Women on US submarines

Thanks and I look forward to a great debate! IMHO, women are stronger than men. In some places men are better suited (collision sports), while in others women are better suited (pregnancy), but I give women the nod for having more overall strength. I support gender equality and I applaud the brave women and men who have fought for women's rights. I want to point that out before making my arguments so that no one reading this will think I am a male chauvinist. On my submarine there were 2 gay men. No one cared because they did their job. Our concern was effectiveness. Women will lower the effectiveness of submarine crews. 1. We are not keeping them from pursuing a dream. Subs are very hard and I've never been more bitter people. The suicide rate is higher than the rest of the military [1], [2]. One third of my shipmates eventually saw the chaplain, meaning they had suicidal thoughts and were taken off the ship. I replaced an officer that was carried off in a straitjacket for suicidal thoughts. One of my roommates had a voodoo doll of the captain with a string noose that we hung in our house. A submarine is not a challenging environment that pushes you to build confidence. A submarine is a demoralizing, discouraging place. The OPTEMPO (# days at sea) is psychotic and the hours in port are between 70-110. Not only that, since working a "stressful" civilian job, I noticed that submariners do more every two hours than most civilians do in a day. When you actually do get a day off, it is hard to get your mind off work, you can get called into work at any time, and you feel guilty for enjoying time off. I've only scratched the surface of this and I'll provide more details if asked. I can assure you that after a month, they, like everyone else, will be counting down the days until their time is up. 2. Given #1, these men do not need more stress. Yet, those who want women on subs never think about the effects to the crew. All of your arguments were based on women's ability to do the job, and not the crew's ability to handle the extra stress. As always, no one advocates for these men. The admirals who "support" this are forced to for fear of losing face. Don't believe they really mean what they say. I am former Navy, I know this. 3. Regarding the legal aspects, consider this quote from Dr. MLK Jr: "We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was 'legal' and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was 'illegal'. Sometimes ethics extends beyond legal boundaries. Solving one problem by creating five others is bad and unethical, legal or not. 4. The problems women on subs will create: 4a. The crew likes to weed out the weak, if you know what I mean. Grabbing someone's penis, reaching in and giving them a sweet little kiss on the face to see if they get freaked out easily, mentally trying to break them down (even straight up telling guys to kill themselves) are things that happen regularly. Not a place for women, and this behavior is ingrained in submariners. 4b. Pregnancies. Crew manning is very tight and there is very little margin for losing sailors. Having a sailor take pregnancy leave would screw their shipmates. Would you like to tell someone to work more than 80 hours a week in port? 4c. Usually, married sailors want to be on SSBNs due to less sea time, less in port hours, and predictable schedule. But women are guaranteed billets on these ships and will not serve on SSNs, which have a MUCH tougher schedule. So, this is unfair to married officers and their wives to lose a spot on an SSBN in favor of a female. Also, officers who serve on SSBNs on their first boat MUST switch to an SSN for their second, to prevent the same guys from monopolizing "the good deal." But women who stay in won't be made to switch to an SSN. Special treatment is unfair, but again those who want women on subs are more than okay with the disharmony it will create for current submariners, which again have the highest suicide rate in the military. To ask for these men to do more is cruel. 4d. Where you sleep on a submarine is based on seniority. They will be given a 3 man berthing room from day one ahead of more senior officers. Having a nice rack on the boat meant something to me. Explain to me how it is fair to take that away from someone who earned that right and force them to continue to stay in "junior berthing" while women who are more junior get special treatment. 4e. Per policy, the captain can't discipline female officer behind closed doors, yet I was chewed out a few times in his stateroom for making mistakes. The CO will have to treat women different. 4f. On paper, submariners are highly professional, evidence people use that the force can adjust. In reality, guys who are supposed to be supervising a nuclear reactor have their penises hanging out. Guys masturbate on equipment in the engine room. Integrity is a major problem. Sadly, women will not be treated with respect here, no matter what the Navy tells the outside world. 5. Women add nothing to the crew that will justify the problems they'll create. You mentioned numbers about technical degrees and qualified women vs men. Regardless, my technical degree was not used once and we were started from scratch in training. I observed no correlation between major and performance. You are not there to think and innovate technically. You are there to be a piece of the machine. Officers are expected to think and innovate in non-technical aspects, where technical degrees are of no value. Someone who is not sensitive and can handle the rigors of the job is more useful than someone with a technical degree. Also, even if technical qualifications were that important, allowing women has so far caused the bar to be LOWERED for them to be selected [3], and there is no indication that this will change. Also, to counter that point another way, just because there are more women with technical degrees does not mean there are more of them that WANT to be on subs than men with technical degrees who want to be on subs. You mentioned the Admiral pointing out sexual harassment training will be done. The sub force has an amazing capacity and tendency to low ball or gaff off things that are supposed to happen. I've witnessed unbelievable amounts of integrity issues, including having the CO order us to manipulate top secret mission reports to make the boat look better. I think on paper this training will be "done" but in reality it will be the usual cluster, much like the current sexual harassment training we do, where you get on a computer and continue to click ‘next screen' without reading it. Closing On paper you make good arguments on why the US should have women submariners. Your points mean well so far but fall short of reality. It takes more than good intentions to make things better. Well meaning people often make mistakes due to ignorance of the consequences of their decisions. After what I know about how unprofessional it is, I would not dare think of telling my sister being a submariner would be a good idea. If the government is interested in protecting our freedom, it should be able to justify denying it in some rare places in the military so that the military is effective enough to protect freedom for us all. Promoting gender equality in the microscopic environment of subs compromises the overall gender equality movement because it damages our military which protects freedom for all. For all my points about why women shouldn't be on subs, notice that I do not blame any of it on the women who will be serving, nor do I believe any of the problems created will be their fault. I admire their courage and wish them best of luck. Thanks and I look forward to continuing this debate. Sources: [1] http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com... [2] http://www.strategypage.com... [3] http://www.nytimes.com...