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'll be Mullen said that so that Obama would like him more. I'm sure the perks for the Chairman of the JCS are awesome.
Closest I ever got to that was being stationed on Air Force bases for my four years in Germany (Hahn & Spangdahlem). Even so, I moved off-base as soon as I could. It was a no-brainer...Hahn was 10 miles from the Mosel River, and I didn't move when I was transferred to Spangdahlem.
Women don’t belong ob subs.
Often, the closer to the tallest flagpoles, the faster common sense decreases.(the shinier the shoes, the murkier the reasoning)
On the pillows, probably not but don’t know about the rest.
I agree. If your post to me was intended for me, I encourage you to read all of them on this thread. I do not have a problem with women serving in most capacities in the military. There are a few that I believe that should be reserved for men. I am not a staunch believer that men and women are generally equal in every way.
I do not want a female marine to be captured by terrorists. It would be a larger moral impact on a war effort as images of her torture were sent around the world. Call me sexists, but the idea of what these pigs might do to one of our own female soldiers makes me sick. It would certainly affect me in a different way than if it were a man.
I do not want a woman to be in a situation where she may need to throw a fellow soldier over her shoulder and run for safety. This is not to say there are not women out there that could do it or that there are men out there that could not, given any specific situation.
I do not want a woman in a situation where her own discomfort or situational emotion affects her abilities or duties or those of the other service men. Being seen naked routinely by other seamates, having to poop and pee in front of them or shower with them should be uncomfortable for most women. Being ribbed by shipmates about femine hygene products and procedures might not be that welcomed. Sleeping within 8" of men on the bunk above or below you, knowing that some masterbate, might keep her up at night.
Again, I am not sexists, maybe a little old fashion, but I logically see some circumstances that introducing women into can be detrimental to the cause. I know women have been captured in battle. I know they fly everything from fighters to attack helicopters.
Bingo.
When I was an officer in The Army, it was strictly forbidden for a company commander to list pregnancy or any “female” reason as a factor in unavailable or non-deployable readiness.
Numbers were fudged and reasons were made up completely.
Of course, the fact that almost the entire battalion S-1 (personnel) section was female and most of them were pregnant at some point during their tour couldn’t have been a factor.
Naaaaan.
I don’t see why a woman would want to anyway. Aside from the no personal space, etc........it smells, it’s cramped, six on twelve off is annoying, if you work back aft it is beyond boring, and they would have to ban Blue Nose, Shell Back Ceremonies, etc.
Actually all the PC stuff the men would have to be indoctrinated to would ruin the service..........
Ah, yes. But, I'm unfamiliar with the aircrew that flies for six months straight - or longer.
The problems that women aboard ship, especially in such a small and confined boat like a sub, present to command are two-fold,. First, it's the necessary but problematic segregation of the sexes for berthing purposes. Why do we want to segregate the sexes in the berthing areas? Because if we don't, the crew begins to multiply like bunnies - to say nothing of the corrosive nature of sexual intimacy on morale and discipline amongst the crew.
And, to build upon the "bunnies" problems, once a female crew member becomes pregnant, they are a liability to the ship and her mission. There's no other way to couch it.
Well, there is a mile high club for the fly boys, and now we can have a mile deep or mile low club for the submariners.
You can ruin a military person’s career with a sexual harassment complaint, but a military member cannot get monetary damages. Just for general information.
Apparently, he's willing to trade that for STDs on the missile subs.
("Fire torpedo...ONE!" "Ohhh!")
*head-desk*
It already has, in many cases.
Soldiers are taught that females are “equal” in every way.
EVERY WAY.
Then, we’re forced to undergo “diversity” and “sensitivity” training because they’re, well, “different”. Soldiers are punished for offending their feminine sensibilities.
What kind of a mixed message is that?
Mentioning the significant gap in physical abilities is not allowed, and is even punishable. “Suck it up, Soldier! Pick up that extra rifle and pack and drive on! She’ll be waiting for it when you reach the finish line.”
The US Navy did a complete stand-down for three days over this. Unprecedented, as it’s only been done for safety reasons.
1993, IIRC.
Poor choice of words. "Sir, she's going down!"
Cheers!
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!
Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "Loose Lips...Sink Ships!"
NO more calls, please.
We have a WINNER!
I am sure that co-ed subs will cause more than a few women to “blow tubes”
Hey, what’s your expeience and opinion about women in submarines?
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.