[net.women] Discrimination in the USAF

amyl@gatech.UUCP (11/08/83)

   It seems to me that the USAF's failure to use women in
   underground launch substations is simply a rationalization
   for not wanting to take the trouble to train some women for 
   the job.  To say that people working down there would be
   made uncomfortable if they had to work with women might be
   true-- at the outset.  Anything new is usually difficult at
   first.  But human beings are nothing if not adaptable.  I
   strongly doubt that the people in those substations would
   NOT learn to work together, since their work would be more
   important than the fact that their (learned?) anxieties were
   a bit stimulated.  Working closely with someone of the opposite
   sex is nothing new.  We learn appropriate behavior as needed.
   If I were an Air Force wife and the Air Force said they would
   not use women in the launch substations out of consideration
   for my feelings, I would be just a mite peeved that they would
   think me so petty.
    
    I don't really believe that women will be kept out of any
    domain of public life as long as they insist on being there,
    underground launch substations included.
-- 
Amy Lapwing
School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA
CSNet:	Amyl @ GATech		ARPA:	Amyl.GATech @ UDel-Relay
uucp:	...!{akgua,allegra,rlgvax,sb1,unmvax,ut-ngp,ut-sally}!gatech!amyl

spaf@gatech.UUCP (11/08/83)

I seem to remember reading some psychological studies which indicated
soemthing about who are good individuals to have in positions of
responsibility for launching nuclear weapons.  There was a definite
hierarchy of "preferred" choices -- some groups were less likely
to particiapate in a launch sequence than others.  Before I try
to make any conclusions based on this, does anyone out there know
anything definitive about those studies?
-- 
Off the Wall of Gene Spafford
School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332
CSNet:	Spaf @ GATech		ARPA:	Spaf.GATech @ CSNet-Relay
uucp:	...!{akgua,allegra,rlgvax,sb1,unmvax,ulysses,ut-sally}!gatech!spaf

smb@ulysses.UUCP (11/10/83)

The line handed out by that Air Force officer strikes me as pure poppycock.
I've heard some similar reasons advanced for why women can't be firefighters
("it gets the wives upset because you're in the same room with their
husbands for days"), or for why women can't be astronauts ("there's not
much privacy in a space capsule (snicker giggle leer)").  Well, I've got
news for such folks:  some women do just fine as astronauts, fire fighters,
truck drivers, construction workers, and all the other non-traditional roles.

Granted, some women aren't strong enough to handle a fire hose, or to carry
a person out of a burning building -- but neither are some men.  And some
women don't have the psychological "features" that let them blow up millions
of their fellow human beings.  I don't, either.  If you need particular
traits, select for them, not for Y chromosomes.  (Aside to those who think
that some traits are genetically linked to Y chromosomes:  you may be right,
the evidence is at best inconclusive and contradictory.  But the person-to-
person variation is enough greater than the difference of the means that
a sex-based selection mechanism is ridiculous.)

Finally, what about questions of privacy and "husband-stealing"?  To some
extent, those are symptoms of older attitudes.  After all, why don't
women in any workforce "steal" other men?  Maybe an all-night hacking
session will make a woman programmer want to tear the clothes off of a male
companion?  And maybe companies can save money on buildings by installing
only men's rooms?  You see my point, I trust.  Many years ago, I worked in
a small building where the men's rooms and the women's room's were on
alternate floors.  When the university took over the building, the systems
folks didn't put with that nonsense.  Given that the bathrooms were only
large enough for one person at a time anyway, we solved the "problem" quite
simply by putting a rotatable sign on the door that said ENQUEUE and DEQUEUE.
No problem...

		--Steve Bellovin

leff@smu.UUCP (11/16/83)

#R:gatech:-197000:smu:18900001:000:230
smu!leff    Nov 14 19:07:00 1983

The Citadel which is a private military school in North Carolina
recently decided to go coed.  However, they informed all of their
applicants that they had not intention of having separate bathroom facilities
for men and women.

leff@smu.UUCP (11/16/83)

#R:gatech:-197000:smu:18900002:000:296
smu!leff    Nov 14 19:14:00 1983

At the citadel, a private military academy in North Carolina, they
just went coed.

However, they sent a note to all applicants informing them that there
were no separate bathroom facilities for men and women.

(This information was given to me from the mother of a man who is a
student there.)