Musings on ships and the feminine mystique (03/14/06)

To the editor:

“She was expected to enter port at high tide but her arrival has been delayed.”

Chapters abound with myth and tradition why Navy ships (and all ships in general) are referred to in the feminine gender. Landlubbers (most of them) are aware a Navy ship is referred to as a man-of-war, which may be confusing in regards to the female reference. But for those crewmen who put to sea in such vessels, the reality of the feminine reference is more readily evident in the physical and mental demands these ships require from their crews. Genuine reasons abound for this feminine identity.

There’s always a gang of men hanging around plus they’re expensive to keep up, which can and often does create financial problems. No matter the cost, a constant need of paint and powder are usually required to maintain an acceptable appearance. Location of paint needs will dictate color, texture, number of coats, and frequency of application.

And for some unknown reason, it’s removed by scraping and dissolving before deterioration demands it and the process begins anew. Considerable space is needed to store these supplies and no matter how plentiful, there appears to be never enough.

For going anywhere, even the shortest of trips (it could be half a mile to another pier), preparations are all out of proportion to the distance traveled.

And there’s always those last minute details that crop up at moment of departure. Even on a calm day, it requires considerable training and experience to maneuver a vessel properly with the results never perfect but normally acceptable. But during inclement weather (or what is perceived as such) due to precipitation, wind, temperature change, barometric drop, or a cloud shaped like someone’s mother-in-law, control is nearly impossible and can defeat the most determined efforts, bringing tears to the strongest of men. This can result in standing humbly in the presence of superiors and explaining your miserable failure.

These challenges could be reduced or eliminated (along with the headaches) if they would just terminate this tradition of having females, with their bottles of champagne, christen newly-launched ships. I’ve been suspicious for some time about the hereditary make up of these ladies and have concluded that witchcraft capabilities are the main qualifying trait for this task. (Ever observe that smile after the bottle breaks?)

It may be difficult to prove, but I think a congressional investigation should look into this selection process.

But total condemnation of these witching tactics would be in violation as the qualification is not selective but absolute. Ships carrying names of the fairer sex (fairer?) place greater demands on her servants and no doubt experience tremendous joy from this attention. (Ships do have personalities.)

Due to their unpredictability, the National Weather Service attached female names to all hurricanes.

Beginning in 1978, either on their own or from outside pressure, male IDs appeared. Someone apparently thought this would delude their vexing nature if not all were influenced by female monikers. The Secretary of the Navy should consider a similar adjustment for ship christenings.

Meanwhile, without apparent reason or absolutely no warning, ships will continue to occasionally bread down (or just blow up), and way too often, regardless of the effort, no cause can be determined.

Perhaps this will lay to rest the mystery of why ships are hexed with the feminine mystique.

Roy Leverich

Portland[[In-content Ad]]