Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

USMC and women in infantry

Discussion in 'The Stump' started by USMCPrice, Mar 17, 2015.

  1. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
  2. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,887
    Likes Received:
    868
    There ARE women capable of doing these things...Inlcuding taking out a wide receiver! If you've ever watched women's rugby...there is always a handful well over 100kgs with a nip of speed that cream the other girls/women. It keeps comng back to standards...if they are the same as the males and you pass then there is a good chance you can hack it...or the test is faulty.
    But because of the very real relationships men and women are "supposed" to have they dont make good fox-hole buddies...coulpe this with the "baggage" women have to carry in terms of periods and hygene etc then the answer as i have said is a women's "corp" separate to the men. Id make them auxillery (but thats my choice) - and would require the same pass standards as the males.
    Anyone remember the space marines in Aliens? The female (the only female) marine in the unit is cranking out impressive chin-ups after a hypersleep...one bloke is watching on and says "you ever been mistaken for a man?" she replies "No, have you? Thats the sort of woman i want in the marines...or no one.
     
  3. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I tend to agree if the standards are well designed and enforced equally then much of the problem goes away. For instance one can see why the SEALS don't mind allowing women to try to get in as long as the process isn't changed. They have almost no chance of being high enough up the list to get selected. Of course there is still the bone density/injury issue and while I've read several people say that there are methods for preventing that problem I've never heard what they are. The fear is I believe that the standards will be lowered or not enforced equally. Again one of the big things the Marine study showed was that the current standards were too low.
     
  4. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    Still don't understand why women/government aren't fighting for equal numbers of female plumbers and road layers.

    However on topic. Maintaining standards won't happen if the government wants equal outcome regardless of physical differences.
     
  5. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I haven't seen anything to indicate the government wants "equal outcome" whatever that is. However there are goals, from what I recall most if not all are under 20%. If those goals are applied to areas like the infantry or SEALs it does set up a situation where there may indeed be pressure to either lower standards or apply different ones.
     
  6. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,617
    Likes Received:
    1,656
    Location:
    God's Country
    Secretary Mabus wants the Navy and Marine Corps to be 25% female.

    General Dempsey, the former Chairman JCS stated back in 2013, if women didn't meet the standards, the standards would be called into question.

    "Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday that with women now eligible to fill combat roles in the military, commanders must justify why any woman might be excluded – and, if women can’t meet any unit’s standard, the Pentagon will ask: “Does it really have to be that high?”"

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gen-dempsey-if-women-can-t-meet-military-standard-pentagon-will-ask-does-it-really-have

    So there will be pressure to adjust standards downward. Just as happened when no women (I don't think there was more than one that made it past the first day) passed the Marine Corps Infantry Officers course. Politicians asked why the standards were so high, even though they were the standards that had been in place for a long time.
     
  7. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    17,227
    Likes Received:
    2,004
    Location:
    Alabama
    Standards are standards for a reason. Changing requirements doesn't change the absolutes that will be faced.

    But, when you are buying votes...
     
  8. Pacifist

    Pacifist Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    406
    Likes Received:
    90
    In addition to what USMCPrice posted lets consider the standards that have existed for the last few decades.

    If I as a man wished to become a USNavy cook I would have to pass these standards.


    PERFORMANCE POINTS CURL PUSH 1.5-MILE SWIM
    CATEGORY UPS UPS RUN 500-YD 450-M

    Satisfactory 45 37 27 15:00 13:23 13:13


    If I was female and wished to be a USNavy cook I would have to pass these standards.

    PERFORMANCE POINTS CURL PUSH 1.5-MILE SWIM
    CATEGORY UPS UPS RUN 500-YD 450-M
    Satisfactory 45 37 9 17:00 15:15 15:05



    The job is the same. The pay is the same. Why would the standards be different unless they wanted equal outcome with unequal ability.
     
  9. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm still not sure what you mean by "equal outcome". In the case of the cook one does wonder how the standards were established. I can see pretty much service wide standards with exceptions for the more physically demanding jobs. I can even see a case being made for the service wide ones being essentially a "good shape" standard which could allow for different standards between the sexes. However when condition impacts actual job performance that should trump any differentiation.

    USMCPrice thanks for the 25% correction. I thought I'd seen 20% used in places and didn't remember seeing anything more but your post jogged my memory a bit on it. It does make it clear that there will be pressure to lower standards and/or differentiate them service wide. From all I've read there is no way they can get that many women in some of the MOSs though no matter how much they try to rig things. From the numbers I've seen and as you have posted (I think it was in one of the articles I linked recently as well) the percentage of women even interested in the infantry is very small.
     
  10. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,617
    Likes Received:
    1,656
    Location:
    God's Country
  11. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm also still waiting for an explanation of what can be done to address the issue of bone density differences.
     
  12. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,617
    Likes Received:
    1,656
    Location:
    God's Country
    The latest from Navy Secretary Ray "the retard" Maybus, Recruit Training WILL BE fully gender integrated. The Marine Corps has been ordered to come up with a plan by the 15th of January. I've got one. Single standard, the current male one. Can't make a run young lady, you're gone same as with a male. Can't keep up on a road march, gone same as a male. You will hump the exact same weight, can't do it, gone. They live in open squad bays with no privacy, welcome to the Marine Corps. Shower together, sheet together, urinate together, Port Side for a headcall, every swinging di*k and teet, you've got exactly two minutes then back on line. Do it! Platoon gets pitted, stop exercising and you've quit, you're gone, male/female all same/same. "But Sir, I'm female and we can't do as many push ups as the guys!" To bad sweet heart, Pvt. Schmuckatelli quit too, you're both gone. Pack your trash and report to the quarterdeck. Can't get over the wall or climb the rope on the "O" course, you failed that event, cry me a tear or two. Pack your trash, gone. Can't firemans carry Pvt. Lax, what do you expect when your fellow Marine is wounded in combat, pack your trash, gone. Can't get promoted young lady because your non-gender normed PT score gives you a lower cutting score, too bad, that's equality. Hell, the Marine Corps is only 7% female now, with Maybus' direction it could end up at .001%. That won't happen though because that's not fair (cough, cough, BS), the only way will be to implement lower standards and additional accommodations. There is no privacy or expectation there of in a Marine Corps rifle company, I can remember being at Camp Wilson the day we came out of the field after a couple weeks of C-Rats and everyone hadn't had a bowel movement in days. The head had two long rows of crappers, one along each wall, no stalls. I can remember maybe 50 guys in there trying to go. "Hey, Hart, give us a courtesy flush, damn man you need to go to the Doc and get checked. Something died in you." "Hey, man pass me the sports page." "OK, pass me the comics." "Hey, Coberg, come check this sheet out. Looks like a freakin' Anaconda. Damn, things almost coming over the lip of the commode." "Hey, anybody got some sheet paper? Hey, thanks man throw it over here."

    http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2016/01/06/marine-corps-boot-camp-job-titles-gender-neutral-april/78351756/
     
    George Patton likes this.
  13. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,887
    Likes Received:
    868
    I hope the enemy goes easy on them...
     
  14. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    5,945
    Likes Received:
    757
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    I know many have said "the standard is the standard..." but that doesn't matter to Progressive Leftists such as Mabry or the multitude of Minions of Ignorance in the Obama administration. They, instead, will be bigots, racists, sexists, or whatever it takes to give them the results they desire. Millions could die, the military could become ineffective, it could cost billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses, and none of that matters to them. What matters is that their dogma and their agenda is fulfilled.
    It is more important to them that the USMC, Army, whoever is their ideal reflection of society in terms of gender, race, sexual orientation, or whatever the issue de jour is for the Left. If unions are the working man's friend then by god you're going to be in a union regardless of the cost to you, the hit the company takes in productivity, etc. That is how the Left works.

    Does that sound insane? Well, it is. But, that too doesn't matter to the Left. Oppose them at your own risk. They will use every dirty trick in the book to eliminate you as an obstacle to their plan. You're competent and good, even exceptional, at what you do? Too bad for you, you have to go if you are holding up their dogmatic utopian ideas. That is how this will play out until Obama is out of office. If Shrillary gets in it will continue until the US military is so ineffective that it is obvious to a blind man and then all the Left's crappola will finally be tossed aside, not that they'll care.
     
  15. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    5,887
    Likes Received:
    868
    The US military has most of the best equipment...and its soldiers are as good if not better than any...even with this "watering down" the male equation will shoulder more and continue to do the job...you are right in saying that any failure (past and future) can be laid at the feet of the Gumbiment.
     
  16. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,617
    Likes Received:
    1,656
    Location:
    God's Country
  17. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,126
    Likes Received:
    565
  18. Poppy

    Poppy grasshopper Patron  

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    7,032
    Likes Received:
    604
    The Kurds don't seem to mind the ladies helping out. Maybe not quite the same, but still they help out a lot... And the nutters think if a woman kills them:
    @ under cover info
    https://undercoverinfo.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/kurdish-women-fighters-force-isis-on-defensive-at-kobani/
    What other things could we make up?...if a woman shoots at you, ur dick will fall off. Or, If a woman soldier gives you the evil eye- seven years bad luck...hmm, the possibilities are endless.
    It'd be cool to see a US women's brigade charging on sabre tooth tigers wearing only animal skins, and brass bra's.
    According to Enemy At The Gate :), Russian women managed ok as snipers. Pilots, tankers.
    Too bad we let them vote, though.
     
  19. mcoffee

    mcoffee Son-of-a-Gun(ner)

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    314
    "New physical standards established so women can compete for combat posts in the Marine Corps have weeded out many of the female hopefuls. But they're also disqualifying some men, according to data obtained by The Associated Press."

    "The results underscore the difficulties for women. Nearly 86 percent of the women failed the tests, compared to less than 3 percent of the men."

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article84983262.html
     
  20. Carronade

    Carronade Ace Patron  

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    2,357
    Likes Received:
    385
    3% actually looks pretty good to me. If no one ever failed, you'd have to wonder if the standard was strict enough. I'd say they have a good standard for the men, and for those women who can meet it.
     

Share This Page