Another reason I’m all in favor of mandatory birth control for all military women on deployment. Not just submariners, not just navy, ALL active-duty women, especially all on deployment.ShadowDragon8685 wrote:The question then becomes not so much 'how does one prevent sex' as 'how does one prevent the potential complications sex could cause.' I saw a documentary about how on the Nimitz class carriers, even though sex is absolutely verboten that doesn't prevent it, and they frequently - or perhaps "not-infrequently" - have to ship pregnant women back stateside.
This might cause a problem with women intent on a military career. In which case make provisions for them to request shore/stateside assignment for purposes of reproduction at some point. I will point out, however, that in that case you're looking at planned reproduction, not accidents.
Oh, FUCKING BULLSHIT. Please. You do realize that the vast majority of women, both civilian and military, use birth control? Please tell me you are aware of that and not as stupid as that makes you look.The only practical idea that comes to my mind would be mandatory birth control. But of course, this idea takes a gigantic heaping diareaha all over civil rights. On second blush, though, is that really such an insurmountable thing - after all, in volunteering for the military, you already waive a great many - some might say most - of your civil rights, and the sub corps is and always has been all-volunteer in an already all-volunteer Navy.
But it would still, without question, represent a gigantic, titanic, incomprehensibly vile imposition on the female pioneers who might think of volunteering for submarine duty..
Are you aware that some medical treatments require a woman to be on reliable birth control?
Get a grip – there’s more to a woman than her fertility. Temporarily suppressing fertility is something women have sought throughout history. Don’t act like it’s some horrible imposition when a woman has to volunteer twice (once for the navy, once for sub duty) to get that posting. No one is forced to work on a submarine. All who do volunteer for such must accept rules and regulations that limit their freedoms in the interest of successfully completing the mission.
No, there are not. No male-based birth control is as reliable as the female, hormone based version sort of permanent surgical sterilization. It is one thing to ask someone to temporarily suppress fertility, it is another to permanently sterilize someone.Could this be mitigated, I wonder, by making birth control on submarines a nonoption for all crew, male and female? IIRC there are forms of male birth control pills that can be used..
Yes. So do some civilians, for that matter – pilots and firemen, for example (small moustaches may be permitted so long as they do not in any way interfere with masks) So fucking what? If you don’t want to accept the rules required for a certain job get a different job. Otherwise – we’re not talking about a lifetime ban, it’s for the duration of service..I'm certain the idea is one that will enrage fury. Believe me, even I know how bad it looks. But then, Army personel have to keep smooth-shaved so they can get a tight fit for gas masks, irregardless of religious objections requiring them to wear a beard, do they not?
Men have also been known to rape other men, too, along with various domestic animals and inanimate objects. On the other hand most men don’t commit rape. I have no idea how often the average man has the impulse to commit rape (I might not want to know) but most of them manage to suppress the urge and behave themselves. Let’s not smear men who are in control of themselves with the bad behavior of those who are not.Of course, that doesn't do anything to address the problem of rape. I'm not sure what even could be done - equally as long as horny, consenting human beings have been leaping at one another, horny men have been clubbing nonconsenting women over the head and dragging them back to their caves.
Explain to me how a submarine – particularly one of the larger ones – is somehow intrinsically a different case than over-wintering in Antarctica or serving several months in the ISS. C’mon, I want to hear it – because both of those places have had co-ed crews without a sudden outbreak of rape. We haven’t had a pregnant woman in space (yet). We have had a few in Antarctica, along with successful births but McMurdo Base is more of a small town than a space station or sub is.As far as on a ship that sails half-sunken... I have no idea. Even if you stationed an NCIS Agent Afloat on every single sub, even if that agent was invariably a woman, and even if you trained all the sub docs in rape kit proceedures and cross-trained the NCIS agent in crime scene investigations, I doubt it would help much. For one thing, there's simply the pressure not to report it - in a tight, crunched steel can holding itself together against the ocean's pressure, I imagine that many wouldn't simply report it, for fear of retaliation of the report. Some would, of course, be too shamed to admit it, too.
Organizations that staff small, isolated groups – such as NASA, science agencies, and the military – do study the problem of isolated group dynamics as well as observing what other groups do. It is not inconceivable that the USN has made this change in part based on observations of such isolated groups that have performed successfully.
Yes, those factors you mention are at play. On the other hand, there are rape victims who will name names despite pressure to NOT do so, who become crusaders, who don’t treat their raped sisters like shit. There are men who do believe when a woman claims rape, who will defend a woman against rape, and who do not defend rapists. Let’s not make people into caricatures.Then there's the paradoxical fact that, though you'll be hard-pressed to find a human alive who wouldn't call rape one of the most heinous crimes imaginable, in the leauges of torture, murder and treason, almost nobody ever wants to believe it. Paradoxically, this seems to affect women as well, if not moreso, than men - I've heard it said (purely conjecture, but worth throwing out,) that women come down hard on rape victims because if they're forced to admit that she was victimized, they could be too; hence they subscribe to the 'she was asking for it' mentality to assure themselves that as long as they don't 'ask for it' it cannot happen to them. Men, of course, are simply likely to take a much simpler stance of 'lying bitch is trying to get my bro in deep hot water'.
Rape is heinous crime – but it’s not a capital crime. And it shouldn’t be. Yes, it’s a horrible felony, so are a lot of other things. That is way over the top.I don't know how you'd fight that. Even if you made rape aboard a submarine a crime punishable by summary exeuction, it wouldn't stop it.
Honestly, I can't imagine what kind of patriotic fervor could inspire a woman to volunteer for military duty having any inkling of the likelihood of sexual abuse at the hands of those who are ostensibly her comrades-in-arms.
You. Just. Don’t. Get. It.
Do you NOT understand that rape at the hands of her “comrades-in-arms” is faced by every woman who ever lived? Women are at risk of rape not just from strangers and co-workers but also family, friends, and acquaintances. That is one way in which woman’s reality differs from men. We are constantly at risk of rape in a way men are not regardless of where we are. Military or civilian, women risk rape every day of their lives. If a risk of rape was enough to stop a woman cold from doing something no woman would ever leave her home. (and even there, she could still be raped by her male relatives). When you make a fucking stupid statement like “I can’t imagine what would inspire a woman to do X because there’s a risk of sexual abuse/assault/rape.” you clearly do not understand that no matter what a woman risks that Horrible Thing every day of her life.
Which is why I say “risk of rape” by itself is not a good enough excuse unless you’re favor of purdah. Myself, I’ll risk rape in preference to be subjected to life imprisonment for the “crime” of being female.
I’d be shocked, too.On the other hand, we have to face facts: sex will happen. Not even a probably there, a certainly - I would be very, very surprised if there were so much as one submarine tour which didn't already have at least one fucking occur aboard, and yes I'm aware that the crew of subs is currently all-male.
I’d be shocked if there has never been a male-on-male rape on a sub, too, though I don’t expect such to be reported or for evidence of such to be made public. I expect other crimes such as theft and even murder have occurred on subs as well because you’re dealing with people and people are sometimes very nasty animals. Despite that, we still stock submarines with men.
I can’t condone castrating the entire male crew. For one thing, castrated men have been known to have erections and penetrative sex so it is in no way a means to prevent rape.The only thing I can think of to deal with the first - or at least, the problems raised by the first - without the extreme measure of castrating the entire crew (which I have no doubt would cause volunteers for the sub corp to dry up faster than those volunteering to give Goldmann Sachs even more free money,) is to implement mandatory birth control. Draconically implementing such a measure only upon the women who already face such steep and personal obstacles to military service would be heinous; therefor the only way I can think of to salvage it would be to make it mandatory for all crew, regardless of gender.
I don’t understand why you think birth control for women is a such a horrible imposition. The women who oppose birth control are hardly the sort who would volunteer for military service.
As the only forms of male hormonal birth control have appalling side effects this just isn’t going to happen. Again, why do you feel hormonal birth control for women is such an imposition? You perhaps don’t think it’s fair? It’s not “fair”, either, that women go through childbirth, that men are stronger, that women live longer than men in our civilization – you’re talking about a difference based in biology. It’s not fair but it’s reality. Men and women do have physical differences.And of course, that will slow everything down as studies are launched - what are the potential long-term ramifications of putting everyone aboard on hormonal birth control
No, not a headache. If you can’t medically tolerate the required birth control you don’t get sub duty. It’s no more unfair than saying people with less than perfect vision don’t get to fly fighter jers.should we allow those crew who have already been medically sterilized - IE, having had tubes tied - to forgoe the mandatory BC, and so forth and so on, not to mention potential individual reactions with the BC medication, and... Headache.
Conception doesn’t make a woman “suddenly” incapacitated. It’s not like a woman is instantaneously aware of conception, nor does she have to be rushed off the ship. Explain to me why, on a 90 day patrol (which is what we’re talking about to start) you would have to evacuate a woman who became pregnant during that time period. Seriously. What “incapacity” in a three month pregnant woman are you talking about? A lot of women aren’t even aware they are pregnant for the first two months. Women in the military are statistically younger and healthier than the aggregate of civilian women, they are less likely to suffer a medical complication that would turn an early pregnancy into an emergency.OTOH, I think every officer would agree that a member of the crew suddenly being reduced in effectiveness owing to the fact that she's now growing another human being would be unacceptable; and equally unacceptable would be the alternative of immediately making landfall or rendevouing with teh nearest surface vessel to transfer her off, especially if she was vital to the operation of the ship.
Unless you can point to some horrifically toxic environmental thing in a sub I just don’t see it – and if there is such, why the hell are we exposing the men to that shit, isn’t their health important, too?
Maybe most of the obstacles you imagine don’t exist? Or at least aren’t insurmountable.Frankly, what we need to do is send bunch of navy pukes up north to consult with the maple-leaf navy to see how they managed to make it work without the world falling apart..
(sarcasm if you can't tell)
It conjurs up imagas of a classroom of sailors in front of an old teacher saying now dint do that or your going to be punnished. I cant see it being very effective.