Virtually NO females in this film?

Don't go looking for some hidden significance where there is none.

Look at the story itself and the time it was set and tell me.. just where would there be a female character?

No Women on Subs.
No Women on the Carrier.
Other than a few other scenes like at CIA and the White House briefing of the NSA.. just where would there be a woman?

There are too many dumbasses that think a story should be altered to insert something that would be UNREALISTIC just to satisfy some bullsh!t politically correct position.


I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

How many vaginas do you think were on nuclear submarines during the cold war?

Yeah. Not exactly a common thing. I don't see why you find this surprising. Women have been largely excluded from warfare in most societies throughout history- it's only been quite recently even in America that women have started to see actual combat roles.

Clancy never had much in the way of "love stories" in his books and not many female characters overall. In the Ryan series, there's of course the wife, but their love live is never dwelt on. There's some rare remarks about it and in one of the books, a political enemy of his, tries to paint an affair on him, leading to a subplot that feeds the main plot.

Then there's the odd female agent of some agency or another and a few female victims of various plots. With one exception, if their love life is brought up at all, it's just a side remark not really connected to the plot. And the exception is the incorporation of a honey trap.

Clearly, Clancy isn't in the habit to include subplots to accommodate the best selling target group.

Having said that, this movie, nor the book it's made from, suffer from the absence of a love angle.

In another of "his" movies, they dragged in a love interest and the movie suffered greatly from it (and other changes).

I did not save the boy, God did. I only CARRIED him.

Are there ANY women in the film? I think we might get a quick glimpse of Ryan's wife and maybe Greer's secretary at the CIA but that's it. Much of the action takes place on warships and those remain disproportionatley male environments and were even more so back in the 1980s. Women weren't allowed to serve on US submarines until 2012

Unless Alpert's covered in bacon grease, I don't think Hugo can track anything.

Not politically correct enough for you there?

It's a film about manly men doing manly things. It's not a feminist issue, there just aren't that many women in this story. Like there aren't that many men in Orange is the new Black.

No, it's simply because it is (was) considered unethical to use women in war since only they can give birth. For that reason it would be illogical and wrong having those who give life being the destroyers of life also.

However, having said that, some tests once showed that women *would* in fact be better submariners than men, for three reasons:
1. Their smaller bodies require less consumables (food/air) than men's ditto, making longer patrols possible.
2. A group of women (for reasons unknown) performed better under psychological pressure than men did.
3. The women got along better in prolonged isolation in a confined space than men did.

Anyway, the echelons decided against using female-only crews for the above-mentioned ethical reason.

And as for a mixed crew? Well, I suppose lots of small, submerged wars would go off all the time. And who wants a jealous boomer C.O., wanting to press all sorts of expensive buttons?

I siphoned this info off from somewhere more than 20 years ago, so don't expect me to produce a reference. It *might* have been from Michael Crichton's novel "Sphere", but I haven't read that book in ages, so don't take it for granted.

Also, only two black characters in the entire movie. Again, don't ask , don't tell. I did see one black naval officer aboard the USS Dallas.