U.S. Navy makes history by launching its first coed submarine: "Breaking barriers"

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CBS News

Updated on: September 16, 2024 / 9:18 AM EDT


The United States Navy commissioned its first coed submarine on Saturday, in a ceremonial event that the vessel's commander called "a truly historic moment."

"Today, we commissioned our ship, and she is the fastest, most advanced, fully integrated fast-attack to date," said Cmdr. Steve Halle, the commanding officer of the USS New Jersey. "Our superior professionalism is enhanced by our crew integration and our diversity," Halle continued as he spoke about his crew being the first to be fully integrated on a fast-attack submarine.

The ceremony marked the conclusion of a years-long process to commission the USS New Jersey, which is the third Navy ship named after the U.S. state, succeeding the BB-62 battleship that sailed in World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War, according to the Navy. The event for the fast-attack submarine took place at Naval Weapons Station Earle in Middletown, New Jersey, the military branch said.

"USS New Jersey (SSN 796) is now commissioned and ready for service!" the Navy said in a social media post unveiling the sub. "The Navy's latest Virginia-class submarine joins the fleet." In a video accompanying that post, the Navy described the USS New Jersey as the "first fully integrated submarine built for male and female sailors" in the history of submarines, which stretches back roughly a century. It said the vessel is "a symbol of progress" that is "breaking barriers as it protects our shores."

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-navy-first-coed-submarine-uss-new-jersey/

[Traildogbob]

1. WOW!

Much different from my destroyer days in the early 70’s
Rock on women!!!!👏👏

[Think. Again.]

2. I don't think I want to know...

...how the construction of this submarine is different because it will carry males and females.

I honestly didn't know they had been building subs differently for males and females in the first place.

[stumpysbear]

3. Separate berths and bathing facilities would be my guess

They haven't been building subs differently for males and females...there just haven't been any females on subs.

[Think. Again.]

4. Oh, that's right, adult heterosexuals can't control themselves I forgot.

[stumpysbear]

5. Well, to be fair, the military doesn't have an awesome track record....

[Think. Again.]

14. That sounds more like a hiring problem than a vessel design problem.

[yagotme]

17. You have to remember, that on nearly every naval vessel,

roughly half of the crew is probably not even drinking age. A decent amount of those, are a year or less out of high school. So, yes, there are going to be "hijinks".

[Think. Again.]

18. Rape is now "hijinks"? Man, the world has changed.

[yagotme]

20. Rape isn't the only concern. A rarer occurrence than other things.

The worst, yes, but not the only. Pregnancies. Fights/jealousy. Missing from duty to "polish the torpedo". Inappropriate comments. Remember, we're talking about a bunch of teenagers crowded into a small area, and not a lot of freedom of movement on a sub. BOTH sexes can get into trouble in this type of situation.

[Think. Again.]

23. Yep, definitely a hiring problem.

I was always under the impression the military taught discipline.

[yagotme]

26. You can teach someone the methodology of discipline,

but practice finishes up the course. Asking a teenager to control hormonal impulses can be done, but you don't always get success. Putting coed teenagers together, in a highly restricted space, can cause problems where a larger space wouldn't cause as much friction. And , on a sub, you may be submerged for quite some time, and no port call. Imaging living at work for a few months, no new people, same ones over and over, no windows, no sunshine, no going outside, unless it's for a few moments, standing just on the sidewalk, with nothing to look at but water, doing the same thing over and over. Don't even get to order out. You get whatever the cook decides to make that day, or snacks from the commissary.

[Think. Again.]

28. Yep, definitely sounds like they need to be...

...more selective in their hiring for those jobs.

[yagotme]

30. Going to be hard to "weed out" someone that may make an inappropriate comment

under the conditions I stated, until you actually put them under those conditions. That's why there is a Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that is the "law" for the military. Think US Code. Violations of the law are numerically listed, such as Article 86 is for unauthorized absence, IIRC correctly.

[Think. Again.]

31. It just seems to me...

...that all of the difficulties you mentioned would be avoided with mature crew members.

Not necessarily older crew members but more mature crew members.

Pandering to imbeciles by designing ships around their immaturity sounds like they actually want foolish military people.

[yagotme]

32. We have a volunteer force.

Out of xx graduating high schoolers, only yy will volunteer. Out of those volunteers, only zz will actually make it through "boot camp", the physical and mental tests failing some. Then schooling, where a couple more will fail. Then, to the duty station. A couple more will fail, but by this point, to get out, it must be something of a more spectacular failure, as it will involve the UCMJ. The armed forces needs a certain amount of bodies every year, and the amount they're getting now is behind what is needed, as I have heard. Now, unless you want to make military service mandatory, and only the most brightest and most mature will be drafted, we're stuck with the current program.

[Think. Again.]

34. We have the largest military in the world...

...by far, and we are in no wars or even war zones.

I highly doubt the military NEEDS a "certain amount" of.. wait for it..."bodies".

[yagotme]

37. Each active unit on record has a certain amount of slots to be filled.

Also called "bodies". "How many bodies showed up for PT this morning?" This is not an offensive description for anyone that served. We know the meaning of it. What happens if we decide to downsize the military, reduce active units, etc.? If war DOES break out (like a sneak attack), we will be MONTHS getting our numbers up to where they should be. EVERY TIME we have gone to war, our military was not prepared, usually in more than one way. Keeping members on active duty, having those slots filled, allows us to absorb an attack, and have the ability to stave off the enemy while we build up more forces. Look at ANY military that has fought in the last 100+ years. Always needed more at the end than they did at the beginning. And, new troops are not nearly as effective in battle than more experienced ones. Having a minimal active force, to be quickly (and probably, poorly) trained green troops to fill out the ranks, is a disaster waiting to be called upon.

[Think. Again.]

40. Sorry, ain't buying it...

...our military is an extremely lucrative boondoggle for connected military contractor fatcats.

THAT is why it is so over-sized, costly, and bloated, in every way.

[XorXor]

96. If you were in charge what would the military look like and how would you handle things?

[Think. Again.]

97. I would have military experts who are honest enough to focus only on...

...building and maintaining the most effective, efficient, and prepared defensive forces.

The sale of unneccesary and grossly overpriced military contracts to the highest bribe-bidder would not be happening.

[XorXor]

100. What does that look like, though?

Anything specific?

[Think. Again.]

103. Nope, I have nothing specific for you, I'm just an internet rando with absolutely no interest in military administration

[pfitz59]

70. Not rape between consenting adults

'Fraternization' is a bigger concern.

[Think. Again.]

73. If it's between consenting adults, why is there a concern?

[jimfields33]

79. Because enlisted cannot fraternize with officers

Heck you can’t even fraternize with your supervisor. It’s a huge no-no regardless of rank.

[Think. Again.]

80. So tell them not to.

[jimfields33]

84. They do. And if they don't listen, they are punished.

[Think. Again.]

88. Good, so everything's cool. No need for any more expensive re-designed subs.

[jimfields33]

89. Yep.

You seem to think this only occurs in the military. In the civilian world, you can’t sleep around with the boss. We’ve seen many careers destroyed for being dumb. It happens in politics, education, law firms, and every career imagined.

[Think. Again.]

91. I didn't even know bosses were a part of this...

...I thought the new designs were just about separating male and female crew members for some reason.

[sarisataka]

7. Catch-22

Put women on current submarines and get criticized for not accommodating to let the women have some privacy for changing, showering or going to the bathroom.
Put in accommodations, "it's only needed because all men are rapists"

I suppose they could send out a submarine with an all-female crew. What would the objection be then?

[Think. Again.]

9. We really need to get past the junior high school mentality.

Didn't they recently have a coed crew in the space station?

[IronLionZion]

22. Those 2 are still up there

and there are jokes about what they must be doing while stuck in space

[Think. Again.]

24. Jokes? But they're consenting adults, aren't they?

[IronLionZion]

39. No judgement from me

[IronLionZion]

25. USS Wyoming had an all female submarine crew 2 years ago

https://www.navy.mil/Press-Office/News-Stories/Article/2976775/the-women-of-uss-wyoming-make-history/

There are at least 4 US Navy submarines with women aboard. OP is notable because the sub was built with separate facilities.

All of these things are more possible during Democratic administrations than Republican of course.

Semper Fortis

[NutmegYankee]

85. The Ohio Class boats also have modifications for women on subs.

They were just ship alterations performed long after the submarine was built.

[Polybius]

63. Well, males and females who have been away from their g/f's and b/f's for months sharing showers...

Might not be the best idea.

[Think. Again.]

65. Usually consenting adults enjoying each other's company when they choose to is a great idea.

[Polybius]

66. I'm all for public showers being co-ed, I'm just not sure it would work

Hell, I'd be at my local gym 7 days a week.15 minutes working out, 45 minutes in the shower.

[Think. Again.]

67. Have you considered therapy?

[Polybius]

68. No

It's normal to be attracted to situations that are pure fantasy. My gym isn't going co-ed for its showers.

[Think. Again.]

69. Okay, I understand if you need a few moments alone.

[Polybius]

71. Not in a joking mood today I see

Talk to you tomorrow.

[Think. Again.]

74. I thought that WAS funny!

[Polybius]

82. Oh

[sboatcar]

27. female hygiene products in the bathrooms!

Thanks a lot Tim Walz!


lol

[Think. Again.]

29. SHOCKING!

Thank goodnesS they spent billions re-disigning the ships so males don't have to see THOSE THINGS!

[jimfields33]

83. They do have to see them. Both bathrooms must have tampons.

In Minnesota, it’s the law. It’s an inclusive way to reach each person who needs one. No need for jokes.

[Think. Again.]

87. Goodness, talk about diversion.

[NutmegYankee]

76. Just has a few extra heads and dedicated berthing spaces.

The changes were fairly minor.

[Think. Again.]

78. Well, they'll all be in very close quarters for long stretches...

...I guess it's about time they gave everyone a little space.

[NutmegYankee]

81. It'll be fine.

Women had served as officers previously, but long after the ship was commissioned. New Jersey is just the first Sub to have women on the crew from day 1. It was interesting climbing around doing my engineering inspections and seeing women NCOs on board.

[Think. Again.]

86. I'm sure it would have been fine before the re-design, too

[quaint]

6. Accommodation changes

According to media reports, the submarine is designed differently and has more doors, washrooms, and separate sleeping and bathing spaces for the male and female crew.

It has lower valves and steps in front of triple-high bunk beds and stacked laundry machines.

These changes were made to accommodate the women who would join the Navy. In the past few years, the Navy has seen a growing number of female officers and enlisted sailors.

There are currently about 60,000 enlisted women in the Navy, and as of August, 730 were assigned to operational submarines.

MarineInsight

[Think. Again.]

10. Did people really have to share bunks and could only shower together in the old designs?

[quaint]

11. The only submarine voyage I've been on was the original E-ticket at Disneyland.

I thought they shared bunk rooms, not bunks, but idk.

[yagotme]

12. Subs are limited in interior space.

"Sharing bunks" in the Navy is called "hot bunking". 2 or 3 sailors are assigned a specific bunk, they each work a different shift. 1 sleeping, 1 work, 1 off duty for 8 hour shift, 1 on and 1 off if 12 hour. (Didn't serve in Navy, but USMC. Know the concept, though.) Therefore, the bunk is always "hot".

[Think. Again.]

13. Oh, okay, so no one ever had to share a bunk in the old designs...

...I wonder why they needed to change that now.

Thanks!

[yagotme]

15. No prob.

This is done pretty much on all smaller vessels (destroyers, etc.) as space is at a premium, and bunk areas take up space. The "change" now is to accommodate female sailors, to give them their own separate area. On an aircraft carrier, fairly easy peasey. Small vessels are more of a headache to accomplish this.

[Think. Again.]

16. Why would anyone need their own bunks if they're not sharing them anyway?

[yagotme]

19. I'm not quite sure what you're asking here, but I'll give it a stab.

Low level enlisted are assigned a bunk. Sailors A, B, and C, are assigned bunk 1A. Sailor A works from 8-4. Sailor B works from 4-12. Sailor C works from 12-8. They are all assigned the same bunk, not individual ones. Therefore, there is always someone sleeping in bunk 1A. Mid level enlisted, I believe, are assigned individual bunks in a different area (NCO/SNCO). No one else uses their bunk. Top level NCO's, mid and high level officers are assigned rooms individually, or perhaps just doubled. RHIP (Rank has it's privileges). Hope this clears it up.
(The above info varies some from vessel to vessel, depending on size, etc.)

[Think. Again.]

35. That's why I don't understand why the new vessel has to have...

...seperate bunks for people.

[yagotme]

38. What I think they mean by "separate" is female/male.

Females will have their own areas, therefore, their own bunks. As in no male/female hot bunking. Hot bunking will be straight male/male, female/female. Perhaps this is where you are confused.

[Think. Again.]

41. Yeah, I think what's confusing me...

...I didn't realize males and females couldn't sleep on a mattress someone of the opposite sex has previously slept on.

[yagotme]

44. They can, but then we go back around to the hijinks thing again... nt

[Think. Again.]

46. Ah, yes, hiring people who are not yet ready for the job.

[XorXor]

98. No that would be concern for many regardless of age

For the showering, even if they only allowed the most polite, respectful, and mature males who would never look at or make a crass comment, a good number of women wouldn't want to be naked around men. There is probably a good number of men who might be uncomfortable being naked around women too. That's just how things are.

As for their bunk areas. They are out to sea for long periods of time. The act of masturbation is a thing that takes place. It's awkward enough with another dude (or woman, I suppose) in the bunk above you. Now imagine that happening with a male and female in the same area. Also, such close proximity might encourage totally consensual relations, but that could lead to pregnancies and also bickering amongst sailors. That is just an issue with humans regardless of age.

[Think. Again.]

101. Bullshit, we're talking about adults.

[XorXor]

106. Can you clarify specifically what you disagree with and why?

[Think. Again.]

107. I disagree to the post I replied to because I don't believe it's true.

[XorXor]

109. It looks as if you replied to my post when you said "BS", was that your intention?

If so, I am curious to hear your reasoning.

[Think. Again.]

110. The reason I reply "B.S." is because I don't believe, or agree with, the statement I replied "B.S." to.

By replying "B.S." to a statement, I am making it clear that I believe the statement was "B.S."

Does that help at all?

[XorXor]

111. That was clear from the start, but I'm actually trying to understand your perspective in more detail

I'm also trying make sure I'm understanding what you disagree with so that we can discuss it further (or not). For example, do you find the part about some males and females being uncomfortable to be nude around the opposite sex to be bullshit? Is that similar about certain "private functions" being carried out in the presence of the opposite sex? Do you find it bothersome that I'm curious to understand your viewpoint in more detail?

[Polybius]

64. During times of peace, what work is there to do on a sub?

I get those who are mechanics, but what else?

[maxrandb]

112. OMG! We train and exercise the ship as if we are at war

all the time. That way, of a real war comes, we're prepared.

[pfitz59]

72. 'Hot racking' is/was real on older model subs.

Means sleeping in shifts in a shared bunk. 'Showering together' wasn't a thing. The shower on my sub was the size of a telephone booth, and we each had about 30 seconds to shower. (Rationed water.)

[Think. Again.]

77. So why the expensive re-design then?

It doesn't sound like there's any separation needed if everyone gets to sleep and shower alone.

[Angleae]

94. Because those bunks are all in one room.

You're never alone in there.

[Think. Again.]

95. Ah, yes, individual rooms will be nice!

[Angleae]

99. Aint happening on a sub, no space.

More likely, the one room is changed to 2 rooms.

[Think. Again.]

102. So now we're back to "why bother, then?"

[Gore1FL]

92. It makes sense. If the Boy Socuts could do it, one would hope the Navy could figure it out. nt

[Gruenemann]

8. Mustn't...mention...

Submarine races...

[Prairie Gates]

21. I remember the first coed missile silos...

[Torchlight]

33. Social progress often trails tech progress

but it does move, however slowly.

I think this is a (not the, but a) good leading indicator of tomorrow's obligations we've chosen to take seriously today.

[Think. Again.]

36. Yep, soon every crew member will have their own submarine to themself....

...because naked bodies are scary.

[yagotme]

42. 2-person Japanese sub:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_K%C5%8D-hy%C5%8Dteki-class_submarine

[Think. Again.]

43. THOSE TWO PEOPLE BETTER BE MARRIED!!!

[yagotme]

45. Japanese culture, early 1940's, I highly doubt it.

As there were no females in front line active duty posts.

[Think. Again.]

47. Oh, wow, what a sexually liberated society that was!

...but we don't bother preventing unmarried same sex relations in our new subs either, just unmarried heterosexual relations.

[yagotme]

49. You forgot your sarcasm thingy. Some here might take what you said as reality.

Unmarried heterosexual relations:
https://www.militaryjusticeattorneys.com/blog/2019/september/understanding-article-134-ucmj-extramarital-sexu/
https://ucmjdefense.com/article-134-ucmj-extramarital-sexual-conduct-adultery.html
If "we don't bother preventing", it's on the commander. There IS a UCMJ charge for it. Both types fall under it.

[Think. Again.]

51. So then why does the new sub only separate males from females?

.... if the separation of sleeping quarters and showers by male and female isn't aimed at only preventing heterosexual relations while still allowing for same-sex relations, why did they do it?

I'm getting even more confused about this new sub.

[yagotme]

52. "Don't ask, don't tell."

Easy to separate by sex. Sexual preference, not so much.

[Think. Again.]

53. Yes, so the military IS okay with same-sex relations as long as no one brags about it.

I wonder why they don't just do that with male-female relations?

Sure would be more cost effective than building new subs with segregation units.

[yagotme]

54. Maybe then, females shouldn't be on board...

Sure would be more cost effective than building new subs with segregation units.

If the goal is saving money, of course. Perhaps females don't like disrobing/showering in front of males? Or, does the desires of the females have no impact on your opinion? They are the ones that have to serve there. They should have SOME say in berthing arrangements...

[Think. Again.]

55. How is any of that different from anyone not wanting to...

...undress or shower in front of someone of the same sex?

[yagotme]

56. Showering in front of someone the same sex is usually started in Jr High, at least High School.

If you don't like showering in front of ANYBODY, then don't join the military. Boot camp, we had about 1/2 hour to SSS. Sh*t, shower, shave. Roughly 65-70 in platoon. In shower, had shower columns, 6 heads to a column. If you wanted to get done (we ALL did, or else...) it wasn't uncommon to be stacked about 8 deep around each column, because there wasn't one for everybody.

[Think. Again.]

57. Ah, I see, it's the school system's fault for not implementing co-ed showers for children....

....THAT'S why adults can't act like adults. Got it!

[yagotme]

58. Well, if you insist upon putting words in my mouth, then I'm done.

Have a nice remainder of your day.

[Think. Again.]

60. Thanks, you too!

[Torchlight]

48. It does not follow

But it's a cool bumper sticker.

[maxrandb]

50. I served 28.5 years in the Navy, and was there when we started allowing women to serve on combatant ships

Last edited Mon Sep 16, 2024, 08:01 PM - Edit history (1)

People really need to grow up.

We had absolutely no illusions. We knew full well that if you put young men and women together on a ship, some were eventually going to get around to schtooping each other, and yes you can do it in a coffin locker, BTW.

Anyway, just like anything in the military, we rely on the leadership to lead, and set the standard for acceptable behavior.

Violations to this policy were no different than violations to underage drinking, unauthorized absence, fraud, or any other UCMJ violation encountered on single gender ships.

We welcomed women to these roles in the Navy, and we are a better force today because of it.

[yagotme]

59. Too bad some can't grasp this concept:

We know full well that if you put young man and women together on a ship, some were eventually going to get around to schtooping each other,

Or words to that effect...

[Think. Again.]

61. You mean adults do that? Shocking!

[Think. Again.]

62. Thank you, finally some mature common sense!

Building entirely new subs with modifications to avoid this stuff seems ludicrous, will crew members get to choose paint color next?

[pfitz59]

75. There's a long running joke in the 'bubblehead' (submariner) community

"100 sailors go to sea, and 50 couples return." This in the days before females were allowed on board. There will be folk having sex. There might even be a rape (especially on drunken liberty.) Overall, it will work because folk are trained to do their job, and they will be too busy most days to entertain more thoughts than working, eating and sleeping.

[Gore1FL]

90. What about the Sea Tiger!?!?!?!

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053143/

[Aristus]

93. I attended an Army training course one time for both male and female soldiers.

Our barracks were segregated by gender. There were no instances of rape or fraternization. But the hotels and motels just outside the post were at full capacity on the weekends with couples relieving the stress of the week.

[Bavorskoami]

104. That's difficult for submariners

Getting off base on weekends are not a thing on a two or three month underwater patrol.

[Aristus]

105. True.

But submariners are selected and trained based on their capacity for discipline, obedience, and mission-first outlook.

I trust they will do the right thing.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

108. Next step will be ADA-compliant submarines.

You'll be able to identify them by wheelchair-wide aisles, the handicapped symbol on the sail, and "Handicapped Mooring Only - Minimum Fine $25,000" signs on piers.