US Navy to allow women to serve on submarines!

Navy to allow women to serve on submarines!

apnews.myway.com

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. policy banning women from serving on submarines passed quietly into history Thursday morning.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates notified lawmakers in mid-February that the Navy would be lifting the ban - unless Congress objected.

Navy spokesman Lt. Justin Cole said the deadline for Congress to object passed at midnight without action.

The Navy plans a press conference later Thursday to talk about the new policy that will allow women to serve along side men on submarines.

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 4/29/2010 by anon72]

Sorry but this is just wrong-IMO. Living in those close quarters, under water for so long-just asking for problems.

With the reports of Rape and Abuses to our female military in Iraq should have been enough for Congress to stop this one.

It will only take one incident-and it will happen-to make this decision eveident that it was the wrong one.

Maybe they could have their own sub(s). I am not opposed to that. Please don't consider me sexist-I am just saying I know the military, men, and women. It won't go well.

apnews.myway.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by anon72


I know the military, men, and women as well having spent time as an infantry Marine and will tell you that while this will create additional problems, it's a good thing overall.

The way to adjust these problems is to simply include more women rather than to simply exclude them.

Is the military changing? Sure, but the men/women who make up the military are changing too. They are becoming more accepting, generally, so these issues will tapper out over time, or reach a normal societal level.

I'm for real equality, but women who want equality don't want true equality yet. They want the benefits but not the drawbacks (general statement but mostly true).

Starship Troopers style.

Peace
KJ

reply to post by anon72


From the Royal Navy Website..

Q. Why are women not permitted to serve on submarines?

Service in submarines is closed to women because of medical concerns for the safety of the foetus and hence its mother. This restriction is purely medical and does not relate to combat effectiveness. The potential risks to the foetus do not arise from hazardous radiation, but from contaminants in the submarine's atmosphere.

The Institute of Naval Medicine (INM) reviewed the exclusion in 1999, as did subsequently both the Defence Scientific Advisory Council and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Their outcomes supported the conclusions of the INM report, that the exclusion was justified.

So it seems the US and UK disagree on something (for the time being at least)

Wonder how long it will be until some Seamen cannot be contained and a problem arises?

I thank you both.

That is some great info from the UK side of things. Very interesting.

One of the best things about ATS is its knowledgable members.

Star for both.

Have a great day.

Originally posted by mikelee
Wonder how long it will be until some Seamen cannot be contained and a problem arises?

Amen to that!
wink wink

Mod Edit - Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 29-4-2010 by elevatedone]

reply to post by mikelee


I rarely agree with you...but this made me laugh:

...how long it will be until some Seamen cannot be contained...

Either my mind is in the childish gutter, or that was an incredibly clever pun.



In any event, they will adapt to the changes. I recall reading about this last week, when news broke. Saw arguments both ways ( ... sorry it is too funny to resist).

What I don't wish to do is seem cavalier about it, especially in honor of the submariners, and their traditions.

However, isn't it about time that the prudish-ness be abandoned?? I mean, I was employing some juvenile humor references, but just to lighten up, because (especially in America) most things sexual are taken way too seriously. Even any hint at a titillating situation...

One serious concern though, and I think it was mentioned above, is the potential for abuse --- which will normally be in the direction of Man on Woman, with possible rank privileges being used as intimation factors.

But (and I am not sure) it occurs to me that the close confines make privacy harder to achieve, and therefore any untoward activities hard to conceal. That is my impression, anyway.

reply to post by anon72


If, What the Royal Navy is putting forward is true, that the contaminates in the air of a sub can be harmful to a foetus and therefore any potential mother, I honestly wonder where the US Navy would stand in a court of law should something happen to one of it's female crew who for whatever reason got pregnant and miscarried,

Especially while other navies decline women on those grounds, which negates any potential claim that the US navy did not know the risks.. So would any miscarriage open the door to a potential lawsuit.. Seems a fine line to walk (that is only if the reasons for exclusion the RN use are true)

An interesting dilemma.. Equality, but at what cost..


[edit on 29/4/10 by thoughtsfull]

I just thought of this. My very first rape case, a woman walked up to me while I was on foot patrol (rookie actually). She was crying a little and after a few moments she blurted out "I was just raped". Well, turns our she was raped about 200 yards from where I ran into at.

Ok anon, so what?

A woman can walk away to get help etc-when on land. But on a sub, she is trapped. If she talks, chit hits the fan and all kinds of morale problems could occur-to mention just a few things.

Not every woman will react the same way. Not every woman who gets raped/sexually abuse etc makes a complaint right away-for whatever reasons. A victim maybe too afraid to talk and thus subjects herself to the bad guy day, after day, after day on a Sub.

I hope I made myself clear.

[edit on 4/29/2010 by anon72]

[edit on 4/29/2010 by anon72]

Yeah let's throw a bunch of women into close quarters with a bunch of men for 6 months on a submarine. Great.........so now the preoccupation and distraction of sex will be on the minds of people responsible for nuclear threats and first line defense and attack capabilities. I'm all for women serving in the military............but the mingling of sexes is a bad idea. Look at government and corproate world...........instead of doing their job many politicians and execs are too busy being preoccupied with sex. Case in point, the current SEC regulatory organization whose people have downloaded thousands of hours and images worth of pornography.

Why not put a submarine out there and other miltiary entities made up completely of women. I mean if they are good enough to serve alongside men they should be good enough to serve on their own right? I mean if women are as capable as men we should have special operations forces made up entirely of women. Otherwise I see no point in adding women to a male dominated submarine. I mean really what's the point?

reply to post by Zosynspiracy

I mean really what's the point?

Simple, kinda: Political Correctness (P.C.) and the continued tearing away at the fabric of this country by Obama and gang-who hate the USA as it is/was known.

you bring up some great points about women and serving alone/separate.

You people act like the women go into heat and the men can't resist.
We are talking about grown, professional adults. Not wolves.
What silly knee jerk reactions, as usual, people who pride themselves on thinking outside the box have a strong reaction to any kind of change.
If a man or woman are not able to contain themselves sexually, then it doesn't matter if they are in a sub, frat party, or an office setting.

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Either my mind is in the childish gutter, or that was an incredibly clever pun.

You said a mouthfull.

Mod Edit - Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 29-4-2010 by elevatedone]

reply to post by nixie_nox

A woman can walk away to get help etc-when on land. But on a sub, she is trapped.

I bet to differ as to it doesn't matter where they are at-Frat etc. It does matter when the victim can't get away. You are making it sound like they wouldn't be under water for 6months at a time (or longer) etc.

As to acting like wolves etc? I take it you were never in the military-at the enlisted levels.

This is really dumb. They are going to put women under water in a submarine with men for long periods of time! What a bunch of idiots.

[edit on 29-4-2010 by Alien Mind]

My sister was in the navy for 7 years. I remember her telling me the worst place on planet earth for a woman to be was a sub berthing. Why? Well, according to her own accounts it wouldn't matter if you were fat, old, ugly or the First Lady-You were gonna get hit on. You would have men following you around staring at your hind end and wolf-whistling when they could get away with it. As an army brat and wife, I can inform you that you might not want to be around a single soldiers barracks on the weekend either if your're a lady.

People like to think humans are better than that but the truth is most people aren't. I'm not naive on this point. I think a lot of this stems from lack of personnel not simply some deep seated need for equality.

If you have notice, the navy is running short of man powe. Thats why they are allowing woman.

Originally posted by scoopkill
If you have notice, the navy is running short of man powe. Thats why they are allowing woman.

I don't believe so, the army is the one in straights, from what my friend in the Navy has told me the Navy actually turns some people away, even recommends they join different branches. Unless something has changed in the past 2 years, I would believe that still holds true.