|
|
|
|
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 6:32:56 PM | I understood what you were saying, I just don't see any proof in a quick bing search that women who get pregnant are automatically free of their duty to serve. I know of several mothers deployed RIGHT NOW--of course they're not preggers right now--but the point is, they're still in the AF and National Guard. So I don't quite believe what you say--that by dearth of prenancy a woman is kicked out, or allowed out (bold edit for dumbass below), of the military. I understand that you feel this is the case, and I understand that you feel it's unfair that men can't get pregnant and thereby be absolved of their duty to serve in this same manner.
And, here's the kicker--THE POINT IS MOOT. You keep bringing up UNFIT to serve people, and because in YOUR words they are ALWAYS women, you are biased in your arguments.
You have lost your credibility by saying I said it was the man's "fault" for her getting pregnant--read my words again, this time with comprehension. In actuallity, YOU said the WOMAN got herself pregnant, I and others merely pointed out it didn't happen without a man there.
=========
I'm not angry at all, I just think you are biased and therefore painting an unfair portait of women who are serving their country honorably. You're talking as if you are THE expert on women in the military, and I'm just pointing out the flaws in your thinking. Sorry if it hit a nerve, but I grew up in the military and many of my friends--male and female--are military, so I don't like to hear lies and sensationalist trivia. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 6:51:21 PM |
I understood what you were saying, I just don't see any proof in a quick bing search that women who get pregnant are automatically free of their duty to serve. I know of several mothers deployed RIGHT NOW--of course they're not preggers right now--but the point is, they're still in the AF and National Guard. So I don't quite believe what you say--that by dearth of prenancy a woman is kicked out, or allowed out, of the military. I understand that you feel this is the case, and I understand that you feel it's unfair that men can't get pregnant and thereby be absolved of their duty to serve in this same manner.
And, here's the kicker--THE POINT IS MOOT. You keep bringing up UNFIT to serve people, and because in YOUR words they are ALWAYS women, you are biased in your arguments.
You have lost your credibility by saying I said it was the man's "fault" for her getting pregnant--read my words again, this time with comprehension. In actuallity, YOU said the WOMAN got herself pregnant, I and others merely pointed out it didn't happen without a man there.
1. The discussion was on women in subs, so obviously it will be about that.
2. I never said they got kicked out for getting pregnet, actually I stated they could not get kicked out. What I stated was that they have the option of leaving the service if they choose, whereas men do not. So it looks like you need to work on your reading and comprhension abilities. Heres is some advice, don't get so irate when someone disagrees with you, you lose credibility.
3.Yes, I'm aware that I said the women got themselves pregnent, it is more their choice then the man's. If a women does not WANT to get pregnent then she does not get pregnent. For an example, go look at any succesful career women, she usually doesn't have kids because she knows they get in the way, but she is still very sexualy active.
So darlin, just relax and fully read the message before the irate feelings take over.
P.S. Its not that I think men should get pregnent too in order get out of their contract (what an idiotic concept). I think it is bullshit that females have the option period. Look, you signed a contract for EIGHT years of your life, most of the time it is FOUR years active. I believe that getting pregnent should be considered a contract violation, thus resulting in disipline. The same as if any male violates the contract. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/19/2009 8:34:17 AM | Women! if you give them what they want, they won't want it anymore.
That's the nature of woman. She wants.
and that's what makes the rocking world go round.
It's man's nature to see that she gets it!
It's so hard to say "No!"
Weaker men don't and wiser men know better.
Some women enjoy this "setup" and a few hate it!
Should a few make policy?
Policy and law has long term implications.
You allow a camel to stick his small head in the tent
it's only a matter of time you are sharing your tent with a camel.
Dance | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/19/2009 1:42:54 PM | I'm not angry at all, I just think you are biased and therefore painting an unfair portait of women who are serving their country honorably. You're talking as if you are THE expert on women in the military, and I'm just pointing out the flaws in your thinking. Sorry if it hit a nerve, but I grew up in the military and many of my friends--male and female--are military, so I don't like to hear lies and sensationalist trivia.
So, essentially you are too lazy to search for the laws. If you can't just type it in and have the answer spit straight out at you by google than it does not exist (taken from the your phrase about "quick bing search").
Highlight where I said, "I was the expert", or is that just something you are throwing out there because I disagree with you? I did state that this is based on my experiance and I also stated that not all women are like this. Actually, you did manage to get one thing correct out of your accusations, I am biased. But that was already established by another poster it has also been established that my bias is based on experiance with females in the service.
You haven't pointed out any flaws. All you've done is attempt to slander, disagree, admit you are too lazy to search for facts ("guick bing search") and insult. So essentially all you've done is argue based off emotional sentiments without a clear understanding of anything, except that someone said something that you think you don't like, so you iratly argue with said person. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/19/2009 2:37:36 PM |
You haven't pointed out any flaws.
I'll do it now.
Outside:
So, essentially you are too lazy to search for the laws.
So, essentially, you couldn't find them, either, huh? Can't find what doesn't exist.
Highlight where I said, "I was the expert",
Highlight where *I* said you were the expert.
Outside:
I did state that this is based on my experiance and I also stated that not all women are like this.
Outside:
Not unless our little American princesses change their attitudes and laws change. Same with the gays, I have nothing against them, but the answer is the same for them as women, for the same reasons. I was stuck with women a time or two when I was in the Marines, luckely I was a squad leader and managed to get rid of them by pulling some strings. Through my experience they are all useless.
Based on a "time or two's" worth of experience.
Now this is my opinion baised off of women I was forced to work with, I'm not saying that all of them are like that, I just never met one that wasn't useless.
You say they're all like that, then say you're not saying they're all like that. Cool world you live in!
There is a newer survey out, but I can’t seem to find it.
I guess you're just too lazy to look.
I have no issues with women in the military, nor do I have an issue with them doing the jobs they can't/don't do now.
Actually, you did manage to get one thing correct out of your accusations, I am biased.
How ironic that you argue that women are the same as men
I NEVER have argued that; in fact, I stated the exact opposite.
You guys who are aurguing on the side of women with men don't seem to care for males at all. One wonders how you drew this conclusion.
Also, you keep trying the "darlin'" thing (passive-aggressive), and the "emotional" and "irate" thing (really, I am minimally invested in this thread). It seems to me that YOU are pretty emotional about this--and that's ok! But you keep arguing that women are useless in military, and it's not true. SOME are, some aren't. SOME MEN ARE, some aren't. So you essentially want to ban ALL women from serving on subs because "a time or two" you met useless women in the Marines; but NOT men (even though I am tempted to believe that "a time or two" you've met useless men as well). Does that even make ANY sense to you, rationally?! | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/19/2009 4:13:57 PM | CassaGo:
You really need to settle down. For someone not to invested you sure take alot of time. I never said ban them. I said, "No", if the laws don't change. If they don't want to change the special treatment thing, then let them have their own subs...you are the one that said BAN. You wouldn't have invested time if youdidn't care. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 11:47:03 AM | I only read the OP, but I have to say that I don't think women need to participate in the Navy to the degree that they need to participate as crewMEN on a submarine!
Geez ladies, why can't you just be happy being a WOMAN? Why do you always have to look at the men and try to compete with them???? I do get it, but it is such a waste of energy! I am a tomboy myself. Grew up with boy cousins all over the place! Learned to survive their treachery, learned to be treacherous! Probably would have loved the military but did not want to become "property of" or sign up for 4 more years of someone else telling me what to do (and probably getting raped for trying) back in those days. I wanted independence as much as any young woman does (and most young women are fighting for independence). Fighting for simple respect that we are indeed intelligent and capable. Just to hear that from a man would mean so much, but when we compete with them and someone has to show up superior, we'll never hear those words and if we do, usually grudgingly. Worst thing for a man is to loose a manly task to a female. Now you're in a submarine with a bunch of men! Whoohoo, now there's the life!
Independence and equality shouldn't cost a woman her femininity or a man his masculinity. Why can't we learn to accept what we are and appreciate the beauty inherent to it? Why did it take me so long to come to this belief??? probably 9 years of mastering my own ship and finding that I wish there was some great guy out there who'd come along and relieve me of the burden of that duty....let me practice some of that feminine mystique... | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 1:38:36 PM | 10-mile run ???? are you talking about the army 10miler ??
look at the army APFT standards .
theres flexible and theres Army flexible
i can picture this now.morning pt is replaced with yoga, no more front leaning rest.
company!!
attention!!!
open ranks!!!
half-right face!!!!
four-limbed staff pose move!!!!
in cadance!!! ah one to three ah one two three
damn it now the Marines will never respect us grunts
remember one team one fight. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 1:47:29 PM | What modifications will have to be made to the sub to accomodate women's privacy and what are the costs? If Engineers have to completely redesign the sub for the space needed, then isn't it just a waste of money? We have plenty of men doing the job already on subs designed to accomodate a uni-sex crew. Modifying subs for principal rather than necessity is a waste of money. When the day comes where there aren't enough men to man the subs, then we should take this serious.
One in three service women are raped. The sadder thing is that there is a bunch of them that were gang raped. So, there is some uncontrolable dynamic of having young men with smurf balls isolated with young women being denied. Thirty percent of our women get raped in the military. That is not an anomally or rare occurance. It's something that needs to be taken serious and preventative measures should not be ignored. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 2:20:03 PM | One in three service women are raped. The sadder thing is that there is a bunch of them that were gang raped. So, there is some uncontrolable dynamic of having young men with smurf balls isolated with young women being denied. Thirty percent of our women get raped in the military. That is not an anomally or rare occurance. It's something that needs to be taken serious and preventative measures should not be ignored.
And of that so called 30%, anywhere from 60-70% of them made it up for whatever reasons. Basically that means that only about 30% or your 30% might actually have been raped. Of course you do have to account for those that might not or do not report it.
You also have to account for the fact that these numbers (the 1 in 3) come from women who claimed that to the VA. They are most likely trying to get what they can financially. So that puts another motive for the "high" numbers on the table.
http://www.stopmilitaryrape.org/
For some of you who say that past sources were biased, I got one from "your" side. Doesn't matter what the sources bias is, I just collect the info. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 2:46:55 PM |
Basically that means that only about 30% or your 30% might actually have been raped. Of course you do have to account for those that might not or do not report it.
That makes me feel so much better knowing that only ten percent of the women in the military are getting raped. Here I thought there was an actual problem in the military. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 2:59:40 PM |
That makes me feel so much better knowing that only ten percent of the women in the military are getting raped. Here I thought there was an actual problem in the military.
It should not make you feel better at all, but it should make you understand and to be aware of other problems occuring in the military.
http://www.sapr.mil/contents/references/2006%20Annual%20Report.pdf
http://www.falserape.net/index.html | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 3:03:10 PM | I was on the USS Jefferson City. It is close quarters. I don't see a "co-ed" boat in the future. Maybe an "all women" boat, but not co-ed. This "PC" thing has gotten out of hand, and sooner or later, we're going to get spanked because of it. BET ON IT. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/20/2009 4:00:36 PM | I don't know why some people see this as "PC" thing? It's a career thing--being on a sub is a great career enhancer, especially for officers. When yu dont' even get the CHANCE to participate in a station where you could earn big points, THAT is discrimination. Not being "politically correct".
I also don't understand and am appalled that woman would think that just because a woman is serving on a submarine she'd be somehow "less feminine" and in any way "competing" with men. She'd just be doing her job.
I was on the USS Jefferson City. It is close quarters. I don't see a "co-ed" boat in the future.
Can you explain why you think this?
ps--there are already co-ed boats, unless by boats you meant subs and not ships? | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/21/2009 7:21:49 AM |
I don't know why some people see this as "PC" thing? It's a career thing--being on a sub is a great career enhancer, especially for officers. When yu dont' even get the CHANCE to participate in a station where you could earn big points, THAT is discrimination. Not being "politically correct".
Its because it is easier than actually holding people responsibe for their actions, male or female. Rather than trying to change the attitudes that have been in place for 100's of years in the military, the attitude and belief that apparently men are nothing more than rutting pigs that cant control themsleves around women. What I want to know is why more service men arent pissed off that their own commanders, mainly men, think so little of them and their ability to actually control their "urges", that they continue to feed the idea that military men cant be trusted to not rape a woman so they have to keep them away from each other. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:00:03 AM |
Its because it is easier than actually holding people responsibe for their actions, male or female. Rather than trying to change the attitudes that have been in place for 100's of years in the military, the attitude and belief that apparently men are nothing more than rutting pigs that cant control themsleves around women. What I want to know is why more service men arent pissed off that their own commanders, mainly men, think so little of them and their ability to actually control their "urges", that they continue to feed the idea that military men cant be trusted to not rape a woman so they have to keep them away from each other.
It is because men have become used to being thought of like this, not just by the military commanders, but by society in general. This perception has been ingrained in men's brains from the time we are little boys. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/21/2009 9:11:39 AM | spoken like a true liberal and complete backer of womens rights and the ERA.
much appreciated. now if we could just do something about the alarming lack of women in our elected government and high level management we'd be getting somewhere. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/7/2009 9:12:38 AM | | With the small spaces for sleeping, showering something tells me all this is going to do is cause an increase in pregnancies and charges of " sexual harassment ". Lets face it a bad idea and should most definitely be shelved. Women DON'T belong on subs!! | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/7/2009 2:38:30 PM | | Ha ha, so this poster has proved the point--he's a MAN and he thinks like that? Except guess who he "blames"--women! Too weird. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/8/2009 12:08:29 AM | | Weird in what way "cutiepie"? Women DON'T belong on submarines due to the problems their presence will bring. I gather that you have never been aboard a submarine? | |
|
| |
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/8/2009 2:45:51 AM |
Only if it is truly equal, unfortunately, there are lowered standards for women to enter both the police force and the fire department. Kimberly Munley, Fort Hood hero. The standards lowered for women? Seems not.
... anybody here ever been in a submarine? you can't sneeze without everybody on the ship knowing about it much less have sex. It seems to me that sexual liasons between members of a sub crew would be unlikely considering the almost complete lack of private space in a sub. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/8/2009 9:54:44 AM | Attitudes won't change until circumstances change. It's like a great aunt of mine - she said she doesn't have a problem with interracial relationships themselves, it's the kids she feels sorry for because they don't belong to either race/world. This is her reasoning about why she doesn't approve of interracial relationships - it's not because she's racist. Uh huh.
And what I say to that, is what I say about making the military truly coed - it is a copout to say this because then you never have to go through the trials of trying to change things.
I'm not saying that you ignore human biology and attaction, I'm saying that familiarity breeds contempt. If you have coed showers every day of your life, then it's normal. If you have coed squads and teams in all areas of the military, then it becomes normal.
Why change the layout of the sub? The only compelling argument I've heard about this so far is the woman who brought up the fact that waste disposal is a big deal on a sub, so women's feminine care products could be an issue.
Same tests, same standards for all - that means hair too. I don't understand even wanting to have long hair and be in the military. Two minute shower? Not with long hair. Desert heat, full gear, gas masks in Iraq? Not with long hair. And frankly, who cares? If you care about your hair length so much, then don't join the military. There are practical considerations to why your hair should be short.
In the short term - there will be conflict. Some genuine conflict from people like Outside who have had bad experiences with women in his units, some whipped into a frenzy by outside influencers so that the system isn't given a chance to really work. There are also big time cultural issues - the issues of what is masculine and feminine, the misconception that women want to become men, etc etc. But if it were enacted, in 20 years it would be the norm. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/8/2009 10:01:03 AM | Attitudes won't change until circumstances change. It's like a great aunt of mine - she said she doesn't have a problem with interracial relationships themselves, it's the kids she feels sorry for because they don't belong to either race/world. This is her reasoning about why she doesn't approve of interracial relationships - it's not because she's racist. Uh huh. Oh yes! I know people like that. Interesting what people will say to justify their prejudices.
I'm saying that familiarity breeds contempt. This is an interesting point. I live in Europe where there is a lot of topless sunbathing by women. It is so common, most of the time men don't even look. Whereas, go to a country where women going topless in public is a no-no, and if a woman were to do so, everyone would be looking, men and women. It becomes a big deal. | |
|
| Women on Submarines
Posted: 11/8/2009 12:06:55 PM | I think the problem is that it's a REALLY, REALLY cramped space, with people serving for maybe months at a time. Imagine if you were put with nothing but really, really fit guys, all with rock-hard abs, constantly rubbing up against each other because of the lack of room, for maybe 3 months, with no sex. All that temptation.
First, it is going to be really really hard to resist, and if it does happen, and it splits up your marriage, you're going to have to serve with these people again and again, and you won't be able to stand looking at them knowing they caused the ruin of your marriage and you losing your kids.
Second, with that kind of pressure, there are bound to be lots and lots of problems of too much flirting being misunderstood, and suddenly lots of cases of sexual harrassment, maybe even cases of rape on board, and once that happens, even once, there is going to be a huge pressure to shut down ALL submarines as being potential breeding grounds for rape. But that's not possible.
Third, submarine staff need to act in unison, as one, extremely quickly in response to a situation. Having women (or men) on the brain, can make you totally distracted while driving. A lot of work in submarines involves a lot of very exacting work, like machine work, where distraction can cost you your hand, or you life. If you're supposed to be doing something very putting a torpedo into a bay, and you're not paying attention, your hand could be crushed by the torpedo, or it could smack you in the head, and put you in a coma. The sub also cannot afford to have lots of casualties, because it isn't going to be able to get you to hospital, or replace you, for months. So it really cannot afford to have distractions, and right now, fit women are distractions for men, and fit men are distractions for women, especially when they've been at sea without sex for months.
I can agree that it would be nice to see women serving in subs. But first, we do need to work out the kinks. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 6
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
|
Home
login 
