Posted on 09/24/2009 11:38:30 AM PDT by Ben Mugged
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
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I don't see how this policy enhances the capability of our submarine force, therefore it's par for the course in the 0bama administration.
I'm to the point now where I can only refer to him as the a$$ occupying the white house.
And less likely to deploy.
Less likely to be able to carry their own kit.
Less likely to engage the enemy.
I was a Lance (nuclear) missile officer and the majority of them (all female officers) were incompetent.
But, hey, they were all pregnant more than half the time, so no big deal because they could rarely deploy on exercises. As long as a male soldier was picking up the slack ...
In general I agree with you. I spent a lifetime in the military and on the whole I've found my female peers just as dedicated and just as qualified as my male peers. However, it's a different environment in a cramped submarine that remains underwater for months at a time. The logistics involved with segmenting birthing and heads by sex is just too complicated to solve easily.
Being an old fart, I really don’t know the answer to this one even though, I suspect the answer is no. Do the sub crews still share racks on a shift basis? If so that could get real interesting.
It would really be "hot bunking" when overlap occured.
A lot more don't.
I am not a submariner, but a good friend of mine served on the Nautilus. He said his main problem was that he was married, so it would be harder on the uys trying to be faithful to their wives, knowing that their shipmates were getting attention.
You don't know much about military law do you?
subs - long , hard and full of seamen, er, seapersons.
True enough. But imagine being deployed on LA-Class sub for weeks. No extra room, hot bunking all over the place, only a few heads. It would be a nightmare.
Women have been serving on Aircrew duty alongside men for over 20 years with distinction.
Scroll up to 43 and you’ll see that I’m not keen on the idea.
Navy/Girl Submarine joke ...”
-
I’m working on one using the phrase
“going down in a submarine”
I’ll get back to you.
I could see it. It really depends on what they would be serving.
Well the solution to that is to court-martial the mother and castrate the father. That’ll end it in short order.
space is for fun, gee-whiz, neato exploration . War is for killing and national defense.
most astronauts are not 18-20, with raging hormones, either...
space trips are front page news, secret sub movements are not...
My PERSONAL experience says that, at any given time, 33% of any given female compliment will be pregnant and undeployable. Sure, they walk around in MATERNITY BDUs (WTF?) barking orders, but the can’t stand more than a day in the field before being driven (or even AIRLIFTED) back to the rear.
Then, when you ETS and become a reserve officer, you’ll meet the worst of these when she comes to your unit to give the “Diversity” lecture.
IMO, it's a stupid idea. I remember when Carter authorized female soldiers in remote Nike-Hercules batteries in Germany. It was done without any thought to living conditions, and modification of barracks facilities for female soldiers.
As a result, female soldiers (mostly E-1s to E-3s) were able to move off-site, forcing male sergeants back into the barracks. It took months for morale to return to normal.
Many a Friday night was spent at Herr Barden's gasthaus in Loffelscheid (near Hahn AB), listening to the horror stories of life on a Nike-Herc site. Don't forget that this was also at the advent of the all-volunteer force.
I considered myself lucky to be in the short-range arm of air defense artillery...women weren't allowed into those units, as their mission included front line support to infantry and armor units.
And having women aboard submarines is a good idea because...???
There is NO good rationale for putting women on submarines and a LOT of good reasons NOT to do that. Just ONE is the effect such an act has on families of the male submariners. Every wife wondering if one of the women aboard will somehow become irresistible to HER husband. That makes for problems at home and increases problems shipboard for the Navy. Mullen is an idiot.
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.