NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarines?

Discussion in 'Submariners' started by soleil, Jan 11, 2010.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    Soleil: The toilet fittings will have to be changed. They are fitting a device which just 'cups' the lady's bits and she can do it stood up like the blokes do. For more details go to: [email protected] - forward slash - etc...lol
  2. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    Soleil: Are you trying to stir the shit mate ? A sea cadet officer is wanting to change the way the most silent of the silent service runs it's affairs ? I trust the said Mr Creighton is an ex-submariner and speaks from experience of boats, if not he'd be better off shutting his gob and carry on drilling schoolkids around a parade ground at Whale Island....f.....g puff !
  3. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    Certainly wasn't my intention, Dicky.

    I chose it for the submariner forum because it was quite a long and detailed article, represented a variety of opinions (although not necessarily informed ones) and was on a topic which is of current interest.
  4. I read the first couple of sentences and decided its too early in the morning to get wound up i may come back later.
  5. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

  6. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    I agree, yet another embarrassing Sea Cadet Officer waving the pc flag (regardless of his background)
  7. Guns

    Guns War Hero Moderator


    Under current employment law we, MoD, have to review any employment restrictions we have in place due to Gender. These reviews are conducted to determine the Operational Effect of a particular decision.

    Within the military we regulalry review decisions (think Estimate and the "What has Changed" question).

    So we are reviewing women serving on submarines. Does this mean next month 100's of women will be serving at sea? No. Does it mean we will look at and decided upon the Operational Effect of women serving in Submarines? Yes.

    The outcome will then determine policy. And then be reviewed again after a period of time.

    So lets park the Outrage Bus, return the keys to MT and let those that are paid to review such things to do their job and report back. It is not the end of time nor will the four horseman ride over the hills.
  8. *?*

    Sorry soleil, seems we cannot discuss this issue..!

    (***feeling calm***) sigh
  9. Guns

    Guns War Hero Moderator

    Feel free to discuss it, maybe those invoved in the decision making process read this site and will take onboard comments, but some of the previous threads on this subject have been crayoned to death.

    Sensible comments, great and a real debate always appriciated. Outrage at the possibility that time will end because, possibly, women might serve on boats is just dull.

    My view, don't have one as I am a skimmer and don't really care. But would be interesting in Submariners comments, if there would be an affect on operational capability - not outdated sexist views. Not aimed at anyone just a comment based on previous Outrage comments from previous threads.
  10. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    I have to say that this is the first article I've seen on this subject which mentions the potential technical difficulties on boats of feminine hygiene requirements. Would this really be problematic?
  11. There was no discussion in the initial replies, there was just pointless huffing and puffing without substance. Guns is right, the numerous previous threads on women in submarines have descended into a lot of people basically saying, it's a man's world, it didn't used to happen like this, submariners wives won't like it! Those are pointless arguments because they will not be taken into account in the eventual decision making process.

    This article is in fact a perfect example of this approach. It's sources include a Sea Cadet instructor, an ex-submariner from a veterans group, the mayor who bases her opinions on the 'oh its not very nice down there is it' theory, a guy who used to have a submarine connection who now has a daughter in the sea cadets and a woman from some business association who has far as we can tell has no Naval connection whatsoever. This is ropey, amateurish, local journalism which trivialises the issue and really fails to engage it any substantive level.
  12. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    I cannot see any reason why women would have a hygiene problem in deeps. Regarding the issue of women's products (or at least the disposal of) there is the eco friendly alternative called the Mooncup.
    I'm sure many women on here have heard of and used this device.

    I'm sure that hairspray would annoy the odd cox'n though!
  13. for me...there are day to day issues..such as disposal of sanitry towells etc...seem trivial but how many times on operational patrol are the showers etc out of use..is this OK with women during their "cycle"..will they be happy to wash their bits in the sink during that time of the month..?

    what if all the heads (on a T boat) in the JRs and SRs bathrooms are down..or a macerator shortage (it has happened plenty of times) and the ONLY head is the wardroom...and that say gets blocked with a sanitry towell..?

    then you have the issue on a deterent patrol..you could imagine the press having an absolute field day if a patrol was cut short due to a female sailor getting up t he duff at sea..and/or there is a complication..what if a female sailor loses an unborn at sea..? could that be dealt with sufficiently without breaking the patrol

    what IF she was an afty and and the baby she will one day have, get complications due to being exposed to radiation...that would be disasterous for the RN.....unthinkable damage will be done etc

    also, lets be honest, just serving that close together will not work..I have been on a ship and many of them are sleeping with each other at sea at an alarming rate..please dont anyone tell me that is not true as you will show yourself up as being completely out of touch...one ship my mate is on has a "shag room" to be used when at sea...

    and all the problems that go with the tensions that brings at sea and ashore..

    one thing that makes (imo) the submarine service much more of an elite is there is not posturing in the mess, we are all in it together lads dont give a shit if they go for a week without a shower as there is no one to impress....and there is simply no "urge" to get yourself into a pickle..

    anyone who has spent weeks/months on patrol (hopefully) will get my gist
  14. My bold
    So there you have it,feel free to discuss it but don't take it for granted that anyone will take any notice of the things that they do not like.You get the impression that the decision is a good as taken and things will press ahead regardless of the clear problems(and cost) involved.Many of those who have actually seen service in submarines can see problems that have not arisen with all male crews and it is only natural that they all should be given the chance to comment.This should take place both in the Lower Deck as well as the Wardroom and all opinion should carry equal weight.Many of those who voice an anti opinion are howled down as being misogynists and being out of step with modern times to discredit their opinions but perhaps they have a point which should not be ignored.
  15. Guns

    Guns War Hero Moderator

    Err as in maybe they read this site. Maybe they don't. I don't know.

    All I asked for was less of the "par women, they'll cry" and some proper debate. Just as FunkyJunky has done, with comments about unborn children and the affects of radiation. My opinion, the medical reasons will be the same and will not have changed from before and that will decided the issue.
  16. I will also add that those saying "well, it is the 21st century and women should be able to serve on them"..

    That is all well and good in making sound bites etc..but in reality things are very different..
    the OC of a sub IS everything...that drops, people could (and have) die...simple as that..that is not being dramatic that is a fact...

    would women being allowed to serve on the current crop of submarines have a negative effect on the OC (S, T, A and V class)...It can only be a big yes.....

    I just hope for the sake of the service that the powers at be dont use this decision to be seen to be doing what the wider public may think is right..I hope they say NO for the time being...
  17. good points raised by funky junky.

    to delve a bit deeper:

    Messing - the messes on A class are:

    1 big JRs mess fwd.
    2 SRs Messes 16 and 24 ish
    Wardroom comprising:
    8 berth

    There is also a riders grot - yup - 9 pits.

    SR/JR Heads and bathrooms are all off 2dk passageway - and not a lot of space
    WR HEads and showers next to WR accom.

    So: The current BAE assumption is that accommodation would be mixed messing - yup. I do not believe that we are "enlightened" enough yet for that to work. The same assumption is also being used for Future Deterrent. There would be no separate Female Heads/Showers - only about 5 showers on board as it is!!!

    San Towels. Cannot go in the heads as the macerator units would break. Therefore need a san towel bin. However there is no gash gun anymore so they would need to be compacted - yup - and then stored with the rest of the gash - that is one job you would not get me doing in the garbo - bodily fluids in the garbo - no thanks. So how do we deal with period products - no idea but answers on a postcard appreciated.

    So I can see the following issues issues: Messing and "female products", showers, as well as pregnancy/radiotion/patrol breaking.

    I can see it happening, but there are serious issues that need addressing.
  18. if the MOD/Labour/whoever had any real common sense for the sake of the Submarine service and not in spite of it for political correctness, they would say NO this time but MAYBE say that the SUCCESSOR project will ensure that females are catered for on the replacement for Vanguard...maybe by then, radiation issue and all those mentioned above are researched and dealt with properly
  19. Re: NW Mail: Will women be employed on Barrow built submarin

    It seems that defence chiefs were offered a choice of two options. 2 studies were undertaken at the same time, as they periodically are, one was into women in the infantry (and other front line combat roles) and the other was into women on submarines. Both came back as being possible and defence chiefs had to make a choice to appease the government who were not willing to disregard both, changing submarine policy is seen as less disruptive than the other option and thus this option is likely to be agreed to. Hence the significant ramping up of speculation just recently.

    There was a newspaper article which outlined this posted here recently but I can't find it.

Share This Page