Report: Mullen Backs Women Serving on Submarines

Female sailors can broaden their role in the Navy by serving on submarines, an activity currently prohibited by the Armed Service, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has advised the Senate Armed Services Committee.

According to Defensetech.org, a site run by Military.com, a group boasting a membership of 10 million veterans and active duty forces, Adm. Michael Mullen told senators in a recent survey that he's long been an advocate for improving diversity in the Armed Forces.

"I believe we should continue to broaden opportunities for women. One policy I would like to see changed is the one barring their service aboard submarines," he added.

The policy change would mark a huge shift for the Navy, whose submarines have been devoid of female sailors even though women began flying fighter jets and performing other seagoing combat roles 15 years ago.

Defensetech.org reported that Mullen, a former chief of naval operations and a surface warfare officer, wrote his endorsement of women serving in subs in his response to questions submitted by senators preparing for Mullen's confirmation hearing for a second term as chairman of the JCS. That hearing was held Sept. 15.

Opponents of females serving on submarines say space is too restrictive to accommodate privacy needs for women, in particular bathrooms. Another study -- conducted in 1994 -- noted that fraternization in close quarters, among other issues, could also complicate operations at sea

This would require the immediate removal of a pregnant woman from the boat the instant she is medically determined to be pregnant. This would immediately compromise the mission of the boat.

This would be a huge problem. Subs move in secrecy. They'd have to surface for the medevac. This would give up the sub's position, causing untold problems from failed mission objectives to potentially embarrasing international incidents that would have to be explained by red-faced Presidents.

Pregnant women on carriers (or other surface ships) are flown off via the C-3s or helos that leave the deck all the time. No big deal except that she leaves behind a short-handed work center. Carrier movement isn't as cloaked in secrecy as subs are. Carrier Strike Groups don't hide very easily. Furthermore, carriers tend to operate close to land (and medical facilities) as the range of carrier-based aircraft isn't that great. Subs can be out in the middle of nowhere, days away from a shore-based hospital.

(hence the saying “caught with your pants down”-nobody was pulling security for her)

I read an article by a woman who joined the Army. She genuinely wanted to serve - wasn't some feminist trying to make a point.

Anyhoo, I took two things away from the article. One was how astonished she was at how hard it is for the average woman to keep up with the average man. She stated that "she was in good shape (...i can't speak to that...), and she just couldn't do it. Furthermore, the women in her unit would fall out in droves."

The second goes to your point. She talked about the need for "Battle Buddies" - as I understand it, that would be a female "partner" to accompany you to the bathroom to prevent sexual harassment. Her comment was "Let me get this straight, I'm going to protect us from North Korea, but I'm not allowed to go to the bathroom by myself???"

Personally speaking, I think that women don't belong in combat. Realistically speaking, I suppose that if they can perform to the same level that men are held to, then there's no issue. From what I hear on FR, and in general, that just ain't the case.

I did some time on subs in the sixties and as you might expect, we often discussed this possibility. It was amazing how many guys said they would get out of the Navy if they put women on subs!

The FBM boats of the sixties were huge compared to any other subs of that time, but today they are small compared to the new boats. Even so, arrangements could have been made to meet the ‘special’ privacy needs of the females.

As far as ‘indoctrination for the male swabs’ goes, whoever made that comment is not familiar with today’s Navy. Sub sailors don’t smoke, any more. It’s not allowed. They don’t use foul language, either, which begs the question, “How can they really express themselves?”

Boats today are big enough to accomodate the women and whatever ‘special’ needs they might have. Nuclear subs, then and now, have less radiation than a Santa Monica beach, so that’s not a problem. (That was documented in the fifties.) The sailors of today are ‘indoctrinated’ into PC life from the time they are sworn in. And life aboard an operating nuclear sub of any kind could not possibly be less comfortable, less secure, or have less ‘privacy’ than a middle-Eastern desert in the summer....

The Submarine Service of today is ‘touchy-feely’ to the extreme. I suspect the males will have to watch out for the females!

US Navy Mans Two Nuclear Subs with Women
The New York Times ^ | April 1, 2008 | Seymor Conch and James Boswell

Posted on Thursday, July 24, 2008 7:06:12 PM by MinorityRepublican

The last bastion of male dominance in the US Navy is about to be swept into history. While the eyes of the nation are focused on the first woman to have a shot at winning her party’s nomination for President, the Department of the Navy has unveiled a project underway since last summer that will put women in submarines.

“This is way overdue,” insists Lt. Hanne Bright, an up and coming naval officer. She is among 340 female officers and chiefs who have been selected to initiate an abrupt change in Navy policy; the manning of submarines by women.

Women in the United States Navy command warships and pilot combat jets off aircraft carriers today, but until now there remained one part of the fleet where they could not serve: aboard the nation’s nuclear-powered submarines.

Now, as the Navy has begun building a new class of submarines, an influential military advisory committee reignited the debate over the exclusion, recommending that the Navy plan to allow women to join one of the service’s most storied and traditional fraternities.

‘’It’s important we re-examine what is still closed to women,’’ said Sue Winkle, the chairwoman of the group, the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, the Pentagon’s main body that recommends policies on the issues that face women in the armed forces.

Opposition to the time-honored all-male tradition has been strong. Submarines are extremely space limited and the Navy has always maintained that designing and maintaining co-ed subs would make them too expensive. Now, however, with the backing of outgoing President George Bush, the Navy plans to get women into submarines and avoid mixing with seamen by making two US Virginia class subs consist of all-female crew and officers.

One of the first female Prospective Commanding Officers for submarines, Commander Sarah Bentworth, is eager to get started. She spend two tours aboard the USS Virginia in order to prepare for her first sub command. The Navy spokesman says the plan should be implemented by Dec 2009.

In a speech to the Naval Submarine League last summer, Donald C. Winter, the secretary of the Navy, signaled support for integrating the submarine fleet, but the controversy over his remarks ignited a flurry of protest. He warned in the speech that the ‘’submarine community’’ — a tightly knit cadre of crew members and officers — risked becoming dangerously out of touch with society if it did not adapt to include women, as well as more minority submariners.

‘’The most Narcissus-like thing about creating something in your own image, about being in love with your own image,’’ he said, ‘’is the continued and continuous existence of this segment of the Navy as a male preserve.’’

What few mention is the likelihood that the Navy is pushing ahead with the female submariner program to avoid involvement of the US Supreme Court, scheduled to hear a case this May, Bishop vs. the State of Connecticut. Captain Bridget Bishop, an accomplished career naval officer argues that prohibiting women from serving aboard submarines limits their career potential. “If history and social progress are any measure, this rule keeping women serving their country in submarines, one of the last forms of discrimination, is not tenable,” says Rachael Perperam.

“In the past, all right, there were solid reasons to keep the submarine force all male,” said Lt. Commander Katrina Van Tassel, sitting in the officers’ ward room, which serves as dining hall, conference room, chapel and, in case of medical emergencies, operating room. “But this is the 21-st century, women can vote, drive cars, wear pants—why can’t they be in charge of a nuclear attack sub?”

Chief Petty Officer Doug Wilson disagrees. “Close quarters with mixed crews produce romantic relationships. Our culture has given up on sexual purity, so why do we expect people will magically become `professional’ and abstinent once they are crammed together inside a 350 tube?” He shakes his head. “I went to submarines to get a breather from my wife and her mother. Especially her mother. Now I have to spend 60 days underwater with women? You know how long they take in the bathroom.”

“I can tell you one thing,” Lt. Bright says, “we may or may not have a woman president this time next year, but we will have women submarines at sea. Move over, sailor.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.