Should the US Navy allow all berthing areas on Ship to be open to both genders?

PO2 William Fornwalt. I agree . . . do the experiment, critique results, rework, and try again. Warmest Regards, Sandy

The deployment goggles are real :)

That sidearm is badass!

LTJG (Join to see) - I found it more pleasant than most other side arms. Sandy :)

Thanks!

Good stuff shipmates. I agree with the sailors in this thread. - "Sea, air, land: we've got your bases covered."

For the service members that have not been posted on a ship, let me offer a few considerations.

First, go into a bathroom that has a combination bath and shower. Look at that volume of space, think about how roomy it is or is not.

Second, imagine six, or possibly eight single beds off the long sides of the tub in bunk configuration. Then, make it so that only one of the narrow ends is open. While you are doing this, enclose the bunks on five of the six surfaces so that only one of the long sides is open. This is a standard berthing space.

Six to eight sailors live in that space when the ship is underway. Now, unless you are planning on making special arrangements inside the berthing, that six to eight people are mixed gender.

They are going to live in those confines for the entire six or more month deployment. Not a patrol, not some out and back exercise, six or more months. During that time, you have watches to stand, differing shifts to work, communal bathrooms, the whole shebang.

Consider this, when general quarters (battle stations for the uneducated) sounds, every one of the people in those bunks has less then 10 minutes to get to their station. The entire ship is controlled chaos, and you can guarantee that someone is going to be in someone else's personal space.

Still with me? Now, add to that human nature and the UCMJ. It is illegal for me to sexually harass my ship mates, but that can be done simply by looking at one of them "if they feel harassed".

SSgt Joseph Baptist - What is currently done on mixed gender ships is to have a male and female berthing. A large amount of consideration is given to movement on a ship during GQ, and how to get from your berth to your station is a part of that.

Placing the crew in mixed gender berthings will not not really change anything in terms of GQ movements as you still need the same volume of living quarters, it is just now mixed instead of one or the other.

I'm sure it happened before women were allowed on the ships, I've heard that it did anyway, but it wasn't as highly publicized for I'm sure obvious reason. I've never been on a ship without women. Working with women was a huge change coming from combat arms in the Army. Speaking of which, this is not a Navy specific issue. I've heard of soldiers getting in trouble for having sex while deployed. As someone else said in another post where there's a will, there's a way. I was told of a couple being caught in a water buffalo, by the person that caught them. I hope they sanitized it thoroughly.

Sir, I can only imagine the number of sexual harassment cases and assaults that would result in integrating mixed gender berthings..

PO3 (Join to see), this is exactly the type of thinking that must be overcome. If we are worried about sexual harassment and assault, the answer isn't to keep everyone separate. The solution is to teach them right from wrong. By integrating berthings not only does the Navy save money, but we start the process of developing a culture where it is accepted that both men and women are sailors. More importantly that they are sailors first. When my daughter acts out at school, I don't keep her home from school for the rest of her life. I teach her why her acting out is bad and then send her back to school the next day. Integrating berthing will help us change our culture.

Does your daughter go to the boys restroom or locker room at school? Boys and girls, men and women are different and that is a good thing. Frankly, we do a disservice to our sisters in arms by not standing up for them and giving them separate berthings. LT Miller, I respectfully disagree with your trains of thought. They lead to moral and practical wrecks (so glad the Aussies aren't our role models)!

I don't think we are at the point in human nature/culture to handle coed berthings.

They used to PO2 Peters. I remember all female crews in the mid 90s~. Small boats, but still.

I agree with OS2 Peters on this subject only because coming off an all-male Cruiser and knowing how they act especially when there intoxicated and with the Navy having issues with co-ed ships as it is I don't think the Navy is ready for that transition.

If memory serves correct, on the all female ships, the heavy work wasn't getting done and the ships needed more work when they pulled into port. FWIW.

And being how young and dumb this new sailors are its not a good idea at all. I just got out a month or so ago and they just need to keep it how it is. And like someone said Before the sexual assault and rap is going to sky rocket.

I wish it wasn't an issue and that the services could just expect everyone to act honorably... however I don't think we've reached that point yet. That said, there is an argument that we are more likely to reach that point if we just stop keeping everyone separate and instead focus on dealing with inappropriate conduct.

SSG (Join to see), I agree with the second part of your response. People rise to the expectations that leadership sets and models. I am constantly surprised by what my fellow sailors are capable of when given proper leadership and motivation. There isn't anything they can't accomplish. The military is supposed to be a cross section of America and I would like to think that we can be the best of America, if given the proper guidance and motivation.

The services could and would adapt to full scale integration if it was mandated, and I believe they would rise to the challenge on this, the same as they did with racial integration. That said, I'd prefer not to see the services do this during time of war and while the Army is already dealing with far too many cases of sexual violence.

That was a travesty of justice.

Just because someone leaves a club together doesn't mean they agreed to consenual sex. Hell, people have the right to demand someone to stop if they change their mind about it while in the middle of it. Fail to see how this is a travesty of justice. Looks more like slut shaming to me.

If she was at a club and drinking, that especially means the sex wasn't consenual. Don't have sex with drunk women you don't know.

How about don't have sex with drunk men you don't know? If it is her word against his, then their word should be considered even. And thus is must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

I am sure there are cases where women are raped after leaving the club and changing there mind, but also there are instances where a man is incriminated solely by a woman's word against his. I am ready to give any person the same representation by the law regardless of race, religion, sex or creed. Cases where the woman wins are often a travesty of justice, and unlike the other scenario I fear this injustice often gets overlooked.

Women and men are equal, but not the same. Food for thought.

Corpsman, I understand that we come from different gender based perspectives, but you are being intentionally blind. This woman broke up with her male, went out and had either rebound or revenge sex, then destroyed a man's life because she made up with the boyfriend before they finally, irrevocably broke up. At that point, she had painted herself into a corner because, if she admitted that she had used the legal system as she did, she would be sending herself to prison.

As to your comment on slut shaming, I made no mention of her name, his name or the command at which it happened. In fact, and I almost wish this were true, I could have made the entire thing up just to prove my point.

It is a travesty of justice because an innocent man had his life destroyed, and the military and the nation were betrayed by the person that did it, for the convenience of someone that shouldn't have been there in the first place.

I don't disagree that there are good reasons for the regulations to be set up the way that they are, but you should be honest enough to admit that the system has the potential for abuse.

I'm sure you've all heard the allegations of a Sailor video taping females using the heads showering, so what's to say that this wouldn't happen in the berthing's? I seriously do not see this working out in the best interest for the Navy.

When I was on the USS Nassau, I noticed an ensign jump out of a equipment closet who seemed startled to see me. I waited till he left and opened the door to see what was in there that he would be in there by himself with the door closed. There was light streaming in through a small hole in the wall. It appears that a bolt had been strategically removed. The light came from the adjoining shower where one of the female officers was showering. I confronted the peeping Tom and later noticed that some bolts had also been removed by the urinals, which also gave one a peephole into the area where people dried off.

Am not a fan of integrating the sexes aboard ship, or on the front lines. Just ran across this article on Allen West's site.

http://allenbwest.com/2015/01/zero-women-pass-marine-combat-endurance-test-army-allowing-women-ranger-school/

Capt Jeff S., I don't understand the thinking that follows your story. When my toddler throws her food on the floor, I don't stop feeding her. I teach her why her behavior is wrong so that the improper actions don't continue. The problem on the USS Nassau, in your story, wasn't integration, it was the Ensign and the climate that allowed his actions to go unpunished.

I don't think that's the right analogy because you can clean food up. Sexual assualt can't be cleaned up. Once you have a victim, there's no cleaning up the mess. The damage is forever. So rather than create opportunities, you nip the problem in the bud and create an environment where the chance of things happening are slim to none. We have enough things to worry about regarding accomplishing the mission and why complicate it? You will NEVER make everyone happy no matter what you do. So rather than continue to turn the military into a social experiment, you focus on what makes the military most capable of accomplishing its mission and go from there. If putting women on ships makes us more capable, then so be it, but I honestly don't think anyone is talking to the spouses of married folks, or looking objectively at the data which reveals that women do in fact manipulate the system and use pregnancy and other gender related issues to avoid long deployments and/or get out of physically demanding work.

1SG Reed you do bring some very valid points to this discussion. It is really a leadership issue to make sure troops know what is expected and what will and will not be allowed. Thanks.

Is it a leadership issue? On some levels I think so but on others I don't. What I've learned is that if someone is criminal they will not care what the leadership does. If they are a rapist, they will find a way to rape. Bring females into their living quarters only makes it easier and there is very little that the leadership can do. The biggest and most effective way to mitigate that is to keep them separated.
Training and leadership involvement will work on those that want to do right but may not understand exactly what is right or wrong, but deviants will be deviants.

SFC (Join to see) I fully understand what you are saying, however, I still think that leadership can and will make a difference. When the message is understood that this will NOT be tolerated in our SOCIETY, then it will not happen in the Military either.

Sorry, for taking awhile to respond. SFC Cortese, you are correct in regards to the criminal mind that even the best leader in the world could prevent them from acting. But you cant use that as a factor since Male on Male sexual assault is on the rise in all services. I give the discussion of co-ed bathing another 10 years and it will be just an after though.