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.)