Women on US submarines

THANKS, CON, FOR A GREAT ROUND. ================ 1. Re: Subs are Stressful ================ Con's first point was that submarines are stressful places with high suicide rates and difficult labor for the crew. I don't doubt that for one second. However, all of the burdens that Con described are mental burdens. The mindset here is that this job is too mentally demanding for a woman. Con writes, "I can assure you that after a month, they, like everyone else, will be counting down the days until their time is up." Again, I have no doubt that a woman would be just as stressed out and overworked as the men on submarine ships. However, there is no proof whatsoever that men are more 'mentally tough' than women. Throughout history there have been a plethora of exemplary females who have shown more poise and psychological strength than their male company [1], [2], [3], etc. The idea that women are "delicate" is nothing more than social conditioning passed on by the patriarchy of our society's foundation. Moreover, even if women are, on balance, more sensitive than men, the reality is that mental toughness is SUBJECTIVE and thus there will be some men who are tougher than women, and some women who are tougher than some men. I am positive that there are some women who can handle life on the submarine. And even if some cannot, it doesn't say much considering 1/3 of the men cannot either by Con's own admission. There is no reason why women should be prohibited from trying. To suggest they should is practicing overt discrimination and demonstrating a lack of psychological education. ==================================== 2. Re: Men Would Be Stressed Out By Women On Board ==================================== Too bad. They need to get over it, and not oppress women for their own inadequacy. Moreover there is no proof that this would happen; Admiral Bruner noted that he does not think the mentality on the subs would change. Con notes that the Admiral would lie to save his own reputation; however, I imagine that if there was a mass catastrophe on board the submarines, then that would ruin the Admiral's reputation as well -- meaning we have no reason to reject the Admiral's position based on Con's speculation. ============ 3. Legal =/= Moral ============ While it's true that morality and legality do not always align, what Con is suggesting here is that the Civil Rights Act is immoral even though it is legal. In other words, Con has the burden of proving that the CRA is wrong and that discrimination based on sex is morally permissible. He also has to explain why the government should be above the law (since citizens are expected to uphold this law). Again, I never denied that women in many cases have less physical strength than men; however, all of Con's arguments revolve around mental endurance and men being too incompetent to successfully socially integrate with women. I am looking forward to Con's explanation regarding how this treatment and intolerance is fair. Also, note the appeal to tradition fallacy. Just because men were the first to do this kind of work, apparently this work should be reserved for them alone. ========================== 4. Re: Problems With Women On Board ========================== A) Weeding Out the Weak Con mentions hazing. Hazing by the military is strictly prohibited (even though everybody knows it goes on... we've all seen A Few Good Men). Personally I don't see how this is relevant. If women are hazed, and they report it, then GOOD -- the offenders should be punished for violating the rules. If the women don't report it, then they have the same mentality as the guys... and what's wrong with that? They can either choose to tolerate the behavior or not, just as the men can. B) Pregnancy A pregnant woman, I imagine, WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO SERVE. And it could easily be written into their contract that a woman was NOT to get pregnant while serving. If this contract was violated, she would be removed (same as any other aspect of a contract). If she was raped, the offender should be punished accordingly. C) Married Sailors This has absolutely nothing to do with anything. Con says that married sailors will be turned away a spot because a woman took it. Is this for real? Too bad. Being married should not give you any special privileges. Moreover what if the WOMEN are married too? I'm sure everyone - not just married men - have friends, family or a partner that they want to be close to as well. D) Sleeping Quarters // E) Treatment of Women Con admits that the men on board are crude (4F) and that there exists several security risks for women on subs. Acknowledging that reality means Con should be in SUPPORT of women having their own sleeping quarters and being protected by rules forbidding the private scolding of women. However instead of feeling protective for these women (who will face hardship on the basis of their gender alone), he feels contempt and jealousy. In other words he wants women to endure the same harshness even though he admits that women would probably have a harder time to begin with (4A). I'm sure as a military veteran Con is aware of the HUGE crisis regarding rape in the military [4]. There are about 3k reports from women of rape per year in the military, and on a sub ship I can only imagine that it might be worse. As such, it makes perfect sense for the military to take precaution here and give women their own sleeping space, as well as make sure they are not left alone to be reprimanded. Nevertheless, I've already mentioned that the women being allowed on subs are ranking officers and in that case may indeed be higher up than some of the men (so they deserve the beds). Women shouldn't expect any less hardship - just more protection regarding sexual assault. F) Integrity Con says that the men on the subs are crude which I'm betting is perfectly true. Again, people should be held responsible for their own actions meaning if they do anything wrong to a female then they should be punished. Women know what to expect going into this kind of thing, and if they try it and want out, they can opt for that too. Just because guys jerk off on the equipment doesn't mean women should be prohibited from serving. ================ 5. Re: Women = Useless ================ Con says that women cannot be helpful and do not justify the problems they create. It would be more accurate to say that every problem he mentioned is actually created by MEN - not women. It is the men who cannot follow the rules or need to be babysat like children. One minute Con is talking about how the guys are immature and masturbating on equipment; the next minute he's saying that women are useless. I highly doubt that women will engage in the same juvenile and irresponsible behavior. Moreover Con writes, "Someone who is not sensitive and can handle the rigors of the job is more useful than someone with a technical degree." That may be true, but again this is operating under the assumption that women cannot be mentally tough. I've already addressed this discrepancy. ======= Conclusion ======= All of the problems Con mentions about unprofessionalism have nothing to do with women and everything to do with the military's incompetence. In that case, those problems should be addressed and maybe having women on board will speed up that process. History has proven that a woman's presence (especially in government) brings certain issues to the forefront of discussion. Serving on a sub should be a PERSONAL CHOICE for all women to make themselves regarding their own career. [1] http://www.metropulse.com... [2] http://www.fscclub.com... [3] http://www.historyswomen.com... [4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...