Oooh! Let's see what B&B have planned

[Lord Poe]

I'm fully aware of that. Even if we ignore that, though, how many "fairly attractive" women do you think could pass the requirements into the SEALs, or SAS, or the Rangers, or any of the other special forces groups maintained by western nations?

Hell, all you have to do is look for "fairly attractive" female police officers. On average, female police officers look like Geoge Castanza with boobs.

[Peregrin Toker]

Did you know that back when TNG was still in early development, Roddenberry got an idea for a tough female security officer after seeing "Aliens"? According to "Star Trek - The Continuing Mission", he really loved Vasquez character and wanted to have something similar aboard the new Enterprise.

No, I didn't. However, this will explain why they're considering a female MACO trooper to be a significant character.

But Marina Sirtis as a tough security officer? As mentioned by MoO, that would be one of the worst miscasting ever.

The idea of having SEVERAL "fairly attractive" MACO's is one of the stupidest ideas I've heard in a long time. How many (female) "fairly attractive" Navy SEALS are there? Are there ANY hot babes in SAS? Delta Force? What would you have said if Natalie Portman and Catherine Zeta-Jones had been running around shooting people in Blackhawk Down?

What if B&B mean "fairly attractive by military standards"???

[Ender]

How many (female) "fairly attractive" Navy SEALS are there?

Running slightly off topic, but there are no female SEALs. It's one of the few military occupations women are still banned from. The others include front-line ground troops, and submariners.

Women are barred from Submarine service for some physiological reason that has to do with the nuclear reactors and contaminants in the air (at least, this is so in the Royal Navy), if I recall correctly. What justification is there to ban them from front-line combat roles? And Navy SEALS (though I can pretty much guess the reason for that one)?

Either you got that reason mixed up or someone somewhere is lying. A nuclear reactor will have the same impact on women as men (with the exception of if the women are pregnant), and there will be zero contamination in the air, and if there was men would be at the same risk.

Over here its because women would need seperate quarters and facilities and space is at a premium on subs (meaning when they do put the gals on them in 05 the subs will carry less supplies and thus be less effective). I'd imagine the same is true for you

[Joe Momma]

Women are barred from Submarine service for some physiological reason that has to do with the nuclear reactors and contaminants in the air (at least, this is so in the Royal Navy), if I recall correctly.

Either you got that reason mixed up or someone somewhere is lying.

IIRC there are certain US Navy engineering positions that women are barred from during pregnancy because some of the chemicals/materials used in those functions may have negative effects on developing fetuses, though otherwise they have no more effect on women than men. Maybe something like that is what Stofsk is thinking about?

-- Joe Momma

[Stofsk]

Either you got that reason mixed up or someone somewhere is lying. A nuclear reactor will have the same impact on women as men (with the exception of if the women are pregnant), and there will be zero contamination in the air, and if there was men would be at the same risk.

That's what I thought.

Over here its because women would need seperate quarters and facilities and space is at a premium on subs (meaning when they do put the gals on them in 05 the subs will carry less supplies and thus be less effective). I'd imagine the same is true for you.

Yup. Women are allowed to serve on our subs.

Anyway I did some checking, and here's what I could find. I'll quote the relevant section, which is near the bottom of the RN's FAQ.

Q. Why are women not permitted to serve on submarines?
Service in submarines is closed to women because of medical concerns for the safety of the foetus and hence its mother. This restriction is purely medical and does not relate to combat effectiveness. The potential risks to the foetus do not arise from hazardous radiation, but from contaminants in the submarine's atmosphere.

The Institute of Naval Medicine (INM) reviewed the exclusion in 1999, as did subsequently both the Defence Scientific Advisory Council and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Their outcomes supported the conclusions of the INM report, that the exclusion was justified.

Now, I can remember more information on the matter, but for some reason the RN doesn't go into it - or my web-browsing skills are so deficient that I can't find it. You would think that given this heavy restriction there would be a page devoted to answering questions about this subject, but if there is more I can't seem to locate it.

IIRC there are certain US Navy engineering positions that women are barred from during pregnancy because some of the chemicals/materials used in those functions may have negative effects on developing fetuses, though otherwise they have no more effect on women than men. Maybe something like that is what Stofsk is thinking about?

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was talking about.

[The Yosemite Bear]

and in other news, they saw "Battlestar Galactica" and the reason T'Pol is really such an emotional bitch, and so illogical, is because she's really a Romulon secret agent.

Oh, god I have to stop before they go aheed and do as I have prodicted....

[Death from the Sea]

MoO, you're talkiong about a pair of dolts who find Continuity "restricting" and they have routinely come out and said that they did not like the precedents set by TOS and felt that Enterprise should not be limited to what TOS established.

and it is also the same ones who say that and then turn around and claim they have not broken continuity and challenge people to show them just one error in continuity that they have made. truel stagering the boldness of such blatant ignorance and self-appreciation.

[Lord Poe]

and it is also the same ones who say that and then turn around and claim they have not broken continuity and challenge people to show them just one error in continuity that they have made. truel stagering the boldness of such blatant ignorance and self-appreciation.

Has any of the Trekkies stepped up to the plate and presented them with a website pointing out all their continuity mistakes?

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

and it is also the same ones who say that and then turn around and claim they have not broken continuity and challenge people to show them just one error in continuity that they have made. truel stagering the boldness of such blatant ignorance and self-appreciation.

Has any of the Trekkies stepped up to the plate and presented them with a website pointing out all their continuity mistakes?

I do believe Berman dismissed all claims of broken continuty by saying they were just 12 year olds whining.

[Superman]

Does anyone have any sites where we can see B & B's responses to all of the Trekkies trying to show them how they fucked up? I would love to read an 'official' response.

[Gil Hamilton]

Obviously, StarFleet MACOs don't have the strict physical requirements that many services do. The thing is that unless you are into muscle-y chicks, the soft curves and feminine features that make a woman really attractive by modern standards tend to get lost when a women undertakes the extensive physical conditioning that comes with becoming a foot soldier, if nothing else due to fat layers being consumed by the body and bulked up muscle, but also that testosterone is generated by that kind of bulk up. I'm sure their female MACOs will look like they are models rather than soldiers.

And I'm sure that Vasquez from Aliens could kick the living shit out of any or all of them.