It would be interesting to compare the ship’s readiness and performance before and after a female CO...such comparison’s are not allowed in the US Navy...too politically incorrect.
BTW, EVERY US Navy seagoing vessel that has allowed women to serve onboard has experienced 30-40% pregnancy rates. This has severe consequences both fiscally and on crew morale. Pregnant women are immediately transferred to a shore billet and have to be replaced. This results in fewer shore billets available to men. Ultimately more good male sailors will not re-enlist, and they in turn will have to be replaced, costing even more money.
The question I always ask is this: How does allowing women to serve in these positions actually improve military war fighting readiness? The answer is that it does not. It’s only done for political correctness.
Liberals like to pretend that sex won't happen, then they pretend that it doesn't matter if it does happen, then they pretend the baby doesn't matter and can be tossed out with the garbage (which has become a rite of passage for liberal women).
Reminds me of the fellow who told Mark Steyn that we could afford to be stupid (fiscally). People who think that way wind up finding they vastly underestimated the price of stupid.