U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-25-2010, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Hawaii
1,707 posts, read 6,232,562 times
Reputation: 1054

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Cells View Post
A totally stupid idea.
Today we see that yet another skipper got canned because of an "inappropriate" relationship with another member of the crew. (read sexual relationship)
Sex has NO PLACE in the military. When you put Men and Women together in highly stressful confined quarters they are going to get together...they are going to copulate, have "sex". That is NOT the job of the military...to provide a time and place for people to grandstand their sexuality or engage in sex. You are in the military to SERVE not get "serviced". Our job is totally stressful ENOUGH with out adding the immeasurably stressful aspect of modern human sexuality to the mix....it's NOT needed....it does NOT make the job easier...faster...better....more efficient....more enjoyable....more productive. It ONLY MAKES IT WORSE!
You are in the military to fight....to prepare for and fight wars...battles. In order to do that you need to THINK ABOUT THE SHIP....not when you're going to get your next "lay"....Sex is like a drug...and people, particularly many young people who's hormones are raging...CAN NOT control themselves when that drug is made available.....if it's there people will take it....and when they are taking it....they ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS!!!
Time after time we have seen that this patently STUPID social-engineering experiment white-washed as some sort of measure of "equality" ...seen that it has resulted in nothing but chaos and a disastrous lack of professionalism in the military workforce the Navy Team and elsewhere. Who knows how much all this garbage really costs the Navy and the U.S. Military? All the lost time to "touchy-feely" EO training....courts-martial...JAG's running around ruined careers and idiotic sexual tension on the ship on the base that was never before an issue but now is going far to seriously erode the morale and effectiveness of our forces. For many many centuries...for many HUNDREDS of years we have struggled to eliminate as many of the variables involved with going to sea...and fighting battles at sea as possible...because all of the unknowns all of those variables COST LIVES....Men died because our ships were not good enough...our systems and procedures were not as good as they should have been. We took our beatings at the hands of crazed determined enemies....we learned our lessons and survived....got stronger got better and got SMARTER....Now we (or rather some dizzy fuzzy-haired politicians and liberal mutant "activists") are pushing to have the greatest unknown DELIBERATELY and FORCEABLY INTRODUCED into the military....that of sexuality and the end result of all that prima facie absurd politically motivated liberal mindlessness will be a serious weakening of our strengths and capabilities. The strongest part of our military is our PEOPLE and if we weaken them the whole system is the worse for it....and America will NOT be as ready to meet the next military challenge...
This social-engineering nonsense is best left to the collage classroom....let the warriors do their job with out weighing them down with NEEDLESS and ENDLESS garbage!
Good stuff, thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-25-2010, 04:11 PM
 
3,071 posts, read 7,575,783 times
Reputation: 2057
Guess I don't need to expound. Happy Cells did it for me reppe'd Though I do believe females should be allowed to serve in the military, and in combat zones, the "highly stressful confined quarters" should be avoided. That's why in USMC boot camp, training is not co-ed. Also when deployed they go to the lengths they do to keep the sexes separated and bascially make sex a crime.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Cells View Post
A totally stupid idea.
Today we see that yet another skipper got canned because of an "inappropriate" relationship with another member of the crew. (read sexual relationship)
Sex has NO PLACE in the military. When you put Men and Women together in highly stressful confined quarters they are going to get together...they are going to copulate, have "sex". That is NOT the job of the military...to provide a time and place for people to grandstand their sexuality or engage in sex. You are in the military to SERVE not get "serviced". Our job is totally stressful ENOUGH with out adding the immeasurably stressful aspect of modern human sexuality to the mix....it's NOT needed....it does NOT make the job easier...faster...better....more efficient....more enjoyable....more productive. It ONLY MAKES IT WORSE!
You are in the military to fight....to prepare for and fight wars...battles. In order to do that you need to THINK ABOUT THE SHIP....not when you're going to get your next "lay"....Sex is like a drug...and people, particularly many young people who's hormones are raging...CAN NOT control themselves when that drug is made available.....if it's there people will take it....and when they are taking it....they ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS!!!
Time after time we have seen that this patently STUPID social-engineering experiment white-washed as some sort of measure of "equality" has in reality become an EPIC FAILURE...seen that it has resulted in nothing but chaos and a disastrous lack of professionalism in the military workforce the Navy Team and elsewhere. Who knows how much all this garbage really costs the Navy and the U.S. Military? All the lost time to "touchy-feely" EO training....courts-martial...JAG's running around ruined careers and idiotic sexual tension on the ship on the base that was never before an issue but now is going far to seriously erode the morale and effectiveness of our forces. For many many centuries...for many HUNDREDS of years we have struggled to eliminate as many of the variables involved with going to sea...and fighting battles at sea as possible...because all of the unknowns all of those variables COST LIVES....Men died because our ships were not good enough...our systems and procedures were not as good as they should have been. We took our beatings at the hands of crazed determined enemies....we learned our lessons and survived....got stronger got better and got SMARTER....Now we (or rather some dizzy fuzzy-haired politicians and liberal mutant "activists") are pushing to have the greatest unknown DELIBERATELY and FORCEABLY INTRODUCED into the military....that of sexuality and the end result of all that prima facie absurd politically motivated liberal mindlessness will be a serious weakening of our strengths and capabilities. The strongest part of our military is our PEOPLE and if we weaken them the whole system is the worse for it....and America will NOT be as ready to meet the next military challenge...
This social-engineering nonsense is best left to the college classroom....let the warriors do their job with out weighing them down with NEEDLESS and ENDLESS garbage!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 06:42 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
29,741 posts, read 47,539,222 times
Reputation: 17595
I completed 17 patrols on subs, most being deployed between 90 and 105 days. I do understand that Navy life is not a lifestyle 'for' everyone, and I understand that sub-life is not 'for' most sailors. We submariners tend to be a different sort of group.

We do not start fights, if any of us were to have the tendency to get into fist fights. It is among the things they screen out during the selection process. Each branch of the military needs different types of people. The Army's infantry and the Marines need guys who like hand-to-hand combat, subs do not.

When I reported onboard my first boat [the Marshall] I was the first crewman who did not already have a college degree before enlisting. You see during the Vietnam Era guys would go to college as a deferment to the draft. But when they got their degree they knew that soon a letter would be in the mail for them from the draft board. Many of them volunteered for subs. It was how the Silent Service came to be predominately manned by college graduates. The Silent Service has continued to encourage crewmen to be working on getting a degree, or three. So it was fairly common during my entire career, to see bubbleheads working on college courses during each patrol. I doubt if I would have gotten my B.S. or M.A. had it not been for sub duty.

Each of the submarine ratings requires very high ASVAB scores. The men may be lacking in common sense at times, but most of them have very high IQs. While on the last boat I served on, I used to get a little kidding around because in my division I had the lowest ASVAB scores. You see on that battery of tests I missed one question, whereas they had each aced their ASVABs.

From 1976 until I retired in 2001, I served with a few men who I considered to have been a-holes. However I have always respected all of them for being highly intelligent within each of their chosen fields. Each submariner is expected to be the system expert of at least one system. Whether it is a computer or a still, a hydraulic plant or a Satellite’s Re-Entry Vehicle, the reactor or an orbital missile. Subs have no seaman gang, no un-skilled or spare crewmen. Each member of the crew is needed and they are each highly trained professionals.

I suspect that the other services function differently. For us, being one man ‘down’ hurts us all, because when that piece of gear fails someone had better know enough about it to fix it. Every time that I re-enlisted I got a new NEC, a new skill set, a system that I could fix, another way in which I could better serve the crew.

On a sub nobody cares how many sit-ups you can do. How fast you can run? No. Many of my PRT runs were done by running in-place on a steel deck, counting how many paces I had ‘gone’. We do not look for the same qualities that other services may look for in their solders. When a new Reactor Operator reports onboard we expect that he knows how to operate a nuclear power plant, and if he stays and eventually re-enlists he will get another NEC which will go toward making him even more valuable to the crew.

Seeing that we require such a select person to begin with:
If someone has a ‘clean nose’ enough to carry a security clearance;
If they have a high enough intelligence to complete the schooling and once onboard to keep their systems functioning properly;
If they can work within a group setting without ticking off too many people;
then we are fine with them as a crewmember. I do not see making such a big deal of their gender.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 06:56 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 22,986,414 times
Reputation: 7957
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
Have to take your word for it. I've toured quite a few, but I've never been stuck on one out to sea for months on end.

How are they not 'rigged' for women?
I'll give you an example from my second ship. Women were given their own berthing compartment. That meant that a section of the ship had to be set aside for women only. Their head (restroom) had to be refurbished to remove urinals and add more toilets. A trash can had to be added to all the stalls for tampons and maxipads. The ship's pharmacy and ship's store had to stock up on items for women without enlarging the ship's pharmacy or ship's store. That meant some items had to be reduced or removed. Curtains were installed at all entrances to the female berthing compartment. Many of the sailors are between the ages of 18 and 22. They're away from home for months at a time in tight quarters with hormones and pheramones (spelling?) running rampant. This is simple biology. The instant a woman becomes pregnant at sea, she's going to have to be removed. That means surfacing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 06:57 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 22,986,414 times
Reputation: 7957
To any bubble heads here, could you head over to the politics board. Someone posted this same topic there. I never served on a sub so could you set some of these people there straight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 07:03 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
29,741 posts, read 47,539,222 times
Reputation: 17595
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
I'll give you an example from my second ship. ...
Excuse me sir, I may have missed it but what boats did you serve on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 07:14 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 22,986,414 times
Reputation: 7957
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper View Post
Excuse me sir, I may have missed it but what boats did you serve on?
Ships. First one was the USS Iwo Jima LPH-2. It was an all male ship right up until decom in July 1993. Second ship was the USS LaSalle AGF-3, formerly an amphib which was converted into a flag ship homeported in Gaeta, Italy. I left the ship in late 1996. Learned both ships have been scrapped and no longer exist. The LaSalle was the ship that was converted from all male to male/female crew. We had a few pregnancies, some runaway female sailors who didn't like life on a ship, and one who was trying to get pregnant to get off the ship. She was at sick call every monday getting tested. She wasn't married. We also had a female chief and her first class petty officer get kicked out. They were having an affair. Oh, and then there was the female Navy officer having an affair with the married Marine NCO. Should have sent the love letter email to the right email address. That's how they got caught. The women that actually were there to do their job were few and far between. The rest didn't seem to want to work or try at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 08:09 PM
 
3,071 posts, read 7,575,783 times
Reputation: 2057
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
Ships. First one was the USS Iwo Jima LPH-2. It was an all male ship right up until decom in July 1993. Second ship was the USS LaSalle AGF-3, formerly an amphib which was converted into a flag ship homeported in Gaeta, Italy. I left the ship in late 1996. Learned both ships have been scrapped and no longer exist. The LaSalle was the ship that was converted from all male to male/female crew. We had a few pregnancies, some runaway female sailors who didn't like life on a ship, and one who was trying to get pregnant to get off the ship. She was at sick call every monday getting tested. She wasn't married. We also had a female chief and her first class petty officer get kicked out. They were having an affair. Oh, and then there was the female Navy officer having an affair with the married Marine NCO. Should have sent the love letter email to the right email address. That's how they got caught. The women that actually were there to do their job were few and far between. The rest didn't seem to want to work or try at all.

not to disparage a whole group. Especially one who is willing to make the sacrifice to serve in the military. still I've found that female officers, percentage wise, are far more likely to engage in indiscretions than enlisted. It kind of vibes with a study I read once about how college educated women had the most sex, followed by lower class, with middle class taking up the rear. i always say, every "female officer used to be a college chick." I believe, miltarily speaking, it's b/c most don't plan on being careerist and therefore are more willing to do things that would jeopardize their career.

forest beekeeper, IME (and granted the marine Corps attracts a more aggressive "alpha" type personality), the intelligent person you're talking bout is less likely to "keep their nose clean". intelligent people will rationalize bad behavior, and also will think their smart enough to not get caught.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
29,741 posts, read 47,539,222 times
Reputation: 17595
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
Ships.
The OP is about boats.

Not targets.



Quote:
... First one was the USS Iwo Jima LPH-2.
Target.

Purpose is to present a big image to direct incoming missiles and torpedoes to itself and away from the combatants.



Quote:
... Second ship was the USS LaSalle AGF-3,
Another target.

The OP is about boats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-25-2010, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
14,095 posts, read 22,986,414 times
Reputation: 7957
Quote:
Originally Posted by forest beekeeper View Post
The OP is about boats.

Not targets.





Target.

Purpose is to present a big image to direct incoming missiles and torpedoes to itself and away from the combatants.





Another target.

The OP is about boats.
If our ship gets hit, I'll float away on the life raft. Sub gets hit, maybe some pieces will float away. They offered the chance for me to go on a submarine. Turned them down. Why would I go on a boat you plan on sinking?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads
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