U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-28-2009, 11:35 AM
 
Location: Florida
1,779 posts, read 3,381,427 times
Reputation: 944

Advertisements

Military may lift ban on women in submarines - Yahoo! News--

Now the Pentagon wants to the lift the ban on women serving on submarines. What do y'all think about women serving in combat roles in the military?

I wouldn't have a problem with it.....if the physical standards are equalized. To me, giving women much lower PT requirements results in less qualifications for the same job. There should be one set of PT requirements, I simply do not understand how a man can fail and be deemed unfit for the job....yet a woman can score lower and be deemed fit for the job. It's the same job, right? Same tasks, same duties....

If women are to be allowed in all the roles in the military, then the PT standards should be equalized to the standards the job requires.

Equality also means equal qualifications.

 
Old 09-28-2009, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,304,497 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by th3vault View Post
Military may lift ban on women in submarines - Yahoo! News--

Now the Pentagon wants to the lift the ban on women serving on submarines. What do y'all think about women serving in combat roles in the military?

I wouldn't have a problem with it.....if the physical standards are equalized. To me, giving women much lower PT requirements results in less qualifications for the same job. There should be one set of PT requirements, I simply do not understand how a man can fail and be deemed unfit for the job....yet a woman can score lower and be deemed fit for the job. It's the same job, right? Same tasks, same duties....

If women are to be allowed in all the roles in the military, then the PT standards should be equalized to the standards the job requires.

Equality also means equal qualifications.

Your answer is dead on where I stand. I couldn't understand when I was in why the girls got longer to run the same distance, and why they had less strenuous physical tests than I did.

Then someone explained to me that women aren't allowed to participate in combat roles.

Personally, I feel that anyone who joins the military should meet certain physical criteria, regardless of sex or race.

If the girls want to be in a combat situation, and they can prove that they can lift enough, run fast enough, and meet the same physical standard as men, I'm all for it.

And before someone jumps all over me for being sexist, the standards aren't that hard for men either.
 
Old 09-28-2009, 10:29 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,046,755 times
Reputation: 14878
Exactly how fit does one have to be to serve on a submarine?

Physical just like aptitude should be based upon the requirements of the the military occupational specialty(MOS).

Having two different sets of requirements through basic is fine with me.

As for women in combat? As Iraq has amply demonstrated, if you in a a war zone these days, everyone is assigned to combat duty.
 
Old 09-28-2009, 11:37 PM
 
Location: Florida
1,779 posts, read 3,381,427 times
Reputation: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Exactly how fit does one have to be to serve on a submarine?

Physical just like aptitude should be based upon the requirements of the the military occupational specialty(MOS).

Having two different sets of requirements through basic is fine with me.

As for women in combat? As Iraq has amply demonstrated, if you in a a war zone these days, everyone is assigned to combat duty.
1. Pretty fit. I think subs are right after SEALS for the requirements in the Navy, but I'm not Navy so someone else would know more about that.

2. It's not just through basic, it applies in AIT and throughout a military career due to the PT tests which factor into performance reports... which determine promotions, assignments...etc. I might understand women getting lower push up requirements, but running and sit ups??? It just does not make sense to me how a man can be disqualified for the same exact job that a woman qualifies for promotion, despite the male doing more push ups, more sit ups and running in a shorter time...

For example...a male who runs a 16 min 2 mile is failed and could be kicked out of the Army, while a woman who runs the same 16 min 2 mile is a near perfect score and put on the fast track for promotion. They could start out with the same job, and the woman gets promoted and the man gets put on punishment or kicked out.....for the same exact performance on the same exact test for the same exact job.

3. Yes, all members of our armed forces are put in danger in today's world. But there is still a huge difference between infantry and logistics in terms of the probability of danger...

If women are to get equal opportunity in all parts of the military, then they need to be subjected to equal qualifications.... that's equality, right?
 
Old 09-29-2009, 03:52 AM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,889 posts, read 20,304,497 times
Reputation: 8606
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Exactly how fit does one have to be to serve on a submarine?

Physical just like aptitude should be based upon the requirements of the the military occupational specialty(MOS).

Having two different sets of requirements through basic is fine with me.

As for women in combat? As Iraq has amply demonstrated, if you in a a war zone these days, everyone is assigned to combat duty.
First things first,

A Sub is not a regular ship. Its not a pleasure cruise.

You've got to be ready at all times, to help stop a leak. Every member of the crew must be able to place clamps, seals, and close and lock doors in case of a leak. Some of those clamps weigh upwards of 60 pounds, which you've got to hold over your head. Or, you've got to swing a sledge hammer to seal things off.

Thats everyone on the ship. Everyone has to be able to function in that capacity, because you might be the only one in a room who can seal a leak. If you don't, it'll kill everyone on board.


I've long said that I think men and women should have equal standards for physical activity in the military. However, I can see a double standard if the women are going to be in a non-combat roll.

However, it should be the exact same physical standards, if they are going to be in a combat situation. The situations when seconds count, and everyone has to be able to do the same physical things.
 
Old 09-29-2009, 06:20 AM
 
7,376 posts, read 12,524,711 times
Reputation: 6934
I think women serving in the military is fine. All we have to do is look at a place like Israel to know that women can function in combat well if trained.
 
Old 09-29-2009, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,084,905 times
Reputation: 948
The only issue for women on subs is privacy. Submarines, especially attack submarines, have little or no privacy for enlisted personnel. There's a big berthing compartment and a gymnasium style "bathroom." Women probably can accomplish about 90% of the jobs on a sub. Only a couple of jobs require much physical strength.
 
Old 09-29-2009, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn
40,057 posts, read 29,709,520 times
Reputation: 10450
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
The only issue for women on subs is privacy.
And even that isn't a genuine issue. It's more like an excuse to tiptoe around things that organizations (like the military, for example) don't especially want to deal with. If there's true equality, then anyone should be able to serve in any branch of the military without restrictions, period.
 
Old 09-29-2009, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,084,905 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred314X View Post
And even that isn't a genuine issue. It's more like an excuse to tiptoe around things that organizations (like the military, for example) don't especially want to deal with. If there's true equality, then anyone should be able to serve in any branch of the military without restrictions, period.
As long as the women don't mind communal showers.
 
Old 09-29-2009, 07:52 AM
 
1,310 posts, read 2,639,688 times
Reputation: 581
Quote:
Originally Posted by th3vault View Post
Military may lift ban on women in submarines - Yahoo! News--

Now the Pentagon wants to the lift the ban on women serving on submarines. What do y'all think about women serving in combat roles in the military?

I wouldn't have a problem with it.....if the physical standards are equalized. To me, giving women much lower PT requirements results in less qualifications for the same job. There should be one set of PT requirements, I simply do not understand how a man can fail and be deemed unfit for the job....yet a woman can score lower and be deemed fit for the job. It's the same job, right? Same tasks, same duties....

If women are to be allowed in all the roles in the military, then the PT standards should be equalized to the standards the job requires.

Equality also means equal qualifications.
I greatly admire women who want to serve their country in the armed forces ...so long as they have the ability to do war as a man does . Based on the way each gender was created, theres some big differences. Theres this one gal at church...shes maybe 24 years old....she was over in Iraq and fell off of the roof of a Humvee and broke her leg badly . Shes on leave now . This gal is a VERY attractive blonde haired shapely gal that could easily win trophies at Beauty Pagents ; her looks are stunning . I cant help but feel she would be quite a distraction for fellow Male soldiers on the ground....and in a Submarine , I dont think much productive work would get done. Using modern vernacular : Shes 'overly Hot' ... so much so that its going to cause some problems.

Last edited by RVlover; 09-29-2009 at 07:56 AM.. Reason: add
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top