US Navy redesigning its submarines to accomodate women

[Deleted]

The submarines are already made to "accomodate" men. If they'd never been allowed to join the military then these changes never would've been necessary.

I don't understand how they're accommodating men.
Focusing on the valves thing, they're made to fit strong people. Which men are more likely to be.
Allowing women into subs is one thing. And many women do belong on the "strong people" group that the subs are fit to.
Making subs fit for physically weaker people is the accommodation.
When the topic was hot, people were concerned about lowering the physical standards.
I don't' really know if subs really need physically strong people, or people at all. Or if it's really a small price to pay, compared to doubling the pool of potential candidates to join the navy. But it's a confirmation of the issues people were raising back then: allowing women, eventually lowers the standard.

[Slant]

There's probably not much of a difference. Waste products like tampons perhaps need some consideration.
But my guess is that they don't want them to be sharing the place to prevent cases of improper conduct, from sexual harassment to filming, to whatevs young, healthy people with a hefty dose of sex drive might be tempted to do while working for months inside a steel can. So they need to fit extra units of bathrooms, showers, changing rooms, etc., and space is at a premium.

Reversible signs might work, though. Setting different times for each.

You can't force a ship full of people to take a dump on a schedule.

Also, either the US Navy has ridiculous punishments for unprofessional relations and harrassment etc. or people will find a way, regardless of coed toilets or not.

[Deleted]

Having served on a mixed crew ship, I can say it is not a good idea to do it while allowing lower physical standards for the women serving. You can rail against this if you want, but every crew member that cannot effectively perform DC (and most women I served with couldn't) hurts the ship as a whole. Not to mention the disruptions that closing off portions of the ship to a large portion of the crew posses. On the other hand, it will make for some very rich female sub crews.

Same goes for blacks and teh gays, eh?

[Deleted]

You can't force a ship full of people to take a dump on a schedule.

Also, either the US Navy has ridiculous punishments for unprofessional relations and harrassment etc. or people will find a way, regardless of coed toilets or not.

If there's a will there's a way, that's true.
I mentioned filming because that's a thing that happened. And not a one off, but organized, distribution and all.

But we set standards to make stuff more unlikely, not impossible. And often as a way to discharge higher ups of responsibility:
-how did you allow this under your watch?
-we are doing all we can, from protocols, to considering the likeliness of several scenarios.

On the topic of likeliness, note that I'm ignoring gay people on this hypothesis. They have, after all, different sexual tastes and desires than the majority of people, so these measures are ineffective to them. But it's just that: a consideration for the likeliness of a wide array of undesirable outcomes.

I'm not saying that's what they're doing or thinking. I'm by no means a submarine builder expert. Just that I can imagine how slapping a coed sign on top might not be enough.

[Slant]

I'm not saying that's what they're doing or thinking. I'm by no means a submarine builder expert. Just that I can imagine how slapping a coed sign on top might not be enough.

Nothing will ever be enough, I'm afraid. I'm just not convinced an actual floor plan redesign of a submarine is worth the effort. It's their money, though. If they think it helps, they can spend it however they like.

[prwraith]

Ok so then why hire women for the navy if they can't perform their roles properly? They shouldn't face discrimination in the workplace.

We should ONLY hire women who CAN perform the role properly.

[GennGreymane]

I'm glad I served when I did.

SO never?
/10

[prwraith]

So now we've gone beyond being armchair generals to being armchair submarine designers?

You really have to ask yourself why we made these valves take the force they take to turn. You can't have accidentally openings / loosenings of valves. What if a ballast floods or empties unexpectedly. Now you've got half the sub torpedoing upwards like a rocket. Which brings us to adding more shit onto a sub. In the event of a crash dive or emergency breach (emergency ballast tank blow) shit will go flying, so if these extra doors, privacy shit isn't absolutely locked down to the point of being nearly useless for its intended purpose people will get hurt and potentially die.

[Skroe]

Nothing will ever be enough, I'm afraid. I'm just not convinced an actual floor plan redesign of a submarine is worth the effort. It's their money, though. If they think it helps, they can spend it however they like.

The Columbia-class SSBN will be in service starting in 2028. The 12 ships will be produced through the 2030s and early 2040s. The last ships of the class will likely serve alongside their replacements in the early decades of the 22nd Century. and even if the US were to scrap nuclear weapons in some kind of landmark disarmament deal (unlikely), they'd be converted to Cruise Missile submarines just like the first 4 Ohio-class subs were.

To put it another way, they're going to be in service so long, that having male and female facilities is forward thinking. For all the Navy knows, a third of their submariners in the mid 21st century could be women.

[Mormolyce]

You really have to ask yourself why we made these valves take the force they take to turn. You can't have accidentally openings / loosenings of valves. What if a ballast floods or empties unexpectedly. Now you've got half the sub torpedoing upwards like a rocket. Which brings us to adding more shit onto a sub. In the event of a crash dive or emergency breach (emergency ballast tank blow) shit will go flying, so if these extra doors, privacy shit isn't absolutely locked down to the point of being nearly useless for its intended purpose people will get hurt and potentially die.

I don't have to ask myself anything, because that's the submarine designers' job.

[GennGreymane]

So people are upset that they basically just did whats normal? Bathroom area and sleeping area, etc?

[Hammerfest]

Weren't you afraid of falling of the edge of the earth?

The Flat Earth model doesn't have an edge. Maybe you should look at it sometime.

[Deleted]

Wait weren't you for equality in the other thread? Now you're not?

How ironic that this actually goes against equality as there is nothing more equal than treating everyone the same way. Special treatment is pretty much the opposite of equality.. well unless you have those special SJW shades on that allow you to ignore facts and reason that is.

[GennGreymane]

Weren't you afraid of falling of the edge of the earth?

- - - Updated - - -

He would just fall on the turtle the earth is sitting on, duh!

[Hammerfest]

I'm glad I served when I did.

SO never?
/10

*Yawn.
/10

[GennGreymane]

How ironic that this actually goes against equality as there is nothing more equal than treating everyone the same way. Special treatment is pretty much the opposite of equality.. well unless you have those special SJW shades on that allow you to ignore facts and reason that is.

But when Target allows everyone to use the same bathroom, oh lordy lord no no no. The Navy keeps the standard, and OH LORDY LORDY NO NO

- - - Updated - - -

*Yawn.
/10

You seem sleepy, which is odd as you have no face

[prwraith]

I don't have to ask myself anything, because that's the submarine designers' job.

Absolutely a case of we definitely can build something, but should we. Just like the rest of the armed services, everyone should be held the same high standards. Regardless of gender. Some women fail, some men fail. It is what it is.

[Hammerfest]

You seem sleepy, which is odd as you have no face

I'd rather have no face than have one that looks like Kanye.

[Skroe]

To be fair... if I had to redesign a male bathroom to accomodate women, I'd end up painting a girl icon on the door and go "That's it! Done! UNDER BUGET and way ahead of time. Now pay me three trillion dollars."

Seriously, what's there to redesign? Women shit just like we do...

The Navy has had unisex bathrooms on various ships and submarines for now, but they don't have urinals. Dedicated men's rooms would have urinals.

It's that they need to add an additional bathroom (and all the plumbing, remember this is a stealthy submarine) where there was something else... maybe crew quarters or a storage compartment or something. They just can't turn a men's room into a women's room because that deprives the men of a nearby facilities.

This is a really minor thing though because the class just entered it's detail design phase. Early materials are just being built. It won't even start being built for a few years at least, and won't enter service until the end of next decade.

Yes. It takes about 15 years to design and build an all-new class of ship nowdays. I remember when the USS Gerald R Ford, which is going to enter the fleet later this year, was supposed to look like this:

[GennGreymane]

I'd rather have no face than have one that looks like Kanye.

touche
/10chars