Replies

Our present system of women in the military is a farce.
I have no objection to women anywhere as long as they meet the same rigerous physical standards as men. No more wimping down physical requirements for positions. Jane Wayne or out.

In truth, I think we are going to have to lose a major Naval Vessel before that happens.
If you read the reports on the fire on the Forrestal CVA-59 in 1967 you will see that if it happened today, with women in the crew under current physical strength standards, they would never have been able to manage the fire fighting and damage control and the ship would have been lost.

So9

I'm going to go with a minor disagreement, while keeping step with you in principal. I was in the USN, served on the USS Chicago CG-11 and USS Samson DDG-10. Sailors tend to not be physical specimens. I think women, in general, can handle the physical aspects.
BUT, I don't think women belong on Combatant vessels. The close quarters, and a woman's natural hormonal swings are not a good mix. IMO.

Sailors tend to not be physical specimens. I think women, in general, can handle the physical aspects.

Mostly they can, but it is things like changing from 2 stretcher bearers in an all male navy to 4 bearers per stretcher now that women are aboard that is going to cause a didaster. Not only does it cut the number of wounded that can be moved in a given time in half, but a stretcher carried by 4 is three times as wide as a stretcher carried by 2. That makes passageways and ladders too congested for the firefighters and repair people to get through.

A lot of people on a ship are doing jobs that could be automated. Their secondary assignment to damage control is the real reason they are there, to savbe the ship after it has take 50% casualties. The fact that a woman can lift the 40 pound load required of her nominal position does not mean she will be able to lift the 200 pounds that may be required in a disaster.

SO9