• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Navy will soon let women serve on subs

If there are certain women (even a small percentage) who are physically and mentally capable of performing the same kinds of tasks on a submarine as men, I hardly see what the big deal is. This isn't really a PC issue to me (though it would be if it were about letting any woman regardless of their physical capabilities to serve on a sub). This is an issue of blatant sexism if you are going to say across the board that no women at all are capable of serving on a submarine. Why is it such a big deal to allow this small percentage of women to serve on a sub?
 
I don't agree with reduced standards - one job, one standard.

Agree or not they are in place, and will continue to be in place. Females on the majority cannot preform even close to the levels of the average male. The only way for it to work (or so the politically correct crowed think) is to reduce the standards. To use their terminology "to make it fair."

I agree with you to a point. If females had to pass within the same standards as men, I would not be as concerned about it. I mite even support it, but this will never happen.
 
If there are certain women (even a small percentage) who are physically and mentally capable of performing the same kinds of tasks on a submarine as men, I hardly see what the big deal is. This isn't really a PC issue to me (though it would be if it were about letting any woman regardless of their physical capabilities to serve on a sub). This is an issue of blatant sexism if you are going to say across the board that no women at all are capable of serving on a submarine. Why is it such a big deal to allow this small percentage of women to serve on a sub?

If you give an inch, people will take a mile, period. Next thing you know just like every other area the standards will be reduced to allow more women participate. This is what I see as the problem.
 
If you give an inch, people will take a mile, period. Next thing you know just like every other area the standards will be reduced to allow more women participate. This is what I see as the problem.

I fail to see how allowing women who physically qualify to serve on a sub would result in military having to adjust their physical requirements for more women to serve. I think it's baseless paranoia more than anything. The only thing I see this doing is not allowing someone's sex to be a determining factor on whether or not they can serve on a sub and instead letting the physical requirements (which is truly the crux of what everyone is arguing here) be the determining factor.
 
I fail to see how allowing women who physically qualify to serve on a sub would result in military having to adjust their physical requirements for more women to serve. I think it's baseless paranoia more than anything. The only thing I see this doing is not allowing someone's sex to be a determining factor on whether or not they can serve on a sub and instead letting the physical requirements (which is truly the crux of what everyone is arguing here) be the determining factor.
Physical and mental requirements.

Sub crews are probably screened for claustrophobia, among other things…

That said, I can’t see how allowing the females who have those qualities on board a sub would cause a massive decrease in combat effectiveness.

At least, once the crew got used to it.
 
..............and instead letting the physical requirements (which is truly the crux of what everyone is arguing here) be the determining factor.

The problem is that the military currently does not do this. They are allowing the females to serve on a sub without meeting the same requirements.

I agree, the physical requirements should be met. We are not talking about business accounting here, we are talking about preparing for these ships to be at war.

The enemy doesn't care about physical requirements, they care care about killing whatever and whomever is on that sub. If there are females that can meet the same physical requirements as males for the job, I think they should be allowed. However, that is not what is being done.
 
I fail to see how allowing women who physically qualify to serve on a sub would result in military having to adjust their physical requirements for more women to serve. I think it's baseless paranoia more than anything. The only thing I see this doing is not allowing someone's sex to be a determining factor on whether or not they can serve on a sub and instead letting the physical requirements (which is truly the crux of what everyone is arguing here) be the determining factor.

Please point out just one case were physical requirements were not reduced for female? Such as Police, Fire etc. Just one?

So far it has happened in every single case, period.
 
Last edited:
The problem is that the military currently does not do this. They are allowing the females to serve on a sub without meeting the same requirements.

I agree, the physical requirements should be met. We are not talking about business accounting here, we are talking about preparing for these ships to be at war.

The enemy doesn't care about physical requirements, they care care about killing whatever and whomever is on that sub. If there are females that can meet the same physical requirements as males for the job, I think they should be allowed. However, that is not what is being done.

Then perhaps we should be criticizing the military rather than making bs blanket sexist statements about how women in general shouldn't be allowed to serve on a submarine. The fact is that some of them, even if it's a small percentage, would pass the physical and mental requirements that would be needed. I don't see how demanding equality is equatable to being PC if they would only allow women who pass these physical requirements. Granted, as you say, that isn't what they are doing. Perhaps then, they should adjust their system to do this rather than just allowing any and all women to serve. However, that hasn't been where the conversation has been going thus far in this thread. People mainly have been making blanket statements about how women in general aren't capable of serving on a submarine.
 
Please point out just one case were physical requirements were not reduced for female? Such as Police, Fire etc. Just one?

So far it has happened in every single case, period.

Please point out where adjusting the physical requirements in the cases of police, fire, etc. has affected at large the performance of these groups overall for the negative? I have to say I'm pretty taken aback by how prevalent sexism still is.
 
Then perhaps we should be criticizing the military rather than making bs blanket sexist statements about how women in general shouldn't be allowed to serve on a submarine.

While we are at it we can criticize it in civilian life as well.

The fact is that some of them, even if it's a small percentage, would pass the physical and mental requirements that would be needed. I don't see how demanding equality is equatable to being PC if they would only allow women who pass these physical requirements.

We live in the real world, this will not happen. They will lower the standards. Hell they are already planning to "retro fit" subs to accept females.

Granted, as you say, that isn't what they are doing. Perhaps then, they should adjust their system to do this rather than just allowing any and all women to serve.

Again this is not going to happen.

However, that hasn't been where the conversation has been going thus far in this thread. People mainly have been making blanket statements about how women in general aren't capable of serving on a submarine.

In general, they are not up to the requirements at present.

This is not rocket science, males and females are different mentally and physically. Why is this so hard to accept?
 
Please point out where adjusting the physical requirements in the cases of police, fire, etc. has affected at large the performance of these groups overall for the negative? I have to say I'm pretty taken aback by how prevalent sexism still is.

A female fireman cannot rescue me because I weigh over 100lbs. A police woman cannot take down a large unarmed suspect without backup. I know, got called in a few times to assist female officers. So they cannot do the same job as the majority of men in the same position. This puts a drain on the team. If even one member of the team is a weak link it is over.

This does not mean they were bad police officers etc, just that they needed a hand more often than the average male.

Again it has nothing to do with sexism, this is reality. Not PC political land.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps then, they should adjust their system to do this rather than just allowing any and all women to serve.

Since that isn't going to be done and instead they are being allowed to serve even though thtey don't meet the same requirements, people have a right to criticize this action.
People mainly have been making blanket statements about how women in general aren't capable of serving on a submarine.

Many have been saying that, but I'm not. I think they should be able to serve if they meet the same requirements.

I agree that those saying they shouldn't be allowed to serve in general is wrong.
 
males and females are different mentally and physically. Why is this so hard to accept?
This has been accepted. What you seem to be struggling with is that some females are stronger than most males, and you constantly resort to steriotypes in order to maintain this disbelief.
 
Please point out where adjusting the physical requirements in the cases of police, fire, etc. has affected at large the performance of these groups overall for the negative? I have to say I'm pretty taken aback by how prevalent sexism still is.

The point is if the job requires you to be able to lift x. You should be able to lift x to do the job. If you lower the standard for females, then why not for a male who can't meet the male standard but can the female standard?

It all goes back to what the job requires. If you can meet the standards and are the best qualified, then you should be hired.
 
males and females are different mentally and physically. Why is this so hard to accept?
It has been accepted. What you seem to be struggling to accept is the fact that even so, there are some women who are stronger than most men - and you continue to revert to steriotypes in order for you to further your disbelief.
 
It has been accepted. What you seem to be struggling to accept is the fact that even so, there are some women who are stronger than most men - and you continue to revert to steriotypes in order for you to further your disbelief.

I agree that some women are stronger than some men. I believe that if a job has a defined physical requirement as long as anyone can meet the standard they should be considered for the job when they apply. I do not believe in having two different standards for the job based on the gender of the applicant.
 
I agree that some women are stronger than some men. I believe that if a job has a defined physical requirement as long as anyone can meet the standard they should be considered for the job when they apply. I do not believe in having two different standards for the job based on the gender of the applicant.
Neither do I.

Assuming those standards are not specifically tailored to prevent females from passing, as I assume it would be possible to do.
 
I believe that if a job has a defined physical requirement as long as anyone can meet the standard they should be considered for the job when they apply. I do not believe in having two different standards for the job based on the gender of the applicant.
Phyiscal, mental and whatever other criteria you want to throw in, but... 100% agree.
 
I agree that some women are stronger than some men. I believe that if a job has a defined physical requirement as long as anyone can meet the standard they should be considered for the job when they apply. I do not believe in having two different standards for the job based on the gender of the applicant.

I agree.

How many more times does this need to be expressed before the dissenters realize this is the only fair way to go?
 
Stupid, dumb, misguided and bad.

That's what this idea is.

Subs are small, their crews, smaller. What happens when they lose a gal cause she's pregnant? Eh? Say... 2 weeks before deployment? Hard to replace her with a well trained person ready to go. Happened on the Inchon quite a few times, we'd deploy and have departments and divisions short manned cause of this. And now we'll lift the ban on SUBS!

Exactly.

Unless BC becomes mandatory - among other extreme measures - I'm fully against co-mingling in close-quarter situations. It invites more troubles than it'll prevent.
 
I agree.

How many more times does this need to be expressed before the dissenters realize this is the only fair way to go?
Never thought I'd see you put fairness above effectiveness. I've stated before I have nothing against women, but this is about national defense and national security. NOTHING should come before the effectiveness of our military. If women can fit in without undue burden upon military effectiveness and costs, fine. If not, the military shouldn't be burden with whining.
 
It has been accepted. What you seem to be struggling to accept is the fact that even so, there are some women who are stronger than most men - and you continue to revert to steriotypes in order for you to further your disbelief.

Of course there are some but they are the exception rather then the rule.........
 
Of course there are some but they are the exception rather then the rule.........
Remember those East German female olympians? :lol:


322518981_04c0c0494e.jpg


See what happened to her after a couple of pushups?

dblbi.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom