The submarine is real and all it has is improved living spaces because the navy now allow women to join. Coping and seething slavs are the ones who post this sutff.
Russians trying to make fun of our military while getting rekt by Ukrainians using our old gear. Russia sucks so hard they invaded a country and then that country invaded them back. Fucking losers
What more of a flex is there than having the world's most powerful nuclear submarine and still have enough room so that our sailors can have a wank in private in the gender neutral restroom?
I did a private tour of a boomer a couple years back and apparently dudes busting in the shower was a major problem with pipe clogs. They had to make several warnings and announcements.
For that you'd need to add a nursery with lots of crayon storage, or those little rascals will get themselves into all sorts of trouble in a place like a submarine.
Are you one of those people who would complain about airplane seats becoming larger and with longer legroom to accommodate the fats and the talls, despite you not being either of those yourself? Shaquita gets more space for her big ass, I get more space for my non-big ass. Sounds like a win for my personal ass regardless of anyone else.
Touch grass, like genuinely. If you don't encounter gender neutral bathrooms at least once a month you're from butt fuck nowhere or genuinely do not leave your house for anything.
iirc they just gave the women a separate shower area, but toilet facilities are all the same. But even before the Jersey was built, women were serving on other boats. All they did when they were showering or using the head was they had a sign they’d flip on the door that said “females only” or something.
I don't really know for sure but I'd guess most of them stopped giving a fuck after a week at sea. Yeah I'm shitting, showering, and shaving in here, don't be fucking weird. Unless they have to follow a set of codes by via orders issue just to maintain standards passed down from the Fleet Safe Space Admiral.
Watch the movie "The Hunt for Red October" (1990), and imagine women in all the super high stress male roles.
Years ago, the rocket surgeons in the Pentagon decided to put women on an aircraft carrier. It was a disaster. I forget if it was 60 or 80 percent of them washed out.
Today, a large number of senior male officers on ships are relieved due to "zipper malfunctions". And female officers are relieved for "gross incompetence" and who knows how many other failures.
Oh, are you fucking kidding me. We have already had this argument a decade ago. You people insisted that standards would not be lowered in the exact same obnoxious, condescending tone. Fast forward to today.
Go be disingenuous about things you don’t understand somewhere else. That article is intentionally titled to make morons like you angry without reading anything lol
Look, I love a good Tom Clancy story as much as the next guy, but using it as your primary device for this argument shows a lack of prefrontal development.
But that wasn't in a nuclear submarine. The history of nuclear submarines gives us far worse scenarios like that time when a captain panicked and ordered to launch a nuclear strike against the US navy:
The Storozhevoy incident wasn't even close to being as high stakes and dramatic as THFRO. It was a disgruntled frigate captain that didn't even make it to open waters vs a nuclear ballistic sub with a sci-fi silent propulsion. It was simply an inspiration for Clancy. The only tangible relation was that they were both Soviet naval vessels that were "stolen".
The second thing you posted about the nuclear torpedo is hyperbolic. It says the captain initiated the order to fire the torpedo, but was stopped because of a moment of delay from a guy blocking the captains path leaving the conning tower which game the second officer time to realize the Americans were signaling and not attacking. Soviet doctrine still needed a multi factor verification before the final release of a nuclear weapon. Initiating preparations to launch is not the same thing as launching the weapon. They would have figured it out anyways even if the captain wasn't momentarily delayed.
So I still fail to see how Hollywood fiction and a hyperbolic sailors tale is a grounded foundation for an argument.
First, that's the reason why I posted the second incident.
Second, it is not hyperbolic. "They would have figured it out anyways" is just worthless speculation. How can you fail to realize that the real risk of that event is a foundation for an argument is flabbergasting.
And yes, I know about the 1983 false alarm incident. As "hyperbolic" as the Cuban Missile Crisis submarines.
Vatnik apergs will laugh about how the murican military is weak because "of woke", as if that'll make a difference when they're starving to death in a cold trench as a NATO drone is approaching piloted by some girl in thigh highs in the comfort of an office
The number of women on board often does not conform to three- or six-man rack configurations, and riders may augment the crew for a time and be comfortable living with other sexes. Heads also flex for mixed-gender usage. Some crews agree to use the wardroom toilets and showers exclusively in all-male or all-female blocks or to divide those assets with a barrier to allow simultaneous use by anyone in the wardroom. Transit to and from these spaces for showering also warrants an unambiguous, uniform standard for decency, and the same goes for dressing in the rack for both unexpected casualty response and routine wake-ups for watchstanding.
Translation for civilians:
The submarine has only so many places to sleep, same with bathrooms. You don't want people running into each other in a towel between the bathroom and their sleeping place... that causes problems because they need to stay professional and focus on their job, the stress is already high enough being trapped underwater for months at a time.
So they probably made two corridors / paths between bathrooms that could be male / female and depending on when they needed them, they changed them on duty shifts. This is something they didn't need before, so that's what's called an accommodation. Same thing for rack spacing or ladders, because women are on average shorter than men. It's an accommodation because they can do the job, but they just need you to design the tool a little different. Like left versus right handed.
That article was written by a female Submariner, so it's worth a look if you care. She'd done more than 99.99% of you dummies making jokes in here.
50% of the population doesn't have to fight anyhow, and most likely won't choose to in the case of actual war, not even if you put a tampon bin in the toilet.
Eventually the military wants a 50/50 mix at all levels, or at least the ability to support that. In jobs where physical strength and endurance are not an issue, so that's about 95% or more of them, they should be able to accommodate mixed gender crews / organizations.
The larger reason is because those "combat" jobs feed the higher ranks, like Generals and Admirals. If you exclude females from those positions at the bottom, you can't give them the experience to rise through the ranks. So you don't have the perspective you need to make good decisions on issues, the same as if you didn't have racial, ethnic, or nationalities represented in the military.
Going forward I expect you'll see more females get comfortable with sports and being athletic while also being feminine. They'll be a new sort of female, just stronger, faster, and more confident in themselves physically.
This doesn't take away from men, so it's not like they need to wear dresses or whatever, but they do need to understand that women who enjoy being athletic and / or being in the military will probably appreciate a man who appreciates what they do, instead of undermining them. Same for women who call athletic women nasty things and say they're trying to be men; you're not helping either.
The military wants all sorts of things, but wishful thinking, fiddling with submarine layouts to support the 10 women who actually do end up aboard, and reduced physical standards, amongst other things, do not make a better military, or convince women to join en mass.
You're both right and wrong. The military can't make America be fit. They can't change the diets of children.
But that's not their job.
If women join and not men, they put them in the submarines. Same with other jobs.
The submarine layout is meant to be flexible, which is to say mission adaptable. If they have 100% females, then it would work. If they had 50% females, then it would work. 0% females, then it would work. Any combination, it works.
They don't lose anything, it's only benefits the military to make these changes. From there, the quality of the female recruits and servicemembers improves. Because you have more females in the higher levels of Command. Because they keep raising the bar of performance at all levels.
At what portion would you admit that the added expense and challenge is justified? What an inane question, just say women shouldn't be on subs and save everyone some time.
A functioning adult is essentially the single most difficult resource for the US Military to get its hands on, so any avenue to getting more bodies is invaluable, especially in a job as shitty as being a submariner, which is also volunteer only.
There's some things one of our Marines told us the females were testing better at, but they were waiting on better data to draw conclusions about. This was F-18 cohort he talked, but I think they probably see it with mech and armor now. Things that I won't list here, but you figure smaller average size, but they apply themselves the same or more because they're told they can't do it.
Simulators are great for stuff like this, because you get a large data set to pull from.
you are trying to be genuine on a sub filled with redditors larping as 4chan users, if you take anything these tards say seriously your mind will break
People incorrectly views these at efforts to inject the DoD with fresh blood, when its really treating a mass hemorrhage. It's not about encouraging woman to join but lessening their chances of leaving. Pretty much anything that gets labeled as the DoD being woke is them trying desperately to keep what people they do have, which gets harder every year.
Chinas industrial output and focus on nuclear energy, however, are. America is falling behind.
Laugh at it all you want, but a gender neutral submarine is still a submarine. It can still launch ICBMs. It can still torpedo your logistical network. And China has the ability to make more of them, faster than anyone else on the planet.
China has the industry and labor advantage. Right now our navy has a pure tonnage advantage. If it comes to blows and we start losing ships, we cannot replace them as fast as China can. Our industrial capacity is lacking as well as our energy infrastructure. China is moving away from coal towards nuclear. We have not built a new nuclear energy plant since the 70s.
Just like americas industrial might won ww2, china’s might win the next conflict if it becomes one of attrition.
If you think the Chinese military industrial complex has the advantage on the U.S. then I have a bridge to sell you.
The U.S. shifted all of its industrial might to the war effort once it got fully involved in wwii, and then is massively dwarfed the rest of the world. What makes you think it would be different next time around? The U.S. hasn’t been in open naval warfare for over half a century and yet we’ve maintained the most powerful naval force the world has ever seen. Tell me again how China has the advantage.
Chinese ships are built fast because they’re built like shit. Just like any other Chinese product it’s all low quality high volume garbage.
A dozens of Chinese warships will be dilapidated and worthless before a single U.S. ship’s lifespan ends.
Chinese nuclear plants are fraught with design flaws and safety issues leading to constant outages. Building a nuclear plant is one thing, maintaining and operating it efficiently is another.
Well, whether we can reorganize our economy to start pumping out ships isn’t something I’m qualified to answer. But as someone who works in shipbuilding, it’s slow, and the presses required to make them don’t grow on trees. As for china’s industrial output, I’m just restating what our military has already said.
Wdym “start pumping out ships”? The Navy is constantly ordering, constructing, and commissioning new units for the fleet to AT LEAST keep up with the current needs as older ships phase out.
China only has TWO active aircraft carriers RIGHT NOW. The U.S. has 6 times that, and 2 more on order, not to mention 49 other platforms that vary in size and role.
The problem with the Chinese military is the same as the problem with the Russian military, in which they have two militaries; one is a military they have on paper, and one that they actually have in practice where half of their shit don’t work and half of their men can’t or don’t want to fight because of massive corruption issues.
It really is interesting to see the same tired points about the U.S. being battle-hardened and competent trotted out after getting whooped by goat-herders in Afghanistan and dirt-herders in Yemen.
The US has been involved in every major conflict for the last 90 years. That experience has given America a wide sample of types of battles to learn from.
We lost because we were fighting an attritional battle against a guerilla force. Their costs were tiny and ours were expensive. We couldn't just blow up all their factories and call it a day. We can do that with China.
We may have lost that war but we never lost a battle. Not a single one.
Last time China had a military engagement was the 70s after we left Vietnam and they got wiped by a bunch of battle weary farmers.
Their army is untested and their main objective is an island across one of the roughest most dangerous patches of sea in the world where they would have to conduct an amphibious landing against a deeply entrenched foe. That's literally the hardest operation you can do militarily, and for a military that has no real world experience, that's a tall bet. They also don't have enough ships to get their infantry to Taiwan, meaning they'll be under heavy fire while ferrying their soldiers to the mainland.
Oh and the straight of Taiwan is only navigable a few months out of the year until it becomes so rough it will break your navy, so they only have a small window every year to invade (and once they invade, a smaller window to get enough troops there to hold an airport).
American production is also kicking back up. Unless they invade within the decade, they'll be fucked 10 different ways and won't be able to pull off the invasion. The 2030s also start to be when their demographics crisis really starts to bite. Y'all don't remember Japan in the 80s and early 90s, where it was growing so fast people thought it would overtake the US. Then it hit a ceiling, stagnated, and hasn't grown in 30 years.
Ukraine is poor as shit but they have a similar number of active personel active as Russia and they're the fifth most well funded military in the world. It wouldn't be a walk in the park for anyone.
They didn't at first, and most of the world's armies are shit funded because there's no active war, and America will Olympic high dive into through your asshole and out your mouth if you start shit with any of their allies.
With air superiority, this war would have been over a month in. Instead they're fighting WW1 with drones because their shit ass economy can't make airframes. There's a reason the US has the first and second largest air forces: they fucking work.
No it really isn't. Air power is completely broken in the meta of large power military power. You can have an army that's 100x bigger than yours but if you have a more powerful air force that gains air superiority, they can't sleep or stop moving without being destroyed.
Not being able to take air superiority (meaning blowing up all their air defense systems and killing their fighter jets while on the ground) was the reason Russia couldn't steamroll over Ukraine in a few weeks rather than this hellfuck nightmare for them 3 years later.
Honestly Pootin nuking Ukraine would be the only way possible at this point, If we're talking about a full reset then that that wont happen until someone's ready to press the big red button.
Nope, they can just "declare victory" and leave, or just keep meat grinding which will eventually lead to russian """win""" where the country is so bankrupt and short on young man power after it immediately collapse like the soviets.
If putin nukes Ukraine his assassination is pretty much all but guaranteed. It would literally make him a threat to every nation including China etc. Even more so considering this is a war they started to "liberate" Ukraine .... by nuking them???? Someone actually that unhinged will simply be killed as the alternative are nowhere near as bad.
You're right he could never nuke Ukraine, he's there for the land afterall. A more realistic approach would be to go after Ukraine's suppliers. What'd happen if he'd do that?
Well it just so happens all of Ukraine suppliers all have nukes or are apart of nato so he can't do a nukeing.
He ganna have to then do limited ground invasion/air strikes which wont go well for him since nato objectively have FAR superior jets, and it would mean opening a second and 3rd front. He's already bearly hanging on again 40 year old American reserve technology, against an army only now being trained to use it.... putin going against modern American tech? It would be so over its not even funny. I don't even think they have the capability of detecting a B2 stealth bomber yet alone countering it, not even to mention the stealth fighters f35.
Like this is why they invest in so much propaganda for Americans to keep them thinking he totally would nuke if we keep funding Ukraine. He won't. It's purly a bluff. There is a reason why, when they finally disable a 50 year old abrams, it's paraded through the streets of Moscow lmaooo
Putin wishes he had the aerospace engineer furries of America, turns out a missile doesn't give a shit who fired or built it, and woke is apparently really really good at making missiles
Yep, tale as old as time. Hell the "manly men" of sparta got rekted by the roman Republic who did "effeminate" things like drinking wine and having fun and enjoying Greek bussy. Idk why dumbasses still fall for this shit.
Hey remember when you guys brought out that gay little forced meme about the heckin' cool woman soldier with drones destroying the "toxic masculinity" guys with a laser to insist that the Houthis would be brought in line in a matter of weeks?
Hey Ivan, how many bottles of vodka are they paying you to shitpost here? IDF pays way more for the same job and you're less likely to be thrown out of a window for not meeting your quotas
If you knew anything about subs, you would know the smell is unbearable. If you knew anything about females, you would know the smell is unbearable. Combine the two, and now you've got a submersible bioweapon, the likes of which rival the streets of Calcutta in summer.
...accomodate difference in WOMEN'S blah blah blah
Sounds like it's just got considerations for women and nothing to do with gender neutrality at all. Still a massive waste of tax dollars, but hey, when you've got trillions of dollars from the pockets of the poors, why not burn it on useless bullshit
No, this is regarded. The navy already has a tremendous amount of backlog in terms of repairing and refitting our fleet and to spend some of those precious resources on making sure women and trains are comfortable is only allowing china to incrementally catch up.
"Gender neutral bathroom" means just having one bathroom instead of two. Now you have more space in your sub to install things that actually help you defeat enemies, not wipe your ass.
The military is struggling to get recruits. This isn't some social justice or whatever thing.
A trained woman is still going to be a much better soldier than Ivan pulled out of the Russian streets and sent to the front with his airsoft vest, or shoved on some shitty diesel submarine from the Cold War.
In fairness if we talk Russian recruits the bar is very low.
Trains aren’t allowed on submarines, or any sea going ship for that matter, as their needs will be a detriment to mission readiness. Your inability to understand what a “gender neutral” submarine means is laughable.
well whatever helps drive more female recruitment, i cant imagine being stuck in a sub with a bunch of other sweaty impressively muscular (and sorta cute actually?) guys is good for morale
There’s already plenty of boomers with co-ed crews. Mine doesn’t, but there’s also not that many women in the submarine force in the first place. Mostly it’s the officers, but the Louisiana for example has female enlisted as well, as well as a female COB last time I saw them.
Authorities have called off the search for the USS New Jersey after floating wreckage was found containing dragon dildos and many, many cases of soylent drink
It’s a money saving tactic to they don’t have to keep doing bullshit ship alts and retro fits to active boats to keep up with the increasing amount of women in the submarine force. Women have been serving on subs for years, they just haven’t been building subs with them in mind since it wasn’t a thing back then.
There really isn't any job on a submarine that requires you to lift more than like 20lbs. If anything women are better for submarines because they're smaller and require less food per sailor. More space for torpedoes. 🤷♂️
I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about or what your point is anymore, all I was saying originally was that us subs haven’t had 2 screws since the Triton.
The whole “women on subs” things is completely separate, the first women to serve on us subs were officers over a decade ago, well before the New Jersey was commissioned.
I have served on an operational submarine since 2019, but the only sign on the doors to our heads was “secured for blowing sans”, we didn’t have any women onboard since my class of ship couldn’t support any of the retrofits they were doing to the newer Virginia class platforms.
The U.S. Navy began allowing women to serve on submarines in 2010. Initially, women were assigned to larger ballistic missile submarines, and over time, their roles expanded to include other types of submarines. Today, women serve in various capacities alongside men on U.S. Navy submarines, although the integration is still ongoing, with modifications made to submarines to accommodate mixed-gender crews.
I'm more surprised that the bathrooms weren't already "gender neutral". I thought due to space limitations that everyone would already be using the same shitter.
So now the US military prioritizes the gender thing rather than winning a war? No wonder they can't even free the red sea from khat-eating soldiers in Yemen lol
Man if I'm gonna be entombed in a metal cigar for 18 months at a time I'd rather there be chicks there than not but maybe it's cuz I'm not as gay as OP.
U.S. submarines have had coed crews for YEARS now (first females were officers around 2015-ish, enlisted females a little later). Those submarines were very badly retrofitted to accommodate a crew of both men and women, meaning certain modifications were made to living quarters and bathing facilities. The overall operation of the platform as a war ship was completely unchanged.
If this is supposed to be some type of jab at the U.S. military, then I’ll just say good luck Vlad.
What more of a flex is there than having the world's most powerful nuclear submarine and still have enough room so that our sailors can have a wank in private in the gender neutral restroom?
Wibble606@reddit
American sensationalism at its best.
The submarine is real and all it has is improved living spaces because the navy now allow women to join. Coping and seething slavs are the ones who post this sutff.
qpwoeor1235@reddit
Russians trying to make fun of our military while getting rekt by Ukrainians using our old gear. Russia sucks so hard they invaded a country and then that country invaded them back. Fucking losers
dicerollingprogram@reddit
Hear fucking hear
What more of a flex is there than having the world's most powerful nuclear submarine and still have enough room so that our sailors can have a wank in private in the gender neutral restroom?
That's American ingenuity people
Cpt_Obvius@reddit
I did a private tour of a boomer a couple years back and apparently dudes busting in the shower was a major problem with pipe clogs. They had to make several warnings and announcements.
fezzuk@reddit
Having gender neutral bathroom litterial just means we didn't add an extra bathroom and just put in a bio bin for tampons.
spilleddrinkcombo@reddit
And a baby changing station
fezzuk@reddit
No, marines generally don't travel on subs.
laniuscollurio1@reddit
dayum, shots fired
FuckRedditIsLame@reddit
For that you'd need to add a nursery with lots of crayon storage, or those little rascals will get themselves into all sorts of trouble in a place like a submarine.
IrregularrAF@reddit
Best part about the chocolate crayon is you get it back every time you eat it.
uvT2401@reddit
Ah I see, so rebuilding everything for Shaquitas big ass is to own the nonlibz
Filoleg94@reddit
Are you one of those people who would complain about airplane seats becoming larger and with longer legroom to accommodate the fats and the talls, despite you not being either of those yourself? Shaquita gets more space for her big ass, I get more space for my non-big ass. Sounds like a win for my personal ass regardless of anyone else.
todayIwillHam@reddit
You might be tarded pardner
RawketPropelled37@reddit
Surely using more space to fit Latifa's healthy 400 lb frame in the airplane seats won't negatively impact prices
ChaseballBat@reddit
Touch grass, like genuinely. If you don't encounter gender neutral bathrooms at least once a month you're from butt fuck nowhere or genuinely do not leave your house for anything.
yyrkoon1776@reddit
Seriously. This sub could blow anything the Russians have out of the water lmao
arbiter12@reddit
Your worldview is a blank wasteland of pointless symbolism. Meanwhile you are a quasi-slave in practical terms, IRL.
mefirstdime@reddit
Is the pointless symbolism in the room with us now
fezzuk@reddit
Does anyone expect separate facilities on a submarine? Of course they are gender neutral. Your in a tube, underwater for 9 months at a time.
You think they have the space for a separate place to shit? Adding a small bio bin for tampons i bet is basically the extent of the accomodation made.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
iirc they just gave the women a separate shower area, but toilet facilities are all the same. But even before the Jersey was built, women were serving on other boats. All they did when they were showering or using the head was they had a sign they’d flip on the door that said “females only” or something.
HanselSoHotRightNow@reddit
I don't really know for sure but I'd guess most of them stopped giving a fuck after a week at sea. Yeah I'm shitting, showering, and shaving in here, don't be fucking weird. Unless they have to follow a set of codes by via orders issue just to maintain standards passed down from the Fleet Safe Space Admiral.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Definitely some sort of rules set down but I doubt it’s any different than what’s been on surface ships for literal decades…
original_dick_kickem@reddit
Russoid cope abounds, at least our vessels intend to go underwater
Paratrooper101x@reddit
A gender neutral submarine can still launch ICBMs at your cities and torpedos at your ships
WendyLRogers3@reddit
Watch the movie "The Hunt for Red October" (1990), and imagine women in all the super high stress male roles.
Years ago, the rocket surgeons in the Pentagon decided to put women on an aircraft carrier. It was a disaster. I forget if it was 60 or 80 percent of them washed out.
Today, a large number of senior male officers on ships are relieved due to "zipper malfunctions". And female officers are relieved for "gross incompetence" and who knows how many other failures.
SalvationSycamore@reddit
I too like to use Hollywood to support all my opinions about the military and real conflicts.
Efficient_Star_1336@reddit
Oh, are you fucking kidding me. We have already had this argument a decade ago. You people insisted that standards would not be lowered in the exact same obnoxious, condescending tone. Fast forward to today.
Sinnaman420@reddit
Go be disingenuous about things you don’t understand somewhere else. That article is intentionally titled to make morons like you angry without reading anything lol
havoc1428@reddit
Look, I love a good Tom Clancy story as much as the next guy, but using it as your primary device for this argument shows a lack of prefrontal development.
Videnik@reddit
You should not throw insults willy nilly. The Hunt of the Red October is based in a real history:
https://www.military.com/history/hunt-red-october-based-real-soviet-mutiny.html?amp=
But that wasn't in a nuclear submarine. The history of nuclear submarines gives us far worse scenarios like that time when a captain panicked and ordered to launch a nuclear strike against the US navy:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2022-10-03/soviet-submarines-nuclear-torpedoes-cuban-missile-crisis
havoc1428@reddit
The Storozhevoy incident wasn't even close to being as high stakes and dramatic as THFRO. It was a disgruntled frigate captain that didn't even make it to open waters vs a nuclear ballistic sub with a sci-fi silent propulsion. It was simply an inspiration for Clancy. The only tangible relation was that they were both Soviet naval vessels that were "stolen".
The second thing you posted about the nuclear torpedo is hyperbolic. It says the captain initiated the order to fire the torpedo, but was stopped because of a moment of delay from a guy blocking the captains path leaving the conning tower which game the second officer time to realize the Americans were signaling and not attacking. Soviet doctrine still needed a multi factor verification before the final release of a nuclear weapon. Initiating preparations to launch is not the same thing as launching the weapon. They would have figured it out anyways even if the captain wasn't momentarily delayed.
So I still fail to see how Hollywood fiction and a hyperbolic sailors tale is a grounded foundation for an argument.
Videnik@reddit
First, that's the reason why I posted the second incident.
Second, it is not hyperbolic. "They would have figured it out anyways" is just worthless speculation. How can you fail to realize that the real risk of that event is a foundation for an argument is flabbergasting.
And yes, I know about the 1983 false alarm incident. As "hyperbolic" as the Cuban Missile Crisis submarines.
Triplebizzle87@reddit
Plus none of that would have happened. Can't act on an incomplete EAM.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
PM_MeYourNynaevesPlz@reddit
Watch the documentary "Top Gun: Maverick" (2022)
It shows women in high stress roles such as Naval Avators and AWACS Communication Technicians.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
This might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever read, and I’ve read a lot of dumb stuff
AegisT_@reddit
Vatnik apergs will laugh about how the murican military is weak because "of woke", as if that'll make a difference when they're starving to death in a cold trench as a NATO drone is approaching piloted by some girl in thigh highs in the comfort of an office
fart_master14@reddit
let’s not act like an american gender-neutral submarine isn’t still cutting-edge technology that could topple most of the worlds nations in a week
ChadWolf98@reddit
Lmao
Bullfight0103@reddit
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2023/october/different-equal
Translation for civilians:
The submarine has only so many places to sleep, same with bathrooms. You don't want people running into each other in a towel between the bathroom and their sleeping place... that causes problems because they need to stay professional and focus on their job, the stress is already high enough being trapped underwater for months at a time.
So they probably made two corridors / paths between bathrooms that could be male / female and depending on when they needed them, they changed them on duty shifts. This is something they didn't need before, so that's what's called an accommodation. Same thing for rack spacing or ladders, because women are on average shorter than men. It's an accommodation because they can do the job, but they just need you to design the tool a little different. Like left versus right handed.
That article was written by a female Submariner, so it's worth a look if you care. She'd done more than 99.99% of you dummies making jokes in here.
FuckRedditIsLame@reddit
What portion of submariners are female in order to justify this considerable added expense and challenge?
Prcrstntr@reddit
What portion of these females are emotional support women?
DastardlyDachshund@reddit
Bro its the navy your not there if you enjoy the company of women
PaidMoreThanJanitor@reddit
has anybody tried sending prostitutes with submarines? This could probably majorly relieve the stress of being underwater for months on end
Prcrstntr@reddit
Apparently the US Navy is retrofitting a bunch of ships to accommodate them.
Also the french probably at one point.
nullv@reddit
Having 50% of your population unable to fight would be a huge disadvantage in a war between countries.
FuckRedditIsLame@reddit
50% of the population doesn't have to fight anyhow, and most likely won't choose to in the case of actual war, not even if you put a tampon bin in the toilet.
Bullfight0103@reddit
Eventually the military wants a 50/50 mix at all levels, or at least the ability to support that. In jobs where physical strength and endurance are not an issue, so that's about 95% or more of them, they should be able to accommodate mixed gender crews / organizations.
The larger reason is because those "combat" jobs feed the higher ranks, like Generals and Admirals. If you exclude females from those positions at the bottom, you can't give them the experience to rise through the ranks. So you don't have the perspective you need to make good decisions on issues, the same as if you didn't have racial, ethnic, or nationalities represented in the military.
Going forward I expect you'll see more females get comfortable with sports and being athletic while also being feminine. They'll be a new sort of female, just stronger, faster, and more confident in themselves physically.
This doesn't take away from men, so it's not like they need to wear dresses or whatever, but they do need to understand that women who enjoy being athletic and / or being in the military will probably appreciate a man who appreciates what they do, instead of undermining them. Same for women who call athletic women nasty things and say they're trying to be men; you're not helping either.
Putrid-Long-1930@reddit
no fucking way!!
FuckRedditIsLame@reddit
The military wants all sorts of things, but wishful thinking, fiddling with submarine layouts to support the 10 women who actually do end up aboard, and reduced physical standards, amongst other things, do not make a better military, or convince women to join en mass.
DeepExplore@reddit
You realize drag queens are men right?
lenooticer@reddit
Chud radar going crazy rn
arbiter12@reddit
brainlet radar going crazy rn
lenooticer@reddit
Why would I address some chud’s point on r/4chan? Cute formatting lmao
Daddy_Parietal@reddit
Your "address" was calling him a chud, fucking lobotomite.
lenooticer@reddit
Funny you put address in quotes when I was using the same phrasing as the person I was replying to because I thought it was stupid. Go outside lol
Bullfight0103@reddit
You're both right and wrong. The military can't make America be fit. They can't change the diets of children.
But that's not their job.
If women join and not men, they put them in the submarines. Same with other jobs.
The submarine layout is meant to be flexible, which is to say mission adaptable. If they have 100% females, then it would work. If they had 50% females, then it would work. 0% females, then it would work. Any combination, it works.
They don't lose anything, it's only benefits the military to make these changes. From there, the quality of the female recruits and servicemembers improves. Because you have more females in the higher levels of Command. Because they keep raising the bar of performance at all levels.
You don't get better limiting who can serve.
ZMowlcher@reddit
You don't understand, they live in a crab bucket world.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
snrup1@reddit
The military should want to win wars again because we lost the last couple, or at least we didn't win them.
powers293@reddit
At what portion would you admit that the added expense and challenge is justified? What an inane question, just say women shouldn't be on subs and save everyone some time.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
New-Prior3101@reddit
Exactly
dddeaddd@reddit
Wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to ban women from subs, ALL line units to include support, tanks and the infantry?
Knight_D-Lark@reddit
A functioning adult is essentially the single most difficult resource for the US Military to get its hands on, so any avenue to getting more bodies is invaluable, especially in a job as shitty as being a submariner, which is also volunteer only.
Denbt_Nationale@reddit
holy shit based ergonomics understander
Bullfight0103@reddit
There's some things one of our Marines told us the females were testing better at, but they were waiting on better data to draw conclusions about. This was F-18 cohort he talked, but I think they probably see it with mech and armor now. Things that I won't list here, but you figure smaller average size, but they apply themselves the same or more because they're told they can't do it.
Simulators are great for stuff like this, because you get a large data set to pull from.
villentius@reddit
you are trying to be genuine on a sub filled with redditors larping as 4chan users, if you take anything these tards say seriously your mind will break
born_2_be_a_bachelor@reddit
I hope they’re talking about an extremely repetitive, snowpiercer-like contraption that only women can operate.
ShartBandit@reddit
I think it's a good thing if this attracts those types to join the army, I'd rather it be them on the front lines tbh
keeleon@reddit
Policies like this are what will make your city the "front lines" in the coming future.
BulbuhTsar@reddit
People incorrectly views these at efforts to inject the DoD with fresh blood, when its really treating a mass hemorrhage. It's not about encouraging woman to join but lessening their chances of leaving. Pretty much anything that gets labeled as the DoD being woke is them trying desperately to keep what people they do have, which gets harder every year.
Efficient_Star_1336@reddit
> 41 percent of American submarines nuke themselves
centurio_v2@reddit
pick 1
PM_ME_GOOD_SUBS@reddit
Navy has always been gay.
Blusttoy@reddit
They're definitely gonna make that submarine the decoy.
KeyedJewedditor@reddit
ima be real with you vladimir putin
fire away
cody0341@reddit
I hope he wins at this point
Paratrooper101x@reddit
Putin and Russia are of no concern.
Chinas industrial output and focus on nuclear energy, however, are. America is falling behind.
Laugh at it all you want, but a gender neutral submarine is still a submarine. It can still launch ICBMs. It can still torpedo your logistical network. And China has the ability to make more of them, faster than anyone else on the planet.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
China’s military is arguably worse off than Russia’s. They think quantity will win over quality, when they barely have the edge in either.
tworupeespeople@reddit
stalin believed that "quantity is a quality on its own"
Paratrooper101x@reddit
China has the industry and labor advantage. Right now our navy has a pure tonnage advantage. If it comes to blows and we start losing ships, we cannot replace them as fast as China can. Our industrial capacity is lacking as well as our energy infrastructure. China is moving away from coal towards nuclear. We have not built a new nuclear energy plant since the 70s.
Just like americas industrial might won ww2, china’s might win the next conflict if it becomes one of attrition.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
If you think the Chinese military industrial complex has the advantage on the U.S. then I have a bridge to sell you.
The U.S. shifted all of its industrial might to the war effort once it got fully involved in wwii, and then is massively dwarfed the rest of the world. What makes you think it would be different next time around? The U.S. hasn’t been in open naval warfare for over half a century and yet we’ve maintained the most powerful naval force the world has ever seen. Tell me again how China has the advantage.
Chinese ships are built fast because they’re built like shit. Just like any other Chinese product it’s all low quality high volume garbage.
A dozens of Chinese warships will be dilapidated and worthless before a single U.S. ship’s lifespan ends.
Chinese nuclear plants are fraught with design flaws and safety issues leading to constant outages. Building a nuclear plant is one thing, maintaining and operating it efficiently is another.
Paratrooper101x@reddit
Well, whether we can reorganize our economy to start pumping out ships isn’t something I’m qualified to answer. But as someone who works in shipbuilding, it’s slow, and the presses required to make them don’t grow on trees. As for china’s industrial output, I’m just restating what our military has already said.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Wdym “start pumping out ships”? The Navy is constantly ordering, constructing, and commissioning new units for the fleet to AT LEAST keep up with the current needs as older ships phase out.
China only has TWO active aircraft carriers RIGHT NOW. The U.S. has 6 times that, and 2 more on order, not to mention 49 other platforms that vary in size and role.
BlackwoodJohnson@reddit
The problem with the Chinese military is the same as the problem with the Russian military, in which they have two militaries; one is a military they have on paper, and one that they actually have in practice where half of their shit don’t work and half of their men can’t or don’t want to fight because of massive corruption issues.
Efficient_Star_1336@reddit
It really is interesting to see the same tired points about the U.S. being battle-hardened and competent trotted out after getting whooped by goat-herders in Afghanistan and dirt-herders in Yemen.
It's over, you kicked out the Scots-Irish hillbillies that made America menacing and replaced them with 60 IQ third-worlders that barely pass the ASVAB after the recruiter spends two weeks playing SAT prep.
mactakeda@reddit
What's a slide-rule boomer?
kuzjaruge@reddit
In comparison to the battle-hardened US army fighting sheep herders with AKs in sandals?
yallmad4@reddit
The US has been involved in every major conflict for the last 90 years. That experience has given America a wide sample of types of battles to learn from.
We lost because we were fighting an attritional battle against a guerilla force. Their costs were tiny and ours were expensive. We couldn't just blow up all their factories and call it a day. We can do that with China.
We may have lost that war but we never lost a battle. Not a single one.
yallmad4@reddit
Last time China had a military engagement was the 70s after we left Vietnam and they got wiped by a bunch of battle weary farmers.
Their army is untested and their main objective is an island across one of the roughest most dangerous patches of sea in the world where they would have to conduct an amphibious landing against a deeply entrenched foe. That's literally the hardest operation you can do militarily, and for a military that has no real world experience, that's a tall bet. They also don't have enough ships to get their infantry to Taiwan, meaning they'll be under heavy fire while ferrying their soldiers to the mainland.
Oh and the straight of Taiwan is only navigable a few months out of the year until it becomes so rough it will break your navy, so they only have a small window every year to invade (and once they invade, a smaller window to get enough troops there to hold an airport).
American production is also kicking back up. Unless they invade within the decade, they'll be fucked 10 different ways and won't be able to pull off the invasion. The 2030s also start to be when their demographics crisis really starts to bite. Y'all don't remember Japan in the 80s and early 90s, where it was growing so fast people thought it would overtake the US. Then it hit a ceiling, stagnated, and hasn't grown in 30 years.
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Lol Lmao He is loosing to the poorest country in Europe rn the gender Neutral submarine will win
Badeer21@reddit
Ukraine is poor as shit but they have a similar number of active personel active as Russia and they're the fifth most well funded military in the world. It wouldn't be a walk in the park for anyone.
yallmad4@reddit
They didn't at first, and most of the world's armies are shit funded because there's no active war, and America will Olympic high dive into through your asshole and out your mouth if you start shit with any of their allies.
With air superiority, this war would have been over a month in. Instead they're fighting WW1 with drones because their shit ass economy can't make airframes. There's a reason the US has the first and second largest air forces: they fucking work.
Badeer21@reddit
"With air superiority, the war would have been over a month in."
This is the most pointless statement imaginable. If boxer #1 was better than boxer #2, then he would have won.
yallmad4@reddit
No it really isn't. Air power is completely broken in the meta of large power military power. You can have an army that's 100x bigger than yours but if you have a more powerful air force that gains air superiority, they can't sleep or stop moving without being destroyed.
Not being able to take air superiority (meaning blowing up all their air defense systems and killing their fighter jets while on the ground) was the reason Russia couldn't steamroll over Ukraine in a few weeks rather than this hellfuck nightmare for them 3 years later.
Brilliant-Mountain57@reddit
Honestly Pootin nuking Ukraine would be the only way possible at this point, If we're talking about a full reset then that that wont happen until someone's ready to press the big red button.
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Nope, they can just "declare victory" and leave, or just keep meat grinding which will eventually lead to russian """win""" where the country is so bankrupt and short on young man power after it immediately collapse like the soviets.
If putin nukes Ukraine his assassination is pretty much all but guaranteed. It would literally make him a threat to every nation including China etc. Even more so considering this is a war they started to "liberate" Ukraine .... by nuking them???? Someone actually that unhinged will simply be killed as the alternative are nowhere near as bad.
Brilliant-Mountain57@reddit
You're right he could never nuke Ukraine, he's there for the land afterall. A more realistic approach would be to go after Ukraine's suppliers. What'd happen if he'd do that?
Curly_Fried_Mushroom@reddit
anyone who doesn't live in a concrete bunker with 4000 tins of beans would die lmao
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Well it just so happens all of Ukraine suppliers all have nukes or are apart of nato so he can't do a nukeing.
He ganna have to then do limited ground invasion/air strikes which wont go well for him since nato objectively have FAR superior jets, and it would mean opening a second and 3rd front. He's already bearly hanging on again 40 year old American reserve technology, against an army only now being trained to use it.... putin going against modern American tech? It would be so over its not even funny. I don't even think they have the capability of detecting a B2 stealth bomber yet alone countering it, not even to mention the stealth fighters f35.
Like this is why they invest in so much propaganda for Americans to keep them thinking he totally would nuke if we keep funding Ukraine. He won't. It's purly a bluff. There is a reason why, when they finally disable a 50 year old abrams, it's paraded through the streets of Moscow lmaooo
Olliekay_@reddit
Putin wishes he had the aerospace engineer furries of America, turns out a missile doesn't give a shit who fired or built it, and woke is apparently really really good at making missiles
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Yep, tale as old as time. Hell the "manly men" of sparta got rekted by the roman Republic who did "effeminate" things like drinking wine and having fun and enjoying Greek bussy. Idk why dumbasses still fall for this shit.
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Efficient_Star_1336@reddit
Hey remember when you guys brought out that gay little forced meme about the heckin' cool woman soldier with drones destroying the "toxic masculinity" guys with a laser to insist that the Houthis would be brought in line in a matter of weeks?
How's that going for you?
LocalDegenerate123@reddit
Are you one of them gender neutral folks?
blizmd@reddit
Goddamn, this is twice you have failed to use the correct form of ‘lose’
Opheodrys97@reddit
Hey Ivan, how many bottles of vodka are they paying you to shitpost here? IDF pays way more for the same job and you're less likely to be thrown out of a window for not meeting your quotas
Nutaholic@reddit
Are there really women signing up to be on submarine crews? Sounds like a miserable experience.
AutoJannietator@reddit
Apparently women like having seamen all around them.
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
Morbidly accurate depiction of what life will be like on the SS Slampig
hateful_surely_not@reddit
Daddy_Parietal@reddit
Just wait until the women find that out. Gonna be lots of drama.
necropaw@reddit
Arent the men on submarine crews basically twinks, so already women?
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Mostly bears
Source: 10 year submariner
Ozymandias_1303@reddit
Did submarines have a gender before? I mean they are kinda penis-shaped I guess...
fatfuck5@reddit
If you knew anything about subs, you would know the smell is unbearable. If you knew anything about females, you would know the smell is unbearable. Combine the two, and now you've got a submersible bioweapon, the likes of which rival the streets of Calcutta in summer.
Harrstein@reddit
think about it this way. if they have time and budget for this, they arent doing bad
PYSHINATOR@reddit
Meanwhile, the Russian navy's had a good chunk of their black sea fleet converted to was/were submarines.
MyDogIsDaBest@reddit
Gotta agree with Canada-anon.
Sounds like it's just got considerations for women and nothing to do with gender neutrality at all. Still a massive waste of tax dollars, but hey, when you've got trillions of dollars from the pockets of the poors, why not burn it on useless bullshit
Zyeesi@reddit
Take it back 50 years, russia would've never guess toppling America would only required "open mindedness"
-kotye-@reddit
tfw your military has such total global supremacy you can invest time and money into stuff like this
TKD_1488@reddit
trainderail88@reddit
No, this is regarded. The navy already has a tremendous amount of backlog in terms of repairing and refitting our fleet and to spend some of those precious resources on making sure women and trains are comfortable is only allowing china to incrementally catch up.
yallmad4@reddit
"Gender neutral bathroom" means just having one bathroom instead of two. Now you have more space in your sub to install things that actually help you defeat enemies, not wipe your ass.
Alex_2259@reddit
The military is struggling to get recruits. This isn't some social justice or whatever thing.
A trained woman is still going to be a much better soldier than Ivan pulled out of the Russian streets and sent to the front with his airsoft vest, or shoved on some shitty diesel submarine from the Cold War.
In fairness if we talk Russian recruits the bar is very low.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Trains aren’t allowed on submarines, or any sea going ship for that matter, as their needs will be a detriment to mission readiness. Your inability to understand what a “gender neutral” submarine means is laughable.
-kotye-@reddit
well whatever helps drive more female recruitment, i cant imagine being stuck in a sub with a bunch of other sweaty impressively muscular (and sorta cute actually?) guys is good for morale
Kitahara_Kazusa1@reddit
The Navy also has more ships than it has people to crew them with. Anything that helps with retention is incredibly valuable.
Triplebizzle87@reddit
Blame the Navy for that. Forced people out, cut bennies, bullshit cpo mess. Sub fleet manning was cut in half while I was in.
Atom-but-nice@reddit
Everything about this is hilarious, and it will be infinitely more so if it gets destroyed on its first mission
PapaAeon@reddit
There’s already plenty of boomers with co-ed crews. Mine doesn’t, but there’s also not that many women in the submarine force in the first place. Mostly it’s the officers, but the Louisiana for example has female enlisted as well, as well as a female COB last time I saw them.
Asscrackistan@reddit
All fun and games until it shows up along your coast, spams over 80 missiles before disappearing.
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
Authorities have called off the search for the USS New Jersey after floating wreckage was found containing dragon dildos and many, many cases of soylent drink
Schwarzekekker@reddit
Dumbasses forget its a beast of a machine. This is just a merketing strategy so that the taxpayer won't complain about the massive price tag
Efficient_Star_1336@reddit
The sort of person that cares about taxes (and pays them) is significantly less likely to like a 'gender neutral' nuclear submarine.
So is the sort of person that can be recruited to competently operate one, of course.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
It’s a money saving tactic to they don’t have to keep doing bullshit ship alts and retro fits to active boats to keep up with the increasing amount of women in the submarine force. Women have been serving on subs for years, they just haven’t been building subs with them in mind since it wasn’t a thing back then.
MrAbomidable@reddit
There really isn't any job on a submarine that requires you to lift more than like 20lbs. If anything women are better for submarines because they're smaller and require less food per sailor. More space for torpedoes. 🤷♂️
LaughGlad7650@reddit
Very NCD
f1nessd@reddit
gg chat, we lost
gravy-and-suffering@reddit
pipe down zoomer
TMCchristian@reddit
Imagine licking Russian boots to pwn the left.
Sikhanddestroy77@reddit
Where was someone licking Russian boots?
Lefties are the biggest establishment bootlickers out there lol. Theyd report their parents to the government for saying the n word if they could
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
I bet it has counter-rotating screws under that top secret do not remove for photos shroud.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
No U.S. submarines have dual screw designs anymore
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
They don't have women either, until now.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
You’re an idiot. Women have served in the U.S. submarine fleet since like 2011.
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
Ah, plebbit.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Damn sometimes I wish I was as autistic as you
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
Are you one of the submariners excited over getting they/their own shitter door sign?
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about or what your point is anymore, all I was saying originally was that us subs haven’t had 2 screws since the Triton.
The whole “women on subs” things is completely separate, the first women to serve on us subs were officers over a decade ago, well before the New Jersey was commissioned.
I have served on an operational submarine since 2019, but the only sign on the doors to our heads was “secured for blowing sans”, we didn’t have any women onboard since my class of ship couldn’t support any of the retrofits they were doing to the newer Virginia class platforms.
KapitanKaczor@reddit
Anon, I...
avalisk@reddit
More like "least gay submarine" launches
Submariners finally get to fuck women instead of each other
Jinova47@reddit
Seriously what?
dogol__@reddit
somehow making things accessible for women makes the submarine less capable against Russian tin cans
pmurr@reddit
The U.S. Navy began allowing women to serve on submarines in 2010. Initially, women were assigned to larger ballistic missile submarines, and over time, their roles expanded to include other types of submarines. Today, women serve in various capacities alongside men on U.S. Navy submarines, although the integration is still ongoing, with modifications made to submarines to accommodate mixed-gender crews.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Noooooo!!!! That doesn’t fit my narrative!!!
BigBlueDuck130@reddit
I'm more surprised that the bathrooms weren't already "gender neutral". I thought due to space limitations that everyone would already be using the same shitter.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
We do. This article has a very misleading title and I’ve been arguing about it with other submariners since it got posted lol
Beneficial-Cup9515@reddit
So now the US military prioritizes the gender thing rather than winning a war? No wonder they can't even free the red sea from khat-eating soldiers in Yemen lol
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
Do none of you morons remember what happened the last time y’all poked the bear? It didn’t work out well for you.
mrboomtastic3@reddit
We export freedom when we feel like it.
NaturallyExasperated@reddit
Man if I'm gonna be entombed in a metal cigar for 18 months at a time I'd rather there be chicks there than not but maybe it's cuz I'm not as gay as OP.
PrisonaPlanet@reddit
U.S. submarines have had coed crews for YEARS now (first females were officers around 2015-ish, enlisted females a little later). Those submarines were very badly retrofitted to accommodate a crew of both men and women, meaning certain modifications were made to living quarters and bathing facilities. The overall operation of the platform as a war ship was completely unchanged.
If this is supposed to be some type of jab at the U.S. military, then I’ll just say good luck Vlad.
Ausfall@reddit
...ok? Isn't this just a simpler (better) design?
MrFuFu179@reddit
Youngsters/foreigners discovering why the Village People sung about the Navy will never not be funny to me.
Bruh, Navy is certified gayest branch. This is not news.
TH3_F4N4T1C@reddit
You can either have a gay navy or accommodate women.
There is no in between.
Crunchy-Leaf@reddit
Joining the military is synonymous with someone else railing your wife
Absolutemehguy@reddit
Based and cuckoldrypilled
Furista0@reddit (OP)
Factual
Rough_Transition1424@reddit
The Navy has always been hella gay
bittercripple6969@reddit
Wonder who the first kid conceived on that sub's going to be.
EH042@reddit
The bastard son of a hundred maniacs
Sledgecrowbar@reddit
The ugliest, most autistic sexual deviant the world has ever known.
_Addi-the-Hun_@reddit
Old_Ad_71@reddit
And yet, not one nation comes close to challenging our gender neutral navy.
theemoofrog@reddit
/b/ is surprised that the Navy of all things is being Hella gay.
havoc1428@reddit
Its clearly /pol/
mrboomtastic3@reddit
Laugh all you want but those bgm 109 tomhawks and mk48 torpedoes are also gender neutral. We don't discriminate here.
stichen97@reddit
«Take it from me! A fucking rooski bot»
deleted_by_reddit@reddit
[removed]
AutoModerator@reddit
Sorry, your post has been removed. You must have more than 25 karma to submit posts to /r/4chan.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
dicerollingprogram@reddit
What more of a flex is there than having the world's most powerful nuclear submarine and still have enough room so that our sailors can have a wank in private in the gender neutral restroom?
irespectwomenlol@reddit
Do woman submariners have real jobs on the sub?
There might be a small case for morale improving if there's a few women onboard for desperately needed ~~diversity and inclusion~~ blowjobs.
Le_Ebin_Rodditor@reddit
NEW JERSEY MENTIONED!!!!
American_Crusader_15@reddit
Woke warfare is the future
es1vo@reddit
Fire the nukes!