Woman + Subs

[Bevo16]

Go spend 5 minutes at the Pass and ID office at NASNI, ask the preggos there what their rates are, look for wedding rings, and watch your entire hypothysis come crashing down.

 

[phrogpilot73]

Go spend 5 minutes at the Pass and ID office at NASNI, ask the preggos there what their rates are, look for wedding rings, and watch your entire hypothysis come crashing down.

Spend 2 1/2 minutes with my wife, and watch your theories come crashing down. And she'll be the first to admit that there are some sailors that pull this crap. On both sides of the sexual spectrum.

Either way, you're wasting your time. Again, your job is to say "aye, aye sir." and carry on. If the Navy leadership decides that they can figure out the logistical issues (and oh, by the way - they figured that shit out on the surface fleet before they issued the order), and that it's worth it - than your opinion will smell just like the rest of ours.

You act like I'm a boot who's never been around junior enlisted, and the issues they entail. Unless the Marines really ARE that much better than the Navy!

 

[Bevo16]

I know you are not a boot. Which is why I find it all the more confusing that you think issues like what we are discussing can be overcome by "orders". I guess that's a Marine thing:

The fact that your wife has her shit together has nothing to do with the actions of junior enlisted sailors.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I know you are not a boot. Which is why I find it all the more confusing that you think issues like what we are discussing can be overcome by "orders". I guess that's a Marine thing:

The fact that your wife has her shit together has nothing to do with the actions of junior enlisted sailors.

I think the reason I have arrived at the opinions I have are based on my experiences. Leading up to my first deployment, we had a female Marine that got pregnant. Original opinion was that she was doing it to get out of deployment. Until she make a conscious decision to "take care of it" and deploy. She deployed with us, and last I checked, she just pinned on Gunny.

Same deployment, and we had a male Marine that decided he didn't want to deploy, and did everything he could (up to and including suicide ideations) to get out of it. He didn't deploy with us, and I have no idea what he did after he was admin sep'd.

I think the point I'm getting to is that shitbags know no gender. It's just that female shitbags have a biological ability to get out of it, whereas it takes more work on the male shitbag side. Knowing what I have experienced thusfar, I think that (again, based on who WANTS to be a submariner) the female shitbags aren't going to make it to the sub world for a least a little bit.

 

[CommodoreMid]

I have seen female officers get tagged for IA's only to get knocked up and have that assignment go to a male officer. It didn't matter that his wife was expecting. That's fair?

Just curious, how many of those women were on shore duty and getting pregnant then because they made a decision not to do it on sea duty? If that's the case, why not just sterilize all women who go into the military because they might need to go on an IA?

 

[phrogdriver]

and the sheer number of women that WANT to serve on submarines (I would argue that it would number in the 10's, not the 100's) and I think that my point is still valid. .

If there are only a few women who want to do this, then why go through all this trouble? I mean, if there were thousands of potential female applicants knocking down the doors to get in, I could understand. You might actually raise the average scores by enlarging the applicant pool. I just don't see why it's worth it to reconfigure living spaces, add interpersonal friction, etc, etc, just so a few women can realize their dreams. Sorry, but I just don't feel that badly about it.

I mean, where were these people when I tried out for the Olympic synchonized swimming team?!? I still cry when I think about it...

As far as following orders if this actually comes to pass...okay...got it. It won't be the first time I disagreed with something but had to salute and do it anyway. Just because a decision comes from someone with more on his collar than me doesn't make it right. It just means that once it is made, I have to do it. In the meantime, we can have fun debating it on AW.

Just think, if they had message boards during the Civil War, maybe the leadership would've thought twice about that Pickett's charge thing.

 

[Brett327]

There is a difference between "can remain" and "will remain". It's the CO's call, and if they have been paying attention to message traffic and casualty reports for any length of time, they know keeping expectant mothers on the ship while underway is not a very good idea.

I have seen two SI cases in the past month where pregnant women have had to be flown off ship due to complications. One off the USS Blue Ridge, I forget the other ship, but it was in the Gulf.

True - I guess my point is that it doesn't constitute an emergency medevac.

Brett

 

[Spekkio]

In my fantasy "Bevo's Navy", they would join up with the understanding that their duty is to remain deployment ready for their first 5 years of service. IMHO, that is really not to much to ask. Complete an enlistment or sea tour without dumping your duties on your shipmates while you have a kid. What an incredible burden.

I'm sure in everyone's "fantasy Navy," we'd never lose a sailor to pregnancy...or the myriad of other testosterone related accidents that I detailed above, all of which rise from a conscious choice to partake in a risky/stupid activity.

The reality of the matter is that it's not possible to prevent all of those things from occurring without taking away so much freedom that few people will want to enlist in the Navy, and hardly anyone would want to reenlist. That's not a good solution. The only thing that Big Navy can do is try to mitigate the damage, which is what they are trying to do through the myriad of "don't be stupid" briefs that they give everyone.

Brett brought up the fact that the military is playing catch-up with the private sector... the private sector has been dealing with women who get pregnant for decades now. Yes, everytime someone goes on maternity leave, someone else will have to pick up the slack. That will continue to be an unavoidable problem for as long as women are in the work force.

If there are only a few women who want to do this, then why go through all this trouble? I mean, if there were thousands of potential female applicants knocking down the doors to get in, I could understand. You might actually raise the average scores by enlarging the applicant pool. I just don't see why it's worth it to reconfigure living spaces, add interpersonal friction, etc, etc, just so a few women can realize their dreams. Sorry, but I just don't feel that badly about it.

Exactly.

 

[Bevo16]

I think the reason I have arrived at the opinions I have are based on my experiences. Leading up to my first deployment, we had a female Marine that got pregnant. Original opinion was that she was doing it to get out of deployment. Until she make a conscious decision to "take care of it" and deploy. She deployed with us, and last I checked, she just pinned on Gunny.

I am more confused that I was before.

The idea of having women in a deployable status having mandatory birth control is a bad idea, but a female having an abortion to make a deployment is a good idea?

I don't know what to think of that, really. Those blocks are just not stacking up in my brain.

 

[JBM]

AW: VE+MK+GS=152

CS(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200
ET(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=222 or VE+AR+MK+MC=222
FT(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=222
MM(SS): VE+AR+MK+MC=210
SK (SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200
STS: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 or VE+AR+MK+MC=222
YN (SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200


Now correct me if I'm wrong, and I really don't know because I never took the ASVAB, but the AW score listed is a composit of three scores. The other rates are composits of four. Shouldn't all the additional listed rates have higher scores because of the additional catagory?

 

[Brett327]

AW: VE+MK+GS=152

CS(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200
ET(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=222 or VE+AR+MK+MC=222
FT(SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=222
MM(SS): VE+AR+MK+MC=210
SK (SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200
STS: AR+MK+EI+GS=222 or VE+AR+MK+MC=222
YN (SS): AR+MK+EI+GS=200 or VE+AR+MK+MC=200


Now correct me if I'm wrong, and I really don't know because I never took the ASVAB, but the AW score listed is a composit of three scores. The other rates are composits of four. Shouldn't all the additional listed rates have higher scores because of the additional catagory?

These numbers aren't meant to compare one rate to another, just establish the minimum scores/standards which apply to that particular rate.

Brett

 

[SkywardET]

Yet another lesson in "If you don't know...stop talking".

I don't know all the details, but what you have said completely contradicts everything my friend, an ELT from a Boomer, has told me. He never made any port calls outside of his home port (which I rib him for every once in a while), and no one in the back half of the boat knew where they were during deployments, etc.

Oh well, I still don't have a dog in this fight, and if y'all want to keep going on about how big of a non-issue it is to allow women to serve on subs, in spite of all the evidence of how many issues it brought to the other communities, then be my guest. Something about doing everything with nothing...

 

[Flash]

If there are only a few women who want to do this, then why go through all this trouble? I mean, if there were thousands of potential female applicants knocking down the doors to get in, I could understand. You might actually raise the average scores by enlarging the applicant pool. I just don't see why it's worth it to reconfigure living spaces, add interpersonal friction, etc, etc, just so a few women can realize their dreams. Sorry, but I just don't feel that badly about it.

I think in this particular case the small number of women could have an outsized impact on the submarine force. I can't say for certain without having access to the manning info but allowing the women in the nuke career path, particularly officers, could alleviate some of the apparent personnel shortages they are having. Even supplementing the submarine force by just 5-10% could help them enormously when trying to crew subs.

One thing to note about physically reconfiguring the subs, I think it will be a much lower impact than many think. I would imagine that they are introduced on subs that are more capable of accommodating them, like boomers or newer SSN's (someone already mentioned the Virginia's being built with women in mind). Given the smaller numbers of women there will likely be in the beginning those subs could bear the brunt of integration with little cost.

In the meantime, we can have fun debating it on AW.

Just think, if they had message boards during the Civil War, maybe the leadership would've thought twice about that Pickett's charge thing.

I am certain the CNO and CJCS are perusing the board as I type.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

I am certain the CNO and CJCS are perusing the board as I type.

CJCS uses twitter. You never know if he could be browsing this site.

http://twitter.com/thejointstaff

 

[Spekkio]

I think in this particular case the small number of women could have an outsized impact on the submarine force. I can't say for certain without having access to the manning info but allowing the women in the nuke career path, particularly officers, could alleviate some of the apparent personnel shortages they are having. Even supplementing the submarine force by just 5-10% could help them enormously when trying to crew subs.

And for every woman who helps man the sub community, how many men are going to leave because they were forced to hotrack while 2 women shared a 9-man room?