Congressman Demands Navy Secretary's Resignation over Women in Combat. Do you agree or disagree?
And just to be clear, my angst in this issue has nothing to do with women in combat, and everything to do with a Service Secretary completely ignoring and undermining senior military leadership.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/09/18/congressman-demands-navy-secretarys-resignation-women-in-combat.html
Grrrrrr
And that's exactly what happened.
What we're seeing now is the proverbial moving of the goalposts. It's a betrayal of the Senior/Subordinate relationship. And it's something SecNav doesn't even realize he's done.
Appreciate the info Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
LCDR (Join to see) Here's the actual summary. Waiting for final report to come out, so I can dive into the data.
QòTÊÑi!åVåQÑlhØ=Æ2]éYg;5ÎærÎÿ#:$"yò:p3NH24K#)"!bìæUj§DtCH§~dtv*">]·Wm:Ð`Âh5ÚØACAØDiÃLíÁv4Ôy%w¶qµNDQÊåûÚTÔ*döwºpCªMFÒàÃñy#PO¡õVv%,;§µZ;um)6?mµéÖzâîã»ýû *m'=µVâÚÚ.lÃÕ5ý7U[ÐÝ?ßKµnýjÝÞÌ?»«»UªZ[ÝgäHd|"1^Öqä$I:!¿ÛêúÚÓôíZ!Âì!iÁaAtàB# A»jâLÛ=&IÐÀY!6ÌÆHgD-¡ãÇÂøGg@qÑ>r#ÙÄ$6ìèdtj"BÑÑ.H§JjDuGUÑ0Ú¿îé]jéÅ1ÒÛîa0ÞáL-&ÐAëj¡>ÓEØT!zÞÁÂì&AØBBACB"Ü"*¶8f$IN#D1qlK=fÆC8Ï Ù{ë_ª^'ÆÉgy*ÚuKIÔKÉÞUØù8(|q&=wõéiúqévÅ4Âq~ ôÔ"1ÚX&b:Aa0NÂiÆZ[ÝnÁ_§...
LCDR (Join to see)
We need more to make it truly valuable.
http://cdn.sandiegouniontrib.com/news/documents/2015/09/10/MCFIP_1.pdf
QòTÊÑi!åVåQÑlhØ=Æ2]éYg;5ÎærÎÿ#:$"yò:p3NH24K#)"!bìæUj§DtCH§~dtv*">]·Wm:Ð`Âh5ÚØACAØDiÃLíÁv4Ôy%w¶qµNDQÊåûÚTÔ*döwºpCªMFÒàÃñy#PO¡õVv%,;§µZ;um)6?mµéÖzâîã»ýû *m'=µVâÚÚ.lÃÕ5ý7U[ÐÝ?ßKµnýjÝÞÌ?»«»UªZ[ÝgäHd|"1^Öqä$I:!¿ÛêúÚÓôíZ!Âì!iÁaAtàB# A»jâLÛ=&IÐÀY!6ÌÆHgD-¡ãÇÂøGg@qÑ>r#ÙÄ$6ìèdtj"BÑÑ.H§JjDuGUÑ0Ú¿îé]jéÅ1ÒÛîa0ÞáL-&ÐAëj¡>ÓEØT!zÞÁÂì&AØBBACB"Ü"*¶8f$IN#D1qlK=fÆC8Ï Ù{ë_ª^'ÆÉgy*ÚuKIÔKÉÞUØù8(|q&=wõéiúqévÅ4Âq~ ôÔ"1ÚX&b:Aa0NÂiÆZ[ÝnÁ_§...
There has been a lot of socialization experiments within the military in the past few years. I am hoping for a more measured and thoughtful approach will be applied - legislated by Congress with input from the military.
Calls for Secretary Mabus to resign may be too early to do any real good. If he chooses to step aside that is another matter.
In addition to being an infantry officer I ma a trained and experienced operations research systems analyst (ORSA) which is military FA 49.
1st. I saw what happened to the women of the first class at USMA.
Background: The nations resources were focused, the media was ever present, there was a massive effort to get highly qualified women to apply and be accepted; laws and regulations were changed; standards were developed for cadet uniforms, haircuts, medical and physical fitness, and barracks were modified to make a safer environment for the women and to be able to afford the some privacy; and enough women were recruited so that they would have no less than two in 25% of the companies the 1st coed class. While our total class attrition rate was over 36%, the attrition among the women was over 50%.
2nd. I was part of the social experiment which began in 1975 the year before West Point at the USMA prep School where women were introduced for the first time.
The physical fitness and medical standards for women had been established and periodically modified since WWII. The standards for men and women have been different for physical fitness which makes sense. A lot of scientific research has gone into that.
3rd. The USMC has already weighed in on this issue. My paraphrases of their position based on the study is that there are positions already open to women, there are probably some women who would excel in the close combat units, and the USMC will introduce women into selected positions [equivalent of duty MOS] when it is prudent to do so.
4th. I stated that I do not support the unbridled opening of all USMC positions to women because I have seen what happens when the powers on high make a decree which seems reasonable to them but is not supported by the facts and/or funding to accomplish the stated objective. Introducing women into close combat positions needs to incremented on a case by case basis with women who are fully capable of the range of missions required brought into specific units I buddy teams.
You used "MENS standards" as a phrase is is inaccuate and disingenuous.
The second response is correct. They dis not perform at the same level "as a class." That is NOT discrimination. That is data analysis.
Someone can perform well, but not as well as others, and still be more injury prone "as a a class" without there being discrimination or disgust. You are inserting emotion where none is needed because you don't understand the report.
You need to learn how to analyze data and read the report correctly. You are inferring things which were not said in the report, and perpetuating bad information through use of terminology which is both vague and inaccurate, but most importantly not in the report.
Women are NOT lesser people, of course. But it is scientific, unarguable fact that the majority of women will have less physical strength than the majority of men. Of course there are exceptions. And those will be the ones that make it IF THEY WANT TO (because honestly, I don't see long lines of women lining up to be SF's, infantrymen, etc).