via the Washington Post.
So what’s held women back in the Marines Corps Infantry Officer Course? I absolutely agree that we shouldn’t reduce qualifications. For Marine infantry officers, mistakes mean risking the lives of the troops you are charged to protect. But I believe that I could pass, and that other women could pass, if the standards for men and women were equal from the beginning of their time with the Marines, if endurance and strength training started earlier than the current practice for people interested in going into the infantry, and if women were allowed a second try, as men are.Read the entire article here.
Female lieutenants aren’t as prepared as male lieutenants for the Infantry Officer Course’s tests of strength and endurance because they’ve been encouraged to train to lesser standards. Officer Candidates School, where all Marine officers start out, is segregated by sex. I was in an all-female platoon. We worked with the men on a few occasions but never competed with them. That was odd for me. As someone who grew up playing hockey on boys’ teams, I was used to facing off with the guys.
The Basic School, where I reported after graduating from Bowdoin College in 2012, has long been co-ed. But physical double standards persist. In the Physical Fitness Test, for example, a male perfect score is achieved by an 18-minute three-mile run, 20 pull-ups and 100 sit-ups in two minutes. A female perfect score is a 21-minute three-mile run, a 70-second flexed-arm hang and 100 sit-ups in two minutes. There was a move to shift from arm hangs to pull-ups for women last year. Yet 55 percent of female recruits were unable to meet the minimum of three, and the plan was put on hold.
I understand not wanting to discourage new recruits. But dual standards highlight and foster differences in a way that undercuts the goal of integrated military units. Women aren’t encouraged to establish the same mental toughness as men — rather, they’re told that they can’t compete. Men, meanwhile, are encouraged to perceive women as weak. I noticed that women were rarely chosen by their peers for some of the harder tasks in basic training.
Yes, men have biological advantages in tests of upper-body strength. But women can do pull-ups if given enough time to build that strength. (I did 16 in my last physical fitness test, and I have no illusions that I’m the most qualified female Marine.) Recognizing biologically based advantages and disadvantages and developing training programs that work to balance them are key.
My advice?
You didn't pass the test so stop making excuses. Life ain't fair, the Marine Corps didn't promise you roses and bitching don't make you better.
Get better.
Lead by example.
And shut the fuck up.
It isn't just about passing the "test" it is about sustaining those levels. It isn't about aggression either it is about having the physicality to back that aggression up to achieve the goal of overcoming the enemy. It isn't about stoicism either because not giving up until the bitter end is all well end and good but if your opponent's end point is much further away you are sunk and perhaps that means your team too.
ReplyDeleteA woman fighter pilot is a warrior but it takes different stuff than infanteering. A woman clerk in a camp under attack defending her position is in a different situation to a male marine out beyond the wire under fire. If these things are abundantly clear to me a civilian why aren't they clear to those who make the decisions?
I sincerely hope that there isn't horrific consequences to any of these decisions. As Mr Putin has demonstrated in a multi-polar world the threat of dirt bloody honest combat isn't too far away. Countries will ask their young men to go to far off places and kill other young men. Shame on a society that champions the right of its young women to do similar.
I respectfully but completely disagree. I say, it is a sign of a mature society who offers every part of this society the same rights. Which includes the right to go into combat, defend your country, brothers (and sisters) in your unit and get sometimes (unfortunately) killed by doing that.
DeleteDon't get me wrong: The standards should be the same for everybody. Same test for all. This will lead automatically (due to biology) to only a very small number of women who make the infantry officer test. Which reflects the reality developed by evolution: Males are in general the aggressive, territorial bunch and females are in general physically (and I assume psychically) less adapted to go into combat. But offering the same chances to everybody helps. And don't forget, that in some situations having a women in your unit might be an advantage:
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/female-special-operators-now-in-combat/
Coming back to the article: She failed. She should shut up.
You are wholly entitled to disagree with me but please don't speak in absolutes. How can you say a society is more or less mature by your metric? You have no purely objective fixed point of reference. There is no absolute index. You can'r compare one society model against another and say one is more mature than another. You are confusing your own standards for universal standards that don't exist.
DeleteAs for your link there is a difference between a formation taking a specialist along with them to conduct certain task and woman in the infantry. If you don't grasp that then there is little point in discussing the issue with you. A specialist can be anything from medic to a technician (EOD to comms) to an intelligence operative to even the likes of dog handlers and even embedded reporters. The latter may carry arms to defend themselves they are not infantry.
Females aren't aggressive and territorial? Really? Are you sure?
The trouble is that there is a likelihood that standards will be diluted if the pressure is kept up. That perceived rights will trump scientific facts for an existential cause fought by women who won't be knee deep in blood, sewage, and battlefield detritus because they will be too busy fighting the next cause from their computer keyboard while somebody else's sons and daughters die for something they championed. You don't run efficient systems on exceptions and that is what we are discussing here.
I found the article to be Pot Calling the Kettle Black the whole time.
DeleteIf you feel that you need to prepare yourself for Infantry Officers Course, than do so. I've found that if you really want to do something you go out, find yourself a group who wants the same thing and train with that group. The whole article she's talking about double standards, if you want to do the same standard than train to that standard.
As for her comment about men being chosen for a particular physical task, well yah i do the same damn thing for my own marines. "I need this stretcher with this 200lb marine carried....hmmm do i put my 135lb marines on it? or my 200lb marines??" well thats a easy choice. Stop bitching,
Mental Toughness? i know you went to OCS and TBS, but its the same as bootcamp, if you didnt establish some form of mental toughness while there, then start putting yourself in tough situations and develop it. Its why we train, get over the suck and embrace it.
in short, shut up, train, and maybe you can do it next time.
I agree @john
Delete@steve What I tried to say (but obviously failed) is: give everybody the chance to try to become a soldier in every desired task. But I also say: No exceptions or lowering standards. I want to be sure, that the person joining my unit is 100% capable to carry my lazy ass when I lost my right leg out of the line of fire.
And I agree, that the public pressure to make exceptions for females or even worse: lower standards is a shame.And this will lead into disaster.
Maybe I am really wrong regarding the territorial behavior of women ;)
By the way: I think its easy to compare society models on objective criteria. However declaring whether one society is "better/more mature" is indeed very subjective, as every society has some advantages or disadvantages
Cheers
War comes about through the failure of civilian systems. You cannot therefore by extension except civilian values to cross into or hold sway within the sphere of war. You cannot engineer systems inside out. Fairness belongs to the civilian world. By even entertaining the idea you are lowering standards. Google dimorphism.
DeleteOne of the few absolute I will say that you can measure a society is by how it seeks to mitigate its people's exposure to war. By your standards most 15 year old males I know should be available for military service.
I don't talk about fairness. War is per definition not fair. I talk about capability. If a women proves her capability, I take her along.
DeleteComing from a society who has until recently subjected every male between 18 and 45 for a distinct time into military service.. I would say.. yes. Every male is available to become a soldier (although I would prefer them a bit more mature then 15). And yes, I know, not everybody is suited for military service.
Looking for example to Israel, I would say although everybody has to perform military service (and seems to be exposed to war regularly), the society seems to work ok-ish.
I presume, that for example the Mongolic society around 1100 till 1250 would disagree to your "objective" measure.
In the end we are all children of our own societies and moral values..
The issue is much wider than whether one or two women can reach a standard. As I said systems can't be governed by exceptions.
DeleteAs for Israel as I said above I am not advocating excluding women from all exposure to harm. But there is a difference between frontline infantry work and policing actions. Go look where the Israeli female infantry unit is deployed. Further look at is makeup its gender balance.
At the end of the day all you are saying is your standards and differentials are different to mine. And I think I am saying the same to you! :)
It is complex issue.
Females have a different minimum standard. Nothing is stopping you from pushing harder. I've never seen a unit where a 3rd class PFT was acceptable, yet it met the minimum standard. Just because you can coast compared to others of your gender doesn't mean you should if you want to be infantry.
ReplyDeleteChanging the environment of infantry combat so women can attend.
ReplyDeleteChanging women to meet the combat environment.
Changing the rules and standards to enable women to attend combat despite the environment.
Winning the battle/war to enable the Nation to exist.
----
The Infantry combat environment is set by the enemy who will not adapt and change the combat conditions which will allow US Forces Women able to compete with men, make them equal to men, survive and defeat them.
Just because the US forces lower the standards that must be met to enable US forces to have women in combat Infantry jobs for social reasons does not change the basic fact that infantry combat is a terrible place to compete with men just because some folks want women to do what ever a man can do and better.
It's like gravity, you can add engine power and aerodynamics to enable an aircraft to overcome gravity, lowering the aircraft performance standards will cause the aircraft to submit to gravity which doesn't care that you lower the standards so a weaker designed aircraft can fly, once airborne the aircraft will deal with gravity which will not lower it's standards because gravity is a constant and deals with reality.
Changing the standards for women will not help those women when they are up to their asses in enemy troops bent on their destruction.
The feminist, liberals and the ones pushing this goat screw won't be there to help them when the women find themselves in a Peliliu type combat situation.
Compared to the general public, this 2nd LT is probably in phenomenal shape. Unfortunately for her, she is not competing against the general public, and not even really against the standards of the IOC.
ReplyDeleteShe is competing against all the male officers who are competing for the same job, and there is no shortage of male officers aspiring to lead Marine infantry. If she can't pass the same tests as them without exception, then somebody who does will get the job.
She is one pretty good looking Butter bar Lt if I might say so.
DeletereallY? all i see is LESBIAN written all over her face. and not a lipstick lesbian either.
Delete