Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Women on Submarines      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Lint Spotter
Joined: 8/27/2009
Msg: 2
view profile
History
Women on SubmarinesPage 1 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)

in these days of EQUALITY then all things and people/gender should be just that EQUAL.
Only if it is truly equal, unfortunately, there are lowered standards for women to enter both the police force and the fire department.

I personally would prefer to have a 200 lb man defending/rescuing me as opposed to a 125 lb woman. Men are naturally stronger and as such, naturally better at some jobs/positions…
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 4
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 9:21:15 AM
Personally, I think that this is just an extension of the 16th-Century superstition that women aboard sailing ships was somehow 'bad luck'.

If sailors (whether on a sub, or surface ship) are incapable of resisting the 'temptation' of opposite-sex crewmates, then they should be reassigned to duties where their lack of discipline isn't a factor.
 GeneralizingNow
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 5
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 9:33:24 AM
I would think women serve just as well as men (or, rather, some women serve better than some men, and vice versa!).

Logistically, though--they have to have two crew quarters, separate showers and bathrooms, ways of disposing of feminine hygiene products (a big issue [lol] on subs is waste control). Laundry has nothing to do with anything.

There is still, also the HUGE problem that women are not supposed to be in combat (law, not opinion), so the subs would be limited in scope, wouldn't they?
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 6
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 10:41:39 AM
Statistically, One in Three women in the military today are raped or sexually assaulted. I think women in the services should be issued tazers and due respect will follow shortly. It's still a good old boys world in the US services and there is still resentment. Remember how women bucked up and did the hard work at home during WW II and were immediately ordered back into the kitchen when the war was over? There remains the resentment that women can do the same job as well or better in many cases.

That said, Subs will probably be one of the safest places in the world if/when a nuclear holocaust is released and it would be good to have both sexes on these arks of mankind to help start over.
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 7
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 10:42:51 AM
If a person can't control their sexual urges and can't do their job without screwing someone, then they should not hold that job. I don't care if it's the maintenance man in a factory or a male & female on a sub, do your job, keep your pants on and find your sex life outside your profession. The genders working together is not the problem, it's asshats who have no self-control or integrity that are the problem and their gender has nothing to do with, just as many women are on-the-job whores as are men.

A man over a woman saving me...well let's see, how would a sub come under that, but anyway....Rosie O'Donald or Woody Allen, who could save me LOL
 GeneralizingNow
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 8
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 10:46:49 AM
Off topic to the subject, but it's against the LAW for women to serve in "most combat situations"...you are correct that each military branch has its own "definition" of combat, though.
===========================
Recent policy changes on women in combat:

1992
The Defense Authorization Act repealed the long-standing combat exclusion law for women pilots in the Navy and Air Force. ***(Cassa's edit--I have two female pilots friends in AF--they will not train women on fighters, but will train women on B1(?) bombers (not the stealth, the other one))

1993
President Clinton signed the military bill ending combat exclusion for women on combatant ships. ***(this answers my one question, apparently women CAN be put in harm's way)

1994
Defense Secretary Aspin approved a new general policy to allow Army women to serve with some ground combat units during fighting. ***(it should be noted, the role is limited)
=========================
In the Army women cannot serve in the following: infantry, armor, cannon field artillery and short range air defense artillery.**

**But there's a twist here that literally allowed women to fly under fire in Panama in 1989. Although federal law mandated that the Navy and Air Force prohibit women from serving in direct combat roles, no such law bound the Army to do so. Instead, the Army used its combat exclusion policy to regulate itself to conform to the intent of the federal laws that affected the other services. Thus, the Army's combat exclusion policy limited women from direct combat. That policy defined direct combat as "engaging an enemy with individual or crew-served weapons while being exposed to direct enemy fire, a high probability of direct physical contact with the enemy's personnel, and a substantial risk of capture." According to the Army, "Direct combat takes place while closing with the enemy by fire, maneuver, or shock effect in order to destroy or capture, or while repelling assault by fire, close combat or counterattack." The helicopters piloted by women were considered transport and not combat, thus the "non-violation" of the then in effect combat exclusion laws.

In the Navy women are excluded from Submarine Warfare, Special Warfare (SEAL) and ratings particular to submarine service such as fire control technician, missile technician, and one aspect of sonar technician. Women can be sonar technicians...they just cannot serve in the submarine component of the rating.

The Marine Corps assignments closed to women are infantry, armor, field artillery, security force guard protecting nuclear material, and several positions related to armored, amphibious, assaultunits and fleet antiterrorism security teams.

Air Force positions closed or restricted are Combat Control, Special Operations Forces, Rotary Aircraft, TAC Pararescue, and Weather assignments with infantry or Special Forces.

All Coast Guard occupations and assignments are open to women.

CG says: This is from http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/combat.html by a female soldier who is trying to break one of the last "glass ceilings"--the military's.
====================
Here's a 1987 GAO doc with some info on the history of the LAWS that prevent women from serving in combat. http://archive.gao.gov/d39t12/134619.pdf
 msquared
Joined: 8/31/2004
Msg: 9
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 11:07:28 AM

I personally would prefer to have a 200 lb man defending/rescuing me as opposed to a 125 lb woman. Men are naturally stronger and as such, naturally better at some jobs/positions…


There is one particular female police officer in my community. She is small, she is attractive, and yet everyone who has had conflict with her has learned she is not to be trifled with. If it was necessary, I'd much rather have her protecting me than most of her male counterparts.
 FL CO
Joined: 12/23/2008
Msg: 11
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 12:52:04 PM

as I understand the latest research women may not be as strong as men but they can take long periods of high pressure better. sort of makes you think we might want to make the sub crews all women


Just where did you pull that from? Dealing with pressure is an individual thing, its not sex based
 GeneralizingNow
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 12
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 3:58:02 PM
I'm just picturing all that/those seamen lol ^^^^^^^^^^^^
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 13
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 5:49:15 PM

Before making any arbitrary decisions, the Admiralty Board ( or whatever they're calling themselves these days) should view "Operation Petticoat", 1959, with Cary Grant...


Oh, GREAT! Instead of basing their decisions on well-reasoned studies, they should base them on fictional and dated comedies...?
 daynadaze
Joined: 2/11/2008
Msg: 15
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/15/2009 10:45:47 PM

There were 3 females onboard, all officers. After 2 or 3 months, they start to look good enough to eat (and they were nothing special to look at).


So did these women ever get so hard up that the butt-ugly guys looked good? Good gawd what a juvenile statement to make.
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 17
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/16/2009 6:03:28 AM
Not The Cable Guy...


Dude... You're Canadian...


DUDE! What does that have to do with the discussion at hand?


My government has made plenty of decisions and implemented policy based on fiction...
Some comic... Some tragic...


And they haven't worked out very well, have they...? So what makes you think that basing yet another decision on a fiction would fare any better?

As I pointed out in a prior post - if you're not disciplined enough to control your urges in close quarters, then you've got no business being in that job. Doesn't matter if you're male or female.
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 18
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/16/2009 1:42:25 PM
^^^

Or one of them won't return at all...

But that same argument can be used in the case of two MEN.
 arwen52
Joined: 3/13/2008
Msg: 19
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/16/2009 1:50:30 PM
I worked in construction for 13 years and was the first journeywoman electrician in my local. People always object when women enter fields where they have been barred before and it is sometimes women themselves who lead the fight against including women in jobs. You can find a hundred excuses and they are that - excuses.

People have affairs. They don't have to be stuck in close quarters. Look at POF - how many married people are here looking to hook up with someone they've never even seen before.
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 20
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/16/2009 5:47:34 PM
Outsideofthemiddle...


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.


Out of curiosity - did these women fail to accomplish the tasks they were assigned to...? Were they unable to handle their weapons, did they fall behind in the combat drills...? You say yourself that you got rid of them by 'pulling some strings' - which implies that you failed to show THEM the respect that you expected of everyone else.

I doubt if you'd know whether or not these women you were 'stuck with' managed to stay in the Corps, under a different commander, to lead honourable careers... but it might be interesting to find out...
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 21
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 1:17:46 AM
outsideofthemiddle...
Excellent illustration of the misogyny that runs rampant in the services. I guess you really believe that women are cowards, liars and whores. And you're on a dating site?
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 22
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 5:42:20 AM
Outsideofthemiddle...


One failed so godamn horridly that she got one of my guys shot because she wasn’t covering her sector; she cowered like a dog under the hummer in a fight.


See... THAT information makes all the difference - I agree that you were right in having her sent back to her old unit.

Nevertheless... that does not mean that *all* women are the same. Have you not also had guys that behave that way when the shooting starts? It's not a male/female thing... just a human one.

I'd be interesting in seeing that study you're looking for... as well as getting a bit of background on who performed it.
 GeneralizingNow
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 23
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 8:53:21 AM
I think it's funny how so many people are saying men can't control them selves because women are on board. I recall stories of guys in the all-male Navy getting and giving blowjobs aboard ships--all "straight" guys, too. I don't believe horniness goes away just because women are NOT present? And why are you punishing the women (keeping them from duties they may love) because MEN are the problem? THAT is what irks ME. You're punishing the wrong people!

The all-female crew is an intrguing idea, too. I'd like to see that. No planes came crashing down when they got all-female flight crews, despite what some men think about women in military.
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 24
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 12:36:13 PM
in canada the navy is co ed, there are no problem, having seved on a sub, i can say there is no privasy at all, no room for sexual encounters
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 25
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 2:00:41 PM
Dancecard...


Out of 25 people ~ there always 3 or 4 that can't control themselves and sometimes more.


So, in other words, you would rather pander to the 3 or 4 who can't control themselves, than to isolate those few and let capable people do the job...?

Because that's what you're basically saying - "Oh, those guys will get horny and have affairs with female personnel... so we'll have to keep the females out, no matter how well-qualified they are."
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 26
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/17/2009 3:29:08 PM
Outside...


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. My issue is with them surving with males.


Now, in the above sentence, replace the word 'women' with 'blacks' and 'males' with 'whites'... and see just how poorly thought-out it actually is.
 tbuddha
Joined: 2/28/2005
Msg: 27
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 1:05:47 AM
Since I don't accept a Federal Government or their enforcers, they can fill the submarines with chimps wearing dresses for all I care.
 RocketMan_Len
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 28
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 5:59:58 AM
Outside...


Here, I'll swing one by you: by your reasoning it is racist and, or sexist to segagrate male and female restrooms. Just picture "black" where female is and "white" where male is.


Sure it is. I have no problem with unisex restrooms.


Do you think it is just that a guys career gets ruined because some little princess is in a bad mood.


No, I do NOT think it's just... and that's a side-point. Within every system exist those who will abuse it to their advantage. You are letting the abusers colour your attitude towards the entire group, and that is not just either.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 29
view profile
History
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 12:15:40 PM
The same misogyny seen here and in the military is alive and well in the VA system as well.

http://tinyurl.com/ylfhlpk
Nearly 8 percent of the veteran population is female. But the Department of Veterans Affairs' health system was designed for a male military, and it shows. A Government Accountability Office report released this month found that two of 19 facilities audited did not offer even basic gender-specific services like cervical cancer screenings, and none fully complied with the VA's policy on privacy for female veterans. Overall, "none of the facilities had fully implemented VA policies pertaining to women veterans' healthcare," the report said. Critics say those shortfalls have deterred women from using the system. And statistics bear that out. While 22 percent of male veterans use VA healthcare, 15 percent of women do.

Because of the military's changing demographics, the VA expects the number of female veterans enrolled in the system to double within four years. Advocates argue that improvements are needed—and fast. The House unanimously passed a bill in June to address some of the inadequacies by, for example, requiring that the VA produce a report on the problems women face in the veterans' health system and creating a child care pilot program for women receiving VA healthcare. Companion legislation in the Senate is on the floor now, where Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee Chairman Daniel Akaka of Hawaii is working to build consensus for passage. But some lawmakers worry that a bill alone isn't enough. "It is more complex than just legislation," says Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, one of the Senate bill's main sponsors. "It's cultural."

One particular problem is that in order to keep them out of combat, women in the military are barred from serving on the front lines. But that policy is meaningless in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, where there are no front lines and attacks can happen virtually anywhere. "One of my closest friends was told by a VA doctor that she could not possibly have [post-traumatic stress disorder] for just this reason: He did not believe that she as a woman could have been in combat," Kayla Williams, a former Army sergeant who came under fire multiple times while serving alongside men on patrols in Iraq, told the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee at a recent hearing.

Some injuries are even harder to prove as service-connected. One of the thorniest is mental trauma caused by sexual assault while in the military, since the assault itself can be nearly impossible to prove. "I am always hearing from women who have experienced rapes and sexual trauma, and they're not getting the treatment that they need," says Wanda Story, national commander of the United Female Veterans of America. They're being denied treatment and benefits, she says, because "they can't prove it." And the treatment itself is sometimes inadequate, with no guarantee, for example, that mental health professionals have been trained for such trauma.
end snip..

The annecdotal implication that women are somehow more easily disabled in the service does not play out in the actual numbers.
http://tinyurl.com/yl7skqh
 GeneralizingNow
Joined: 10/10/2007
Msg: 30
Women on Submarines
Posted: 10/18/2009 1:12:58 PM

Look at the surveys I posted

I did. I also noted the source, and the political agenda behind the "surveys".


I also think that they need to raise the acceptance standards for females to the same as males.

I find the physical standards to be somewhat strange, frankly, for today's computer-based military. I have female friends in the military--not ONE is a princess, BTW--and they have to march and run in step with the guys. For tall women, not a big deal, but when the woman is only 5'2", she's taking giant steps the entire 10-mile run. SHE hangs, so I don't think the standards are that far off.

But I agree, there should just be "a" standard. However, it needs to be gender neutral. I dare say I could invent a physical standard that very few men could pass--women's bodies ARE different, so we can PHYSICALLY do things that many men cannot do. For just one example, if we made flexibility the TOP requirement, very few men would be in the top 10%. As it stands, the "standards" are set so that the STRONGEST pass that standard. Not necessarily the fittest. And in today's military--all branches--there is room for and need for people who are mentally tough, make sound judgements, and are intelligent. Their physical strength means absolutely nothing in 90% of the contexts. ANYONE can push a button, right? So, maybe the answer is to have certain physical standards for general admission, then separate standards for elite ground units and stuff. Which is, basically, what they have now, right?


There is also the issue of females who get themselves pregnant

I'm pretty sure there are men involved in this endeavor. Again--keep YOURS in your pants if you don't want the consequences.

In general, I think you are overblowing the incidence of women abusing the system, and totally overlooking that plenty of men do similar things (abuse the system to get out, get what they want, etc). I bet the INCIDENCE of men abusing the sytem--just by their sheer numbers--is MUCH higher. YOU only notice the women because you are biased against them. When a woman does something you don't like, you say, "Ach, see, women are like that." When a man does it, you say, "That wimp" but don't paint ALL men with that brush.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Women on Submarines