Why are woman not allowed to work on USN's submarines

zoolander

New Member
Why are woman not allowed to work on USN's submarines?

prefer if you also cite a source
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bmt

New Member
i think a perfectly good group of working men can become unprofessional when a woman is brought to the group. Some men will show off, and some men will be sexist. (men at fault, not women, nessecarily) More importantly, there isn't room for privacy of another sex.

this quote is from about.com I can't post URL's until i have 15 posts
10. Can women go on submarines?

Women are not currently assigned to submarine crews because of the very limited habitability and privacy onboard a submarine. However, women have been on submarines for short durations as civilian technicians for specialized equipment testing, family members for one-day dependent cruises, and female midshipmen conducting two-day orientation cruises.
 

riksavage

Banned Member
The below quote was taken from a recent US interview with Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness by CNSNews.com. Same would apply to UK boats who spend a similar amount of time at sea.

Quote as follows: "Medical emergencies occur at two-and-a-half times the rate among women than they do among men, and a large percentage are due to pregnancy. If you create that kind of a situation, you shouldn't be surprised if the entire mission of the submarine is compromised. It's not a woman's issue, it's a national security issue. To say that men are just as susceptible to medical emergencies, as in the case of emergency appendicitis, for example, doesn't wash. I asked the Navy how many cases of appendicitis we've had, among either men or women, in the last three years. It's very rare. Pregnancies on the other hand are extremely common."

Also the US Navy estimated it will cost 300K per-female berth to convert the current batch of Subs to coed!
 

BRAVE

New Member
I think men are more flexible and can endure a lot more harsh conditions than women.For this reason,I don't think women should be allowed to work on subs
 

submerged

New Member
I think men are more flexible and can endure a lot more harsh conditions than women.For this reason,I don't think women should be allowed to work on subs
that's a weak argument because there's women just as harsh or harder then their male counterparts, like stated before the reason for women not being allowed to work aboard a submarine is:

1: privacy issues
2: social impact/complications on the crew
3: hygiëne issues (period and such)

these are the main reasons to disallow women to work aboard subs in a lot of navies around the world, ofcourse one could give the example of the german, swedish and norwegian navies allowing women aboard only these submarines don't do missions over extended periods of time in most cases so thereby the social/privacy/hygiëne issues are limited
 

Rich

Member
Anytime you put men and women together they are going to be sleeping with each other. Lets face it! I was in one of the first US military Dorms that ever went coed so I think I can speak from some experience.

On a land base? Probably not a problem.

On a skinny little tube buzzing around the worlds oceans 200' down for months at a time? A problem! There's going to be issues and pregnancies because nothing can stop biology.

I dont think its anything that cant be dealt with, and I admit woman make a huge contribution to our military, and I honor them for it, I still think it would be a bad idea to have woman on a SSN.
 

Systems Adict

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I can't fault any comments made here thus far, as it does come down to the practicalities of the human condition. However, what about this for a thought....

A submarine full of women, with not a man in sight.


No disrespect to female service personnel, but i find even the idea raising the hairs on the back of my neck !

Personal experience of the limited co-ed facilities on surface ships, as well seeing how having even just one or two women on board a ship affects how men operate / loose concentration, tell me that current policies are pretty much correct.


Your thoughts...?


Systems Adict
 

Dae JoYoung

New Member
'Ever seen the pregnancy rate of women on board Aircraft Carriers?

Women in military is still a major problem. Young people are the most sexually active, and often times, this has not been fully accounted for in the military service.
 

Super Nimrod

New Member
I have only ever been on conventional subs in dock and never at sea but it is immediately apparent that there is zero privacy. Typically sleeping accomodation is 3 bunks high either side of a corridor that people move through 24/7. You only have a curtain to pull across your bunk in that corridor and you have to share that bunk with your Oppo when he is on shift. The nukes do have more room but privacy is virtually unheard of.

In the future I suspect that Subs will get so large that this is no longer an issue (the new Astute class partially solves this) or we will see all female crews if someone takes the brave decision to do this.
 

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
'Ever seen the pregnancy rate of women on board Aircraft Carriers?
No, I haven't seen these figures anywhere! Are there any statistics available in the public domain re this? A lot of claims are being made which may or may not be correct. I would like to see some accurate statistics to back up these claims one way or the other.

Some navies do have females aboard their conventional submarines and it seems to work OK. However, I accept that nuclear submarines may spend much longer on patrol so problems associated with privacy, etc, would be much greater in a nuclear submarine. On the other hand nuclear submarines are larger so providing privacy should be easier (though still difficult) than in a conventional submarine.

Cheers
 

riksavage

Banned Member
The main issue on UK/US Nuclear Boats is not one of privacy, it's one of national security. The statistical likelihood of a female crew-member becoming ill is three times greater than that of a male, which could result in an SSN or worse, SSBN being compromised because it is forced to abort a patrol or surface to CASAVAC a critically ill member of the crew.

Also the US DoD estimates it will cost 300K per-female crew space to change it's current batch of Sub's to coed!
 

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
The main issue on UK/US Nuclear Boats is not one of privacy, it's one of national security. The statistical likelihood of a female crew-member becoming ill is three times greater than that of a male, which could result in an SSN or worse, SSBN being compromised because it is forced to abort a patrol or surface to CASAVAC a critically ill member of the crew.

Also the US DoD estimates it will cost 300K per-female crew space to change it's current batch of Sub's to coed!
I accept that the figures you mention here and in post 3 relating to medical emergencies provide a strong case for females not being assigned to nuclear subs which may deploy for long periods. The cost of 'converting' current subs would also be hard to justify.

Cheers
 

nornavy

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
I see no arguments for not letting women serv on sub's. In The Royal Norwegian Navy, we had the world's first female sub CO as long ago as 1995.
No alterations of the subs layout has been made.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
I see no arguments for not letting women serv on sub's. In The Royal Norwegian Navy, we had the world's first female sub CO as long ago as 1995.
No alterations of the subs layout has been made.
The Royal Norwegian Navy subs are SSKs and I would imagine that they have a fairly short patrol duration, at least when compared to something like a USN SSN or SSBN. A short USN patrol might only last a few days, but a long patrol could run a few months. Given the cramped conditions, plus US tendencies to exclude women from "combat roles" a long duration patrol could well become an issue. On surface vessels, especially on large vessels like carriers, it's much less of an issue.

Something else to consider is how female US personnel interact with male counterparts... One might try getting a copy of "Love my Rifle more than you," sorry, don't remember the author. It was written by a female in the US Army serviving in Iraq. I didn't read all of it, but the general sense I got from it was that the troops in the service need to do some growing up...

-Cheers
 

nornavy

New Member
Verified Defense Pro
Norwegian subs have been deployed to the Med for several months. Time between shore visits can vary.
I don't think US female sailors are any different than others. That they are more "lively" is just a pathetic excuse.
Norwegian policy is not to let couples sail on the same ship
 

Rich

Member
I see no arguments for not letting women serv on sub's. In The Royal Norwegian Navy, we had the world's first female sub CO as long ago as 1995.
No alterations of the subs layout has been made.
Whats the average time at sea for each RNN SSK patrol? And whats the average time at sea for each USN SSN?

Having female Officers is a bit different then female service woman. Officers have strict non-fraternization rules with enlisted men and woman. In the US military such fraternization will probably ruin the career of an officer, if, they even survive the courts martial.

I dont like the idea of a bunch of 19yos, fresh out of high school, running around a SSN pulling their clothes on together during a drill. If so many girls get knocked up on a carrier then why wouldn't it happen on a submarine?

On Land bases none of this is a big deal. On a little tube in the ocean, 200' down, with 24 Trident D-5s loaded? Thanks, but we dont need to be European on this one. Yank boats have tremendous firepower, long patrol times, and huge responsibilities. We need perfect discipline on them and that means 100% discipline, not 99%.

The last thing we need is some High school endless summer movie.
 

USNavySEAL3310

New Member
Here's a NYT story from '91. Click link for full story.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9D0CE6D6163BF933A05757C0A967958260

"Thirty-six crew members of the supply ship Acadia were pregnant and had to be transferred during the ship's deployment to the Persian Gulf, naval officials say."

"More than half became pregnant after the ship was under way, but a Navy spokesman, Lieut. Comdr. Jeff Smallwood, said there were no indications of improper fraternization between men and women on the ship."

"He said nine women became pregnant before the Acadia left San Diego on Sept. 5, but were not tested until the ship was under way. Five others were transferred to the Acadia while she was sailing to the gulf, but their pregnancies were not discovered until after they were on board. Seven Months on Duty."

"The remaining 22 women became pregnant while the ship was deployed, perhaps on liberty calls in Hawaii, the Philippines and other ports the Acadia visited on her way to the gulf, Commander Smallwood said."

"The Navy has strict rules against sexual relationships between men and women while on duty or between commissioned officers and enlisted personnel, but Commander Smallwood said there was no evidence any such regulations were broken."
-----------------------------------------------------

Here is a '03 article mentioning women in their service in the USN:
http://www.msc.navy.mil/sealift/2003/December/women.htm

-----------------------------------------------------

I personally believe women in on-duty navy are fine (i.e. surface ships) because those ships can at least accommodate for most of the female conditions (i.e. giving birth). Like someone said earlier, you can't stop biology. It is very difficult to regulate sex on-board a navy vessel. So instead of prevention and deterrence, you have to focus on containment and that means knowing how to deal with it when it comes up, not just yelling at the couple.

On a sub, those conditions need to be sacrificed for the overall safety of the crew, the sub, and the mission. Again, like someone mentioned, breaking off a recon mission or patrol because a woman needs to be MEDEVACed is unacceptable. It compromises the three I mentioned above for a petty issue compared to the bigger picture.

Just my $0.02
 

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
I personally believe women in on-duty navy are fine (i.e. surface ships) because those ships can at least accommodate for most of the female conditions (i.e. giving birth). Like someone said earlier, you can't stop biology. It is very difficult to regulate sex on-board a navy vessel. So instead of prevention and deterrence, you have to focus on containment and that means knowing how to deal with it when it comes up, not just yelling at the couple.

On a sub, those conditions need to be sacrificed for the overall safety of the crew, the sub, and the mission. Again, like someone mentioned, breaking off a recon mission or patrol because a woman needs to be MEDEVACed is unacceptable. It compromises the three I mentioned above for a petty issue compared to the bigger picture.
I think that you make some good points in this post and the attached articles certainly support your ideas re this issue.

Having female Officers is a bit different then female service woman. Officers have strict non-fraternization rules with enlisted men and woman. In the US military such fraternization will probably ruin the career of an officer, if, they even survive the courts martial.

I dont like the idea of a bunch of 19yos, fresh out of high school, running around a SSN pulling their clothes on together during a drill. If so many girls get knocked up on a carrier then why wouldn't it happen on a submarine?

On Land bases none of this is a big deal. On a little tube in the ocean, 200' down, with 24 Trident D-5s loaded? Thanks, but we dont need to be European on this one. Yank boats have tremendous firepower, long patrol times, and huge responsibilities. We need perfect discipline on them and that means 100% discipline, not 99%.

The last thing we need is some High school endless summer movie.
Good points Rich. I originally had no objection to women serving on submarines but I was looking at the Australian situation with SSKs and in the case of American SSNs and SSBNs I have now changed my mind. With the long patrols undertaken by USN subs and the responsibility for the nuclear deterrent on board the SSBNs I am certain that you are totally correct. You need 100% discipline without unnecessary distractions. IMO, there is no room for political correctness to compromise this requirement.

Cheers
 

AegisFC

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Here's a NYT story from '91. Click link for full story.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9D0CE6D6163BF933A05757C0A967958260

"Thirty-six crew members of the supply ship Acadia were pregnant and had to be transferred during the ship's deployment to the Persian Gulf, naval officials say."
Just about everyone in the USN has heard those horror stories but that just doesn't happen to most ships.

I just got off a six month deployment with on a DDG and none of the 30 or so females on board became pregnant while on deployment or were shipped off because they became pregnant before deployment. In the year or so before we deployed we lost maybe 4 or 5 females due to pregnancy. The USN's policy on pregnancy is that they can serve on a ship for a couple months (sorry I don't know what month they remove them) and then after some baby leave after the child is born they are put back on another ship (though it may not be their original ship).
 

VexxSkyRider

New Member
We can't let political correctness cloud our judgment here people. We haven't got room to bull**** around at 200 feet below the surface. If we really want women on our subs we need <b>mandatory</b> birth control, stringently healthy women and discipline regarding how male sailors act around them. As for all female sub crews? No way in hell. We must select whoever is best suited to that mission. What if there are no female personnel that have the needed skill set relating to the mission available at that time? It is a possibility that they could serve on conventional subs but nuclear subs are much more troublesome.
 
Top