Ditto LITS' comments on "interesting."
I'm sure if we figured this out 30+ years ago to get women into military airplanes and ships, we will take American ingenuity, common sense and lessons learned to get women on subs. We have somehow managed to get men on the moon in the last century, men and women into space stations and allow women to run marathons in the Olympics (women weren't allowed to run longer distances years ago, because of a raft of social reasons and prejudices). My mother played half-court basketball because of concerns about women's reproductive health if they tried to repeatedly run back and forth - gasp
- the entire length of a regulation basketball court. Cultural change will play out before our eyes as it has many times before.
In 1978, when it had all been settled that women could be assigned for the first time to Navy ships and aircraft, I had an officer, a male, say to me he had no problem with women going aboard ship, of course, since it wasn't a matter of brains or ability to do the job, but there was a major engineering problem. Of course, I asked him what that was. Well, we couldn't have Navy ships going DIW (dead in the water) because "certain things clogged up the ship's plumbing." Yep, we could figure out how to put men on the moon but that was gonna be the war-stopper right there.
There are unique challenges on subs with space, cultural norms, retro-fitting, budget, timing, all the "how-to's," but I have faith it will all be done, no doubt with a few bumps and headlines along the way. There will be surprises, set-backs and successes, too.
A sponsor daughter of mine is on the informal USNA subs list. Since nothing is "go" as yet, she still has her service selection for another warfare community. Women in the current nuclear schools pipeline (currently designated for SWO [Surface Warfare]) nuke have also been briefed and offered the opportunity to switch horses mid-stream if the timing is right. Sponsor daughter is excited and challenged about the opportunity to serve her country in this warfare community.
A long-time mentoree of mine currently working this project on a major staff in DC confirms the press release noted above and described the years of research and planning that have gone into this. The gears are primed and ready to go into action.
And I can't resist, in response to 2010's post above with concerns about "true equality," I always felt men should be allowed to wear skirts, hose and heels, with long hair, and make-up, in the interests of equality...my tongue-in-cheek response. It's just SO not fair men don't have as many uniform items to choose from ...
Most of the apparent disparities in certain requirements come from application of a relative standard. Men normally have short hair, so going to no hair takes them to an equal plane. Women normally have longer hair, so taking them to a much shorter cut (that's at USNA, I know other Academies have different practices) takes them the same relative distance back to an equal plane. Everybody gets a haircut that takes them to some relative state of ugliness. That's all superficial stuff anyway, and as for make-up, I had to laugh. Women who attended Navy Women's Officer Candidate School (before my time) in the early 70's and earlier, HAD TO WEAR make-up and girdles, as required in uniform and grooming regulations. The physical fitness standards, I wondered about myself pro and con over the years, though I believe the thinking is the "relative standard" above, that the majority of a group should be expected to meet standards applicable to their group - as an equivalent standard, not necessarily an exactly equal one. As for Selective Service, write your Congressman - that's a matter of law.
OK, enough musing, the integration of women into the submarine community will indeed be interesting to watch unfold.