How long until IOC standards are lowered?

2015-04-25T13:08:55-04:00

Females couldn't make it through the Marine IOC. Is that stopping the push? Absolutely not. Now they are saying 'we aren't expecting Marines to lower standards, but they need to justify why standards are so high'.
That's Liberal talk for 'we are getting the standards lowered'. If they can't pass the fair way, they'll cheat. This is nothing new with the Feminist Movement. When they were talking about putting women in the Marines, this same sort of double talk was occurring. Eventually, there was a middle ground met. They didn't want an influx of Sub-Par Marines, so women got their own Fitness Standards. Now, lowering standards across the board is their only option to get Women into Infantry Officer positions. Otherwise it's a PR nightmare to say 'women can't do it, but in order to force them through, they need easier standards'
......it's only through complete P.C. Arrogance that someone would ask why STANDARDS are so high. And this is typically coming from Civilians, or female military personnel who got in by having a second set of easier standards.
.....in my opinion, just having this conversation means the conversation is lost. They are going to lower standards and a lot of people will unnecessarily die. Welcome to the New Corps.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2015 4:51 PM

2015-04-25T16:51:30-04:00

I just don't think this will be happen. How an you justify unit ready by lowering standards. It is a battle that they will lose.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Apr 25 at 2015 5:32 PM

2015-04-25T17:32:01-04:00

The Corps' been preparing for this fight from the beginning. That's why we did so many experiments. Non of the female Marines who attempted want any of the standards lowered. None of the Commanders are entertaining the possibility. We'll be the ones to keep the standards high, we always have been. We will continue to be.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2015 6:57 PM

2015-04-25T18:57:53-04:00

Personal opinion: If the standards are set, let em stay set. Don't lower them just because someone can't pass them. If the individuals can't pass the standards, as they are, then great job to them. I have seen a lot of changes already since I joined. They use to medically discharge people in BCT. Now, it seems they get leave to come home and recover then they try to keep them. If they can, great. But when they deploy and it's the same person going to sick call for "that" issue- maybe they should have done the medical discharge like they use too. I'm with you- don't lower them

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 25 at 2015 8:35 PM

2015-04-25T20:35:40-04:00

They'll take the study of IOC, look at the individual tests, and determine which tests are necessary, and which are not.

It's that simple. "If" a test is considered to be "unnecessarily restrictive" Congress will ask the Services about it.

As it stands, IOC itself is still a gender neutral course. It's just tougher for one segment of the population. Just like Intel School is going to be tougher for one segment of the population, or any other school is going to be tougher for one segment of the population.

It still allows women, because it still allows women applicants for the Ground Intel Officer (0203), to which that course is a requirement. As Capt Richard I P. said, the USMC has prepared for this discussion (it's not a fight) with Congress for a long time.

I don't even thing anyone, of any worth, is even opposed to it. The standard is the standard. Pass the course, and it opens up the billet. We just haven't had anyone pass the course.

What we have had however, is women pass the ITB program. They found it more difficult than the men. But I remember when MCT was opened up to women, and I remember all these same for lack of a better word, bullshit arguments being said back then too. I don't know how many 1940~ vet's we have on RP, but I bet they remember similar arguments when females were entered into the rolls of the Marine Corps then.

One thing of note then, when they started coming up with all the special names for female sailors, and soldiers, like WAVES, and WACs, etc, the Commandant said "We just have Marines."

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2015 10:13 PM

2015-04-25T22:13:06-04:00

I'm admittedly pessimistic about standards being maintained, whether its with the IOC or Ranger school. Much like 1LT Scott D. said, I think they'll lower the standards until they get the numbers that our civilian leadership desires. The impression I get is that it's more important for our force to mirror their ideal worldview than it is for us to be effective.

Response by Cpl Robert Masi made Apr 27 at 2015 8:27 AM

2015-04-27T08:27:58-04:00

In reality, I say the best defense is a good offense. The reason why women don't have to sign up for the draft, is because they don't hold combat billets.
I say, bring it to the American people. Give them a choice. Women in Combat MOS's and ALL women sign for the Draft, or no.....,when Democrats and Liberals are faced with real consequences BEFORE anyone dies, I call that a rare win. Because let's be honest, that's where this nonsense push is coming from.

Response by Sgt Sasha Cruz made Apr 28 at 2015 12:47 PM

2015-04-28T12:47:19-04:00

Cpl Robert Masi , overall, it almost sounds like you have a general dis-agreement with women in military. With statements like "If they can't pass the fair way, they'll cheat." and "They didn't want an influx of Sub-Par Marines, so women got their own Fitness Standards." i did not "cheat' when I joined and graduated boot camp, I passed all the same tests, drill, crucible, rifle range. And I have come across quite a few women on active duty that can out-do a lot of the men on the fitness performance with the MALE standards. Does that mean that the men that are weaker than them are sub-par? I wouldn't say so. What you're also not accounting for, is that the difference in the fitness test was done not because women are "weaker" as you put it, but have different physical build and muscle distribution.

With that said, no, I don't agree with lowering standards to allow women to join. If they want to be a part of that specific MOS, they need to train, and get there physically.

Response by 1stLt Dave Bell made Aug 18 at 2015 6:55 PM

2015-08-18T18:55:36-04:00

I totally agree...we are headed for "different standards" or some other Orwellian term to change IOC. The military is now a social engineering experiment and it is far from done.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 19 at 2015 8:45 PM

2015-08-19T20:45:11-04:00

Here is my point in a nut shell. we need qualified, motivated people in the Combat Arms. I don't care what their Gender is, or Race, or Nationality or sexual preference. I need someone who can do THEIR JOB!
As a wise NCO told me years ago, know your Job, Do your job.

The world is full of threats, we need smart, competent leaders who can lead no matter the gender !

And a final point: Female Service members have been serving in impromptu combat Arms roles in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Enemy attacks doesnt see race or gender- they want to KILL ALL OF US.