"Four Women Pass Marine Corps Infantry Test For The First Time" Army headed in same direction?

Participating in combat operations is not the same thing as being trained, equipped and deployed for the purpose of offensive combat operations in combat arms specialties.  Defensive perimeter patrols and manning a turret for security are not the same. 

Is the object here equality?  Okay, let's drop bifurcated fitness standards for men and women.  Why should women be able to take a substantially easier fitness test and get the same/better consideration for promotion than a man--and if you think that making fitness tests easier for everyone is the answer you already show your bias.  Why are women not required to register with the selective service in order to receive federal educational benefits?  Is anyone railing for equal treatment under the law in these respects?

When a man enlists he is usually given a first, second and third choice for MOS preference.  Even if infantry is listed nowhere, many men find themselves in the 0300/XXB occ-field.  Now they are expected to serve alongside and rely upon people who are inherently physically weaker and frail, and this increases risk to life and limb.  If weaker team members only got themselves killed that would be one thing, but this is not the case. 

In other endeavors these differences are acknowledged.  In which sports do women compete for top ranks with men.  Boxing?  Women can qualify for male weight classes--why is this not being pursued?  Basketball?  Let's unite women's college basketball and the WNBA with men's programs.  Football? (Right.) 

But let's look at less strenuous sports.  Women don't even compete with men in golf, bowling or curling.  When I noticed that women and men don't compete with one another in top tier curling I was baffled.

Rowing is a very good example.  Not only do men and women not participate together, women's' times are consistently lengthier than men's'.  Even more relevant: stress fractures to the ribs are very common among women in crew--their skeletons are less able to endure the same strain as men in the SAME sport. (Even though they are slower.)  It is a fact that women, though mentally tough, are physiologically weaker and more frail.  This isn't a bigoted rant; it is science.  Basic science.

This doesn't mean that there aren't some women who can't out perform some, or even most men, in certain physical tasks, but the fact that these cases are very exceptional proves my point.

 Offensive combat ops are extremely physical and, at times, push military personnel beyond their training.  Relevant, objective objections to women's inclusion within the infantry are not the same as reasons utilized in arguments against integration of persons of diverse ethnicity or sexual orientation.

When I was in, I consistently performed 20 dead hang pull-ups, over 60 sit-ups in less than 2 minutes and ran 3 miles in under 18 minutes to earn points towards cutting score.  Where are the politicians/civil rights activists clamoring to give women the same opportunity to prove themselves by the same tests as men? (Queue crickets chirping here.)

...that's what I thought.  (For the record, civil rights activists have maintained that requiring women to meet the same physical standards as men is an exclusionary practice--which is an acknowledgment that women are inherently physically weaker and more frail.)

Let's keep in mind that we are currently discussing these issues in desert conditions.  I have participated in combat ops in forests, jungles--both in Asia and Central/South America--as well as deserts.  At times I had to carry up to three radios, two PRC 77's and an FM--for coordinating air.  And let's not forget the encryption gear.  Let's see these women hump in Panama and Honduras under these conditions.  Mount Mammer-Jammer and a certain Ridge near San Onifre seemed demanding at the time, but the rigors of SOI didn't compare to duties actually performed in the FMF.  

These women's SOI graduations are not strides in equality; they are a tribute to making exceptions in the name of inequality--that is, a tribute to hypocrisy.

Require women, across the board, to register with the selective service, require women to meet the same physical standards as men--without making tests easier, and put female recruits in the same pool for occ-field selection as men--those would be steps towards true equality.  (This should be the order in which these steps should be implemented.)

What we see here is a dog and pony show that will make our Corps less combat effective and result in unnecessary casualties.

Ok we really need to dispel this myth of equality.  Equality in importance, but not in ability.  Women in the Military are crucially important, their roles are just as important as that Grunt on patrol.  Men and Women ARE NOT equal in ability, it has been physiologically proven and psychologically proven.  Yes there will always be exceptions, but they are not the rule.

If Women want the Blue Cord and the Crossed Rifles, go for it, but it would be in the best interests of our Military to have segregated Infantry units.

Our military and its leadership is liberalizing right now. Its not about being combat effective, its about being "Diverse". With that said, our government would much rather see a dead 'diversified' platoon with males and females .... then a living platoon of all males. If our government cared about being combat effective first, this females in combat arms debate would have never started to begin with.

Science has proven then Men as a whole are physically different then females as a whole. Our leadership believes that wasting the millions of dollars sorting out which females can and cant do combat arms, then making them their own separate standard for PT, makes much more sense then the system already in place.

Give it a couple years, and they will start letting people with Asthma and Diabetes in the military because its "Unfair" to them.

Ok, I have two options on this topic. Great that a female Soldier
can keep up with the guys in the Infantry got it.

Where my two concerns come into play:

One,  A psychological
mindset, not about women in uniform, but the men.  Reason being is there have been training scenarios
applied to a combat zone where there are three Soldiers down with injuries, two
males one female, two females one male, etc.. Each scenario had the males having a
higher risk injury than females, resulting in females being attended to first
with the minor injuries. It is hard wired in a male’s brain that when we see a
female in danger, hurt or in need of help, that men are more likely to help a
woman before we help another male counterpart.  Example car broke down on the side of the
road, men are more likely to stop and see if a female needs help, compared to a
lower rate if the car on the side of the road belonged to a man, and the same
principle applies in the Army and combat.  A male Soldier will instinctively go and treat
the female Soldier first even though a male Soldier has injuries that maybe more
life threatening resulting in the Army having more causalities, which could have
been prevented.

Two, I serve in the Army Field Artillery.  Currently I’m on a Paladin, a tracked
howitzer. My Soldiers and I live inside this vehicle anywhere from a week until
mission complete, this could be a day, week, month, 3 months, 6 months depends
on the conflict.  Yes the female hygiene
could be a task in its self.  Not trying
to sound like a smart ass, but I could have my Soldiers put a bag over their
head or blindfold themself while my female Soldiers change into a new uniform,
or goes to the bathroom using a bucket inside my gun, that’s practical right ?
Saying she is ok with it of course?  Next
comes the work, Infantry yes they do a lot of walking with rucksacks and yes it
can be strenuous,(not comparing MOS’s by any means) but inside my Gun, I will
have 104 lb rounds, (which is about 80% of a females body weight saying the
average female is 130lbs) that need to be picked up from the floor and loaded
to about the height of your shoulders nonstop during fire missions, the slower
my rounds go down range the higher the possibility that Soldiers who are
calling for fire will die.  I also have
an ammo vehicle that needs to be loaded, it carries a triple digit number of
these rounds that are also 100lbs plus, all being loaded by hand, and has to be
done within 30 minutes for our time standard to be met.

So in my OPINION, no one elses. I’m saying from a Section Chief point of view in a Field
Artillery MOS.  That if a female Soldier
can do, wants to do, what we do, how we do it, then let’s go, I'm about making
the Army as strong as possible as long as possible.  I don’t have time for gimmicks and recreating
the wheel.  I’m about putting rounds down
range in a timely and accurately way without skipping a beat, but if this all
about politics leave it at the door, only serious inquires please respond, this
is not a “or best offer” type of situation, you either have it, or your don’t.