would turn over DC efforts to the NFP. ie.  Nukes were taking IA's and initial DC actions while the NFP was in route with full FFE's and their own equipment. Yes, we didn't even get out of our racks if the fire wasn't in the plant. We have a designated group who is focused on DC. The overwhelming majority of the people on this team were indeed females.

They had all of the same responsibilities and took the same actions while facing the same casualties. I was on our drill team and had a chance to watch them in action several times and they did just as good of a job as their male counterparts. The fire on CVN-73, back in 2008 wasn't combated by a bunch of big strong men. This has been tested and it would work just fine. You would have to get used to hearing, "Hey, can you go downstairs and open that valve, she is on watch." That is definite downside.
Now if you wanted to make the case that to stand watch in a plant that you had to pass a nuke version PRT, I'd be all for it. I would propose swinging a combined exhaust/relief valve and then running from the 7th deck to the 2nd deck through two Zebra set hatches and then donning an SCBA. It would be an immense waste of time in already loaded work environment, but then again, so is our current process.

Agree with it or not, the navy is starting to not sort out sailors by gender or sexual preference in every environment.

Interesting perspective on it, drayer; I'll admit that most of what I know about women in the fleet is anecdotal from the guys I know who've served in the surface fleet.  And most of the opinions I've heard are...less than completely positive, to be blunt.  I'm fully aware that the Navy's moving towards integration, and I personally have no problem with it.  Great career opportunities, increased manning, etc, etc, as long as they can do their jobs.

But there's one part of your statement that really, really worries me.  "Hey, can you go downstairs and open that valve, she is on watch."  Maybe it's just me, but...  That a little concerning.  I stood ERF, and on that watchstation alone - at least on a 726 - we had several large (>1 ft handwheel) valves that we had to sling for casualties.  Not to mention the FRVs in manual control can require a decent amount of muscle to wing open and shut in response to transients; ours were sticky, to stay the least.  And don't get me started on the ship's service hydraulic plant isolation valves, which required a T-handle and a cheater bar on some of them.  

And that, I note, is my only concern.  We don't have the manning to have someone run down and help someone open up a valve or isolate a system for a casualty, especially if it needs a prompt response.  I mean, sure, you have the CAT back there in a couple minutes, but underway steaming, we have 12 guys in the ER.  Four of whom are in maneuvering, with the EWS and ERS as the only 'roving' watchstanders in the ER.  And if the person on watch, in that space, can't handle every immediate action for that casualty by themselves...  I don't think they belong there.  It's unsafe for plant operations, to say the least, if you need that person plus someone else to handle the job.

How would you suggest being able to deal with that sort of thing?  

[spekkio]

Anyone who physically cannot perform every DC role, up to and including dragging a 280-pound guy in an SCBA and FFE out of a compartment, should not be on a submarine.

You have to get off your high horse a lil' bit there killa...most submariners, particularly nukes, can't carry a 280 lb person out of a compartment by themselves. Fire extinguishers and portable submersible pumps aren't so heavy that a female wouldn't be able to handle them, unless they are trying to pretend to be a priss to avoid pulling their own weight...and if they do that, the submarine community and culture will take care of that quickly, I'm sure. The only problem would be how long it takes for one of them to cry discrimination against women when it's really discrimination against stupid and lazy.

Nukes were taking IA's and initial DC actions while the NFP was in route with full FFE's and their own equipment. Yes, we didn't even get out of our racks if the fire wasn't in the plant. We have a designated group who is focused on DC. The overwhelming majority of the people on this team were indeed females.

There are only 110-120 crewmembers on a submarine, and not all of them are qualified; you simply don't have enough personnel to make up for a qualified watchstander being unable to perform basic DC roles. You especially don't have the personnel to make up for a crew that is 20% comprised of them.

Our percentages of "hot racking" was such that almost all of 21 man was hot bunking..... may have been 2 or 3 racks that weren't. So figure 3+(9*3)= 39 women. But that was a long time ago on an old pig boat.

Well, then you buy yourself into the opposite situation where a female E-6 hot racks over a male E-4. Except the women can claim sexism and cause a lot more heat than the men.

[drayer54]

How would you suggest being able to deal with that sort of thing?  

It's very easy and common for some surface nuke to run off on a woman sailor bashing rant and I'm sure this is what you have heard. You would hear the obvious lines about them getting pregnant before deployments and hiding in their spaces away from everyone. You would also hear some stories about some being bad in general. Although, I also remember some guys who weren't worth the $1.75 a week they were getting paid. The sad part of the stereotype is the minority who work hard and do everything right. The VAST majority of the ones I served with did not finish their time and did the stuff that the stereotype said.I never understood the girls who dated around the department, especially on deployments. It's hard to explain this adequately without running off on a sexist opinionated tangent that wouldn't be appropriate for the forum...

As far as them not operating every valve in the plant, well that one is more difficult. I remember for certain evolutions having people cover for them, but we would have done the same for a smaller weaker guy(Who easily passed a PRT).We have some tough valves that were a tough job for some guys. We had two very short girls who couldn't reach or move some of the tougher valves and they required someone to constantly cover them. That's the reality of steaming a plant in that environment. You know what has to be done during a casualty and you usually know as a supervisory watchstander who will need the most help (either due to workload or capability). We had some guys who believed that they wouldn't receive help and therefore didn't feel the need to go sweat for them, that usually just slowed things down dramatically and ended up helping. I will say that despite it's issues, it has been working in for surface fleet and would have to work in the sub fleet. I don't think the two are different as some submariners would like to think. I know we usually end up fighting the same types of BS and most of the stories sound about the same. I would have done sub if I could go back and do it all over again for sure. This issue is one that will draw some strong opinions and I am trying to choose my words wisely, but I just don't think that you will ever see a way to keep everything fair. Fair varies from person to person......

[730SMAG]

You have to get off your high horse a lil' bit there killa...most submariners, particularly nukes, can't carry a 280 lb person out of a compartment by themselves. Fire extinguishers and portable submersible pumps aren't so heavy that a female wouldn't be able to handle them, unless they are trying to pretend to be a priss to avoid pulling their own weight...and if they do that, the submarine community and culture will take care of that quickly, I'm sure.

There's a reason I said drag.  But more seriously, yeah, that is something of a high horse.  But it's probably a consistent opinion that will be encountered; I know I'm not the only one to feel that way.  And most males will, frankly, come closer to being able to drag someone out of a compartment than a female, it's simply a matter of peak upper body strength, and that's simple biology.

[spekkio]

And I'm telling you that I look around my boat, and either two cases are true:

1) I have the most fat, out of shape crew in the entire submarine force OR
2) The laws of average have taken effect and the average submariner is not going to be able to handle a 280 lb person by himself.

Mind you, this is 280 lbs...that's someone who already weighs over 200 lbs before he put his gear on, ie he is also fat and out of shape, since most submariners are under 6'.

Also, DC training has you leave the down person in the compartment and fight the fire. The EMAT team gets him out later, AFTER you put out the fire that's threatening the other 119 people on board and a multi-billion dollar warship. No female ERS watch is going to have to evacuate ERLL by herself during a fire. She's going to be faking out the hose as trained with the RT, AEA, TRW, and LTOW and applying water as necessary until relieved by the FFE hose team.

How often have you heard the line "fitness doesn't have anything to do with how well I can do my job?" Simple biology doesn't automatically make you stronger. You still have to do exercise to gain strength. Your argument is the classical, sexist "women can't do this because they are inherently weaker," except that you are vastly over-estimating the amount of physical strength it takes to conduct damage control efforts and you're using an example that is contrary to submarine fire fighting doctrine anyway.

[730SMAG]

And I'm telling you that I look around my boat, and either two cases are true:

1) I have the most fat, out of shape crew in the entire submarine force OR
2) The laws of average have taken effect and the average submariner is not going to be able to handle a 280 lb person by himself.

Mind you, this is 280 lbs...that's someone who already weighs over 200 lbs before he put his gear on, ie he is also fat and out of shape, since most submariners are under 6'.

Also, DC training has you leave the down person in the compartment and fight the fire. The EMAT team gets him out later, AFTER you put out the fire that's threatening the other 119 people on board and a multi-billion dollar warship. No female ERS watch is going to have to evacuate ERLL by herself during a fire. She's going to be grabbing the nearest fire extinguisher to put agent on the fire as trained.

How often have you heard the line "fitness doesn't have anything to do with how well I can do my job?" Simple biology doesn't automatically make you stronger. You still have to do exercise to gain strength. Your argument is the classical, sexist "women can't do this because they are inherently weaker," except that you are vastly over-estimating the amount of physical strength it takes to conduct damage control efforts and you're using an example that is contrary to submarine fire fighting doctrine anyway.

Okay, you have a point there.  Completely destroyed my argument, in fact; I'd gotten too fixated on the being able to haul someone out of the compartment thing and neglected the actual DC manual requirements.  Forgive me, it's been a while since I've looked at the thing.  And the 280-pounds thing was just an extreme, we had some pretty big guys on my boat.  I would agree that most people aren't at that weight. 

And I agree, simple biology doesn't make you stronger.  I know there are women out there who can bench more than I can.  But it also turns around and says that the physiological makeup between men and women are different in the terms of peak cardiovascular capacity, muscle strength, etc.  Putting in the time to work out and get in shape matters, but biology still has a final word for both ease of gaining strength and final peak strength potential.  I don't think I'm being too sexist here when I'm stating facts. 

And no, most DC efforts do not take that much physical strength.  Some do; I believe my other example was hauling a submersible pump.  No, I don't remember exactly how much it weighed, but it was a good forty, fifty pounds?  Could you check on that for me when you get a chance?  Or any of the other tasks onboard which require, in the end, brute physical strength.  If a female sailor can meet those goals and satisfy those responsibilities, then there's nothing wrong with them standing the watch. 

It's going back to - yes, I'm retreating here - the ability to do the job.  I threw out a couple extreme examples, you shot'em down.  That means they were bad examples, really, and I do admit that I'm overstating some things here. 

It's very easy and common for some surface nuke to run off on a woman sailor bashing rant and I'm sure this is what you have heard. You would hear the obvious lines about them getting pregnant before deployments and hiding in their spaces away from everyone. You would also hear some stories about some being bad in general. Although, I also remember some guys who weren't worth the $1.75 a week they were getting paid. The sad part of the stereotype is the minority who work hard and do everything right. The VAST majority of the ones I served with did not finish their time and did the stuff that the stereotype said.I never understood the girls who dated around the department, especially on deployments. It's hard to explain this adequately without running off on a sexist opinionated tangent that wouldn't be appropriate for the forum...

As far as them not operating every valve in the plant, well that one is more difficult. I remember for certain evolutions having people cover for them, but we would have done the same for a smaller weaker guy(Who easily passed a PRT).We have some tough valves that were a tough job for some guys. We had two very short girls who couldn't reach or move some of the tougher valves and they required someone to constantly cover them. That's the reality of steaming a plant in that environment. You know what has to be done during a casualty and you usually know as a supervisory watchstander who will need the most help (either due to workload or capability). We had some guys who believed that they wouldn't receive help and therefore didn't feel the need to go sweat for them, that usually just slowed things down dramatically and ended up helping. I will say that despite it's issues, it has been working in for surface fleet and would have to work in the sub fleet. I don't think the two are different as some submariners would like to think. I know we usually end up fighting the same types of BS and most of the stories sound about the same. I would have done sub if I could go back and do it all over again for sure. This issue is one that will draw some strong opinions and I am trying to choose my words wisely, but I just don't think that you will ever see a way to keep everything fair. Fair varies from person to person......

I'd agree, most of the comments I've heard were woman sailor bashing rants, with the occasional positive comment.  And I agree with you; there's no point in going off on that tangent.


But that still comes back to my main concern.  We simply don't have the manning to be able to have people cover for them.  There's 180 people on a boomer, 40 of whom are nukes when we're fully manned (we're usually not).  A bare-bones, three-section underway watch means we have 5 ELTs, 12 MMs, 10 EMs, 7 ETs, and the EDMC.  35 nukes.  And that's three-section on all watchstations, with the division chiefs and EDMC standing 4-section EWS, 4-section ERS with the LELT, and an underway ELT.

And if a casualty occurs, we can't afford anyone that's not pulling their full weight, or needs someone to back them up. 

The reality of the situation on a submarine is that every watchstander has to be able to perform the IA's on that watch, because things are much more time-critical and sensitive.  It's apples and oranges, as far as I can tell, when it comes to DC response.  We lose the ER, we're screwed.  A carrier loses an ER, they still have the ability to steam, etc.  These are extremes, I agree, but that's what people are going to look at.  On the day-to-day operational level, I don't think women will have any issue operating the plant.  But in a casualty situation, when everything is on the line, we need people who can, without hesitation or need for backup, operate everything on that watchstation to fight the casualty.

And going back to what spekkio was saying, the vast majority of things can be handled without concern.  It's the outliers that are problematic, and as I said previously, they're the ones that will matter when people are looking at the worst-case scenario.

[spekkio]

And I agree, simple biology doesn't make you stronger.  I know there are women out there who can bench more than I can.  But it also turns around and says that the physiological makeup between men and women are different in the terms of peak cardiovascular capacity, muscle strength, etc.  Putting in the time to work out and get in shape matters, but biology still has a final word for both ease of gaining strength and final peak strength potential.  I don't think I'm being too sexist here when I'm stating facts. 

And no, most DC efforts do not take that much physical strength.  Some do; I believe my other example was hauling a submersible pump.  No, I don't remember exactly how much it weighed, but it was a good forty, fifty pounds?  Could you check on that for me when you get a chance?  Or any of the other tasks onboard which require, in the end, brute physical strength.  If a female sailor can meet those goals and satisfy those responsibilities, then there's nothing wrong with them standing the watch. 

I agree that men, on average, are stronger than women. But this only matters when the people involved are performing tasks that require a high level of physical strength. I contend that lifting 50 lbs does not fit that definition, and the vast majority of both men and women can handle lifting that weight without having to hit the gym. Additionally, rigging the portable submersible pump is a supplementary action that is handled by the DC party. While it's still inexcusable, it's a lot easier to work around the runts who can't handle the thing when you have quite a few people standing by on crew's mess by that time.

I have also seen scrawny guys who can't handle some valves in the plant. What do they do? They get a bigger mechanic, who helps him, then usually makes a sarcastic comment about the other dude's strength/manliness/nubliness, the other dude turns it into a your mom joke, and they carry on smartly. I have also had a male ET nuke whine about/refuse to carry something that is 60 lbs by himself because the "procedure" says it's a 2-person lift.

It's going back to - yes, I'm retreating here - the ability to do the job.  I threw out a couple extreme examples, you shot'em down.  That means they were bad examples, really, and I do admit that I'm overstating some things here.

And with some very rare exceptions that would probably require extra manpower anyway, women are fully capable of doing the same job as men on a submarine. The real challenge is working with a ship design that was not built for coed inhabitants. The options to fix this are: a) expensive overhauls that change the layout of berthing b) somehow managing manpower so you have X amount of women on board at all times so that they can take up one berthing compartment alone without wasting racks c) coed berthing or d) wasting 7 racks in 9-man to accomodate having 2 women on board. Knowing the Navy, I bet they go with d.

[730SMAG]

I agree that men, on average, are stronger than women. But this only matters when the people involved are performing tasks that require a high level of physical strength. I contend that lifting 50 lbs does not fit that definition, and the vast majority of both men and women can handle lifting that weight without having to hit the gym. Additionally, rigging the portable submersible pump is a supplementary action that is handled by the DC party. While it's still inexcusable, it's a lot easier to work around the runts who can't handle the thing when you have quite a few people standing by on crew's mess by that time.

My counter-contention is there shouldn't be a need to have a situation handled differently based on "working around the runts," as you call it.  Which is my sole contention in this argument; if women want to be on submarines, they should be able to perform the same tasks as a male.  I don't remember DC party assignments being made by strength/fitness; if you got assigned the job, you went and did the job.

And you're more than correct, there are work-arounds for the problem.  I believe - and drayer may be able to back me up on this - that it's what they do on surface ships with some of the heavier and bulkier DC gear.  My argument is that there shouldn't be a need for this, because it'll start creating friction.  Imagine, say, the coner/nuke liberty difference, but applied to DC or maintenance.  "Oh, she can't do X, we'll get a guy to do it." 

I'm not saying it'll happen, but that's something I suspect will happen.  My experience with female sailors is limited, so, I can't speak from experience when it comes to that.  If drayer could chime in on that, with how it works out in the surface fleet?

I have also seen scrawny guys who can't handle some valves in the plant. What do they do? They get a bigger mechanic, who helps him, then usually makes a sarcastic comment about the other dude's strength/manliness/nubliness, the other dude turns it into a your mom joke, and they carry on smartly. I have also had a male ET nuke whine about/refuse to carry something that is 60 lbs by himself because the "procedure" says it's a 2-person lift.
And with some very rare exceptions that would probably require extra manpower anyway, women are fully capable of doing the same job as men on a submarine. The real challenge is working with a ship design that was not built for coed inhabitants. The options to fix this are: a) expensive overhauls that change the layout of berthing b) somehow managing manpower so you have X amount of women on board at all times so that they can take up one berthing compartment alone without wasting racks c) coed berthing or d) wasting 7 racks in 9-man to accomodate having 2 women on board.

Knowing the Navy, I bet they go with d.

Oh, I agree that that's the solution, but how often does it come up?  I don't think there was a handwheel'd valve in the ER I couldn't have operated, and I'm not on the high end of the strength scale.  There were ones that left me sweating and panting - the MFP isolations come to mind - when I was done, and there were definitely guys who could shut them faster than I could, but the thing is, I could shut them without needing to call someone to help me. 

I'm not disagreeing with you here, mind you.  The vast majority of operations onboard can be handled by women without any issues whatsoever.  It's those outliers and certain casualty actions that have me hesitating before I completely agree with women on submarines.  If they have the demonstrated ability, then by all means, there's absolutely nothing wrong with having them onboard.  I'd just like to see, well, proof first.  Call it failing conservatively on grounds of safety.


And...yeah, the berthing issue is going to be interesting, to say the least.  I'm not familiar with the berthing on a fast boat, but on a SSBN/SSGN, we could probably lose one of our bunkrooms to be converted into female berthing without too much issue, it'd just mean that the nonquals get to hotrack instead of getting their own bunk.  And I believe that's what they're doing with the officer staterooms, for when the first female officers hit the fleet.  One of them is being converted to female berthing, with the officer's head getting a little flippable 'female present' sign to warn off guys when a female is in the head.  Admittedly, there's the watchstander's head right across the corridor from the officer's head in the forward compartment, so that's not as big of a deal as it would be on a fast boat.

[spekkio]

My counter-contention is there shouldn't be a need to have a situation handled differently based on "working around the runts," as you call it.

Yea, but I wasn't referring to women when I said runts. While ideally we shouldn't have to work around the weak ones, reality is different.

[730SMAG]

Yea, but I wasn't referring to women when I said runts. While ideally we shouldn't have to work around the weak ones, reality is different.

Good point.  Although I don't remember anyone who had that problem - now, the ones we didn't trust to do their jobs, that's another story...

[GNowakowski]

It is going to be great when this becomes a Fast Attack problem.  What already at minimum manning? Oh, I am pregnant I will see you in a couple of years boat.  I weep for the future.    Oh before anyone gets their feelings hurt about women on subs, just remember it only takes one person to make a whole division go port and starboard.

My opinion has no value; but the aforementioned from http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php/topic,27234.msg142160.html#msg142160 thread seems like reason enough for close consideration. 

It would seem to me that women can and will do any job that men do, but men will never have the capacity to get pregnant.  Unfortunately this predicament requires special attention and makes for a situation which I'd be interested to see if there is any reliable solution to.  Not sexist; just realistic.

[730SMAG]

My opinion has no value; but the aforementioned from http://www.nukeworker.com/forum/index.php/topic,27234.msg142160.html#msg142160 thread seems like reason enough for close consideration. 

It would seem to me that women can and will do any job that men do, but men will never have the capacity to get pregnant.  Unfortunately this predicament requires special attention and makes for a situation which I'd be interested to see if there is any reliable solution to.  Not sexist; just realistic.

I have faith that people will be responsible and act like adults while assigned to mission-critical billets.

...oh, who am I kidding?  It'll be a nice, big can of worms the first time that happens. 

[Mike_Koehler]

  Well, then you buy yourself into the opposite situation where a female E-6 hot racks over a male E-4. Except the women can claim sexism and cause a lot more heat than the men.

The problem is not with the # of women present, but with keeping exactly the ratio of female 1st classes to female nubs (who hotrack) as you originally assigned to the boat (and female to men ratio). The issue is tough as it sits right now with no gender assignments to worry about. I remember finally becoming senior enough to have my own rack for a West-Pac only to lose that halfway through when someone more senior transferred to the boat at the midpoint and how that felt. I accepted it as part of the Sub life, but I probably wouldn't have been as easy with it if it were specifically caused by having a mixed gender crew. I feel this way as a male and I am sure that there would be females that also would feel that way.

Mike

[spekkio]

It would seem to me that women can and will do any job that men do, but men will never have the capacity to get pregnant.  Unfortunately this predicament requires special attention and makes for a situation which I'd be interested to see if there is any reliable solution to.  Not sexist; just realistic.

You're right, men don't get pregnant. However, how many men in your career have you seen get married to the wrong women and, as a result, suffer extreme job performance degradation? This happens quite frequently...wifey can't handle the long hours, the time underway, or refuses to move with hubby. Let's also not forget the people who go through divorces with women who make it their mission to take everything that they can. The result is hubby can't get his head back in "the game," and fails to perform up to the standards of his position. The big difference is that this guy stays on the boat instead of getting transferred, so not only does he become as useful as someone 2 paygrades lower, he continues to eat up a billet.

[drayer54]

You're right, men don't get pregnant. However, how many men in your career have you seen get married to the wrong women and, as a result, suffer extreme job performance degradation? This happens quite frequently...wifey can't handle the long hours, the time underway, or refuses to move with hubby. The result is hubby can't get his head back in "the game," and fails to perform up to the standards of his position. The big difference is that this guy stays on the boat instead of getting transferred, so not only does he become useless, he continues to eat up a billet.

This can happen to anyone in a relationship, even one of our new openly gay sailors.

I think your pushing it to the limit. The pregnancy issue is a far bigger hassle because the stork tends to do wonders in the month before a deployment. Getting to that bad part of the shipyard avail? Here comes the stork again.

You ever seen a sailor do 4 back to back prego tours on shore duty? I have.... just this week actually! This is not an all woman rant... This is a statement of observations.

The point that my sub friend was making here is that the smaller crew would feel the effect to a greater extent if an undermanned division were to have some preventable personnel losses before a deployment. I think the amount of women on the crew would make this a minimal pain, but that is what I believe he was trying to say.

[GNowakowski]

You're right, men don't get pregnant. However, how many men in your career have you seen get married to the wrong women and, as a result, suffer extreme job performance degradation? This happens quite frequently...wifey can't handle the long hours, the time underway, or refuses to move with hubby. Let's also not forget the people who go through divorces with women who make it their mission to take everything that they can. The result is hubby can't get his head back in "the game," and fails to perform up to the standards of his position. The big difference is that this guy stays on the boat instead of getting transferred, so not only does he become as useful as someone 2 paygrades lower, he continues to eat up a billet.

In my line of work I've seen both.  The degradation on a persons capability to safely continue their job is largely based on their own personal predelictions.  As such; its not an affect merited only to men, or women.  Both can be effected in this way.  The nature of the beast is that all things can be called effectively equal - and at the end of this equilibrium there is one item on the female list that isn't on the male's.  Once again I'm not being sexist, this is merely an observation.

If women simply don't get pregnant - then its simply not a problem.  Wouldn't it be nice if we could just keep it that simple?
Hopefully we do.

The point that my sub friend was making here is that the smaller crew would feel the effect to a greater extent if an undermanned division were to have some preventable personnel losses before a deployment. I think the amount of women on the crew would make this a minimal pain, but that is what I believe he was trying to say.

Spekkio - I'll once again recede by stating that I have no valuable opinion, as I've never been on a Submarine and therefore am completely uninformed as to the "going-ons" on-board.  My response was merely observation from the points brought up by others and the logical progression of common sense type thinking.  

I'm certain you're right.  I'm just uncertain as to how the Navy will effectively solve its upcoming challenges

_{...Note the use of the word "hopefully" in a discussion regarding Nuclear Reactor/Ordinance safety.}

[spekkio]

This can happen to anyone in a relationship, even one of our new openly gay sailors.

Yea, but while we're playing stereotypes, on average women don't get themselves into this kind of thing. I don't know if it's a matter of emotional maturity/strength or just the way we're "wired," but women tend to handle relationship issues better than men.  Additionally, while a divorce is stressful on both parties, the woman usually doesn't have to worry losing one quarter to half her pay for the rest of her life.

again, why not?

Because in 2011, those standards no longer apply.

I go back to the fact that women on submarines is a function of trying to fill manning. If the submarine force was at or over manning, we wouldn't even be considering this conversation. The Navy wants another pool of people to fill bodies, and their solution is to allow women on board. I don't know about you, but I haven't encountered any women who make a stink about not being able to serve on board submarines as it is. If you mandate birth control, you might as well not even bother allowing women on board because so few will want the job.

[HydroDave63]

We used to have a poster on the boards adamantly opposed to women on submarines because you cannot tell them to not get pregnant,....

again, why not?

Make the kids part of the crew!



Just convert some of the racks to a Montessori daycare/preschool in the Aft Berthing space of the SSGN Schroder class!