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.
You are correct that you have no place in this thread with comments like that. One of the problems the military has to deal with is the fact that during the "Brainstorming" that went into this policy change as well as others there was probably a smart ass comment such as that made and they all thought it was funny. As for the BS that's being put out let me know what has been said by those of us who have or are serving that you personally know to be untrue or is this again based on your non fact based beliefs. My previous comment was under SSNTUBES in responding to Bee Keeper. As I said I have 2 daughters on active duty right now and we've had this discussion and both agree with me even though they would like to serve on one given the chance but too agree it should be an entire female crew and that's very unlikely to ever happen, so the same with this proposal. They are starting with a trial by using female officers as the test platform which in no way is even close to the entire integration of the crew for reasons that would take to long in this forum to explain to someone who has never been there.
Also my oldest daughter is attached as support member for a SEAL unit on deployment in the middle east. I have to ask just because she can do the auxiliary support job perfectly well do you think she should be injected into that elite small group for the sake of so called equality. HELL NO. Seals are elite for a very special reason, so is the submarine force and it's not one that should be ever opened to political correctness. So go watch another Demi Moore movie and make PC ignorant comments to those of us who give you the ability to make these free speech pointless comments and let the protection of the Nation to those of us who have and still do it fo a living.
What in the he!! are you talking about.....I have no reason to be in this thread because why? You have 2 daughters....and that give you the right to be in this thread.....Sorry, but my RETIRED military a$$ does not agree with you.....
Stupid comments are said all the time....as they were in this thread...NUMEROUS TIMES.....
We can start with this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Cells
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!
And if you believe everything that is said in the above comment...then maybe you are more of a problem than a fix.....
So please, if you are military....(I doubt it with your answer) please remove yourself from this conversation.....
IF you believe everything that has been said in this thread....then maybe you need to re-look at you so called military career (If you have ever really been in the military)
chucksnee, I think it was my comment, not yours, when I said it gives the words 'service member' a new meaning, which was a cheap shot joke, but it happens to be the way i see it too.
At 58 years, and the way i was raised, I am very much a knuckedragger and dammned proud of it.
My wife married for because i am a knuckeldragger and she likes it that way.
I m too old for the feminazis to have had any effect on me.
I think that for a man/woman crew on a sub would have to be one hell of a crew. It could work with the right people, expect no privacy. Everyone would have to be very comfortable with each other, more of a family unit I suppose.
I got to spend a few hours on some subs. That diesel in San Francisco and a nuclear sub in Seal Beach. Makes for some tight living.
I spent a few hours on subs as a wee lad with my father, these were still active and commisioned, but i didn't know anything about that then. I was 4 maybe 5 and went with him. I got to hold my breath with him in Groton Ct too, in that tank of water. I enjoyed that part. I thought they were just having some fun. I was.
More recently I toured a boat as part of a Museum in Mass, and got the VIP tour after mentioning my Dad. I got to go in the hold, and see cardboard boxes full of old junk and got to climb the ladder into the conning tower, and the old WW-2 vet tour guide was just full of info he didn't mention to most museum guests.
He let me tinker with the twin diesels a bit too, and showed me more details about how they ran the generators, and i was able to understand some of it. There was a machine shop in the engine room all set up and ready to mill out parts. The diesel stench was outstanding. I can't imagine what it would be like to be underwater in one of those boats.
To who can/cannot, should/shouldn't post on such a thread; I must say that only a few of us here are career submariners.
My underwater time in the 70's was more than a 'few hours' on a museum piece tied to a pier; and again during the 80's, and during the 90's. I do admit though during the 2000's I only briefly stepped onto a few subs for the purpose of giving briefings to the crews.
The issue of putting females on subs has been in the air for a long time. The Tridents were designed with this thought in mind. The first sub to get females is a boat that I was once a crewmember of.
There will no doubt be men whose careers will be ruined. This is the Navy way.
Eventually the kinks will be worked out, and the missions will be completed.
I would have welcomed females onboard when I was still a crewman, and I openly said so at the time.
chucksnee, I think it was my comment, not yours, when I said it gives the words 'service member' a new meaning, which was a cheap shot joke, but it happens to be the way i see it too.
At 58 years, and the way i was raised, I am very much a knuckedragger and dammned proud of it.
My wife married for because i am a knuckeldragger and she likes it that way.
I m too old for the feminazis to have had any effect on me.
Sorry, but he quoted me, not you.....
I feel there is a reason that I did not make it further than E7 while I was in....Could be because I was honest???? People do not have the guts for "HONEST" anymore....
Posts #116 and #117 pretty much got it right, even if the comments may have been a bit on the emotional side. All male crews are still best, and that means surface ships too, not just subs. From the standpoint of morale, discipline, and fighting efficiency, it is far better for men at sea to walk around horny thinking about sex, than it is to be participating in it with another crewmember.
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.
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.
