Posted on Sep 11, 2015
Mixed-gender teams come up short in Marines' infantry experiment. What do you think?
47.7K
440
213
20
20
0
All-male ground combat teams outperformed their mixed-gender counterparts in nearly every capacity during a recent infantry integration test, Marine Corps officials revealed Thursday.
Data collected during a monthslong experiment showed Marine teams with female members performed at lower overall levels, completed tasks more slowly and fired weapons with less accuracy than their all-male counterparts. In addition, female Marines sustained significantly higher injury rates and demonstrated lower levels of physical performance capacity overall, officials said.
The troubling findings come as Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford prepares to make a crucial decision regarding the integration of female troops into closed combat roles. Faced with a Defense Department-wide mandate that will open all jobs to women by Jan. 1, he must decide whether to ask for specific exceptions to the mandate in order to preserve combat readiness. Officials said Dunford had met with Navy Secretary Ray Mabus about the decision but had yet to issue his recommendations.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/09/10/mixed-gender-teams-come-up-short-marines-infantry-experiment/71979146/
Long story but an interesting read. My take is two-fold. One, women simply don't have the experience that men do. That will (most likely) improve over time as women gain experience.
Two, women for the most part simply do not have the muscular strength and endurance that men do. That's basic physiology.
Data collected during a monthslong experiment showed Marine teams with female members performed at lower overall levels, completed tasks more slowly and fired weapons with less accuracy than their all-male counterparts. In addition, female Marines sustained significantly higher injury rates and demonstrated lower levels of physical performance capacity overall, officials said.
The troubling findings come as Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford prepares to make a crucial decision regarding the integration of female troops into closed combat roles. Faced with a Defense Department-wide mandate that will open all jobs to women by Jan. 1, he must decide whether to ask for specific exceptions to the mandate in order to preserve combat readiness. Officials said Dunford had met with Navy Secretary Ray Mabus about the decision but had yet to issue his recommendations.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/09/10/mixed-gender-teams-come-up-short-marines-infantry-experiment/71979146/
Long story but an interesting read. My take is two-fold. One, women simply don't have the experience that men do. That will (most likely) improve over time as women gain experience.
Two, women for the most part simply do not have the muscular strength and endurance that men do. That's basic physiology.
Women in the Military
Marine Corps
Infantry
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 78
49
49
0
They will keep wasting taxpayer dollars commissioning studies until they find one that tells them what they want to hear.
(49)
(0)
Cpl Christopher Bishop
I got nothing against the ladies (in fact I chase them around LOL) but Feminization has always been the last phase of the demise of any historically great civilization. That said, I got no issue with them wanting to become Infantrymen so long as they can do so without the Women's Lib movement trying to lower the standards. Now we already have used the Marine Corps which conducted their tests which resulted in the closing it down. Then almost as soon as the Corps says No, Army Ranger school opens it up, and also cant get many to pass related training.
After a while eventually somebody/some few will make it. Ok fine...but will they ever actually perform their duties as Rangers, or is it merely about the waste of government resources just so they can "earn their Tab" for promotion points without ever doing a day in the field? Now we got people "challenging" what decisions the Corps had made. They will keep pushing and pushing until one day they start dying or being captured and tortured (which men do from time to time), and likely raped/molested too, and then for them it will be Welcome to a Lifetime of VA PTSD meetings and such. Oh, but we'll all give them Front Of The Line "cutsies" because they got their POW medal/ribbon.
I've never wanted THAT one. I was honestly rather surprised when Trump made a comment about preferring those who don't get caught....at how there was such hostile reaction to it. If you're a POW, somewhere along the line there was a mission failure. I can barely believe how people wearing the uniform got butthurt about the comment. People that emotionally frail don't belong in the field in the first place. I do get the "keeping the utmost respect---for those who gave most if not all"... but being captured is never part of the goal of a mission. And of course if Trump is not military then its wrong for military to expect him to "walk-talk-think" like us all of the time...I'm sure he was just looking at a W-L record and preferring the Ws.
Not that I meant to turn this into a political debate here.
In the interest of being thorough, I'm going to add this. If we "men" don't like the idea of women filling what were once traditionally roles filled by men, then perhaps MORE GOOD MEN are needed, keeping those positions full to the point that entertaining Women In Combat MOS(s) isn't even considered needed or useful. Its starts with fathers not abandoning their youngsters...and women not kicking them out, either. Too many single parents, usually ladies, are producing weak men.
The question is no longer about Why Do Other Nations HATE Us....but rather Why Do They No Longer FEAR Us?" I'll submit the short answer with this paragraph above.
Semper Fi.
After a while eventually somebody/some few will make it. Ok fine...but will they ever actually perform their duties as Rangers, or is it merely about the waste of government resources just so they can "earn their Tab" for promotion points without ever doing a day in the field? Now we got people "challenging" what decisions the Corps had made. They will keep pushing and pushing until one day they start dying or being captured and tortured (which men do from time to time), and likely raped/molested too, and then for them it will be Welcome to a Lifetime of VA PTSD meetings and such. Oh, but we'll all give them Front Of The Line "cutsies" because they got their POW medal/ribbon.
I've never wanted THAT one. I was honestly rather surprised when Trump made a comment about preferring those who don't get caught....at how there was such hostile reaction to it. If you're a POW, somewhere along the line there was a mission failure. I can barely believe how people wearing the uniform got butthurt about the comment. People that emotionally frail don't belong in the field in the first place. I do get the "keeping the utmost respect---for those who gave most if not all"... but being captured is never part of the goal of a mission. And of course if Trump is not military then its wrong for military to expect him to "walk-talk-think" like us all of the time...I'm sure he was just looking at a W-L record and preferring the Ws.
Not that I meant to turn this into a political debate here.
In the interest of being thorough, I'm going to add this. If we "men" don't like the idea of women filling what were once traditionally roles filled by men, then perhaps MORE GOOD MEN are needed, keeping those positions full to the point that entertaining Women In Combat MOS(s) isn't even considered needed or useful. Its starts with fathers not abandoning their youngsters...and women not kicking them out, either. Too many single parents, usually ladies, are producing weak men.
The question is no longer about Why Do Other Nations HATE Us....but rather Why Do They No Longer FEAR Us?" I'll submit the short answer with this paragraph above.
Semper Fi.
(8)
(0)
Cpl Daniel Meredith
"Ok, been silent long enough on this. I have been a part of this process from the beginning and I am just going to put it out there. The Secretary of the Navy is way off base on this and to say the things he is saying is is flat out counter to the interests of national security and is unfair to the women who participated in this study. We selected our best women for this test unit, selected our most mature female leaders as well. The men (me included) were the most progressive and open minded that you could get. The commander of this unit was a seasoned and successful infantryman. The XO of this unit was as good as they get, so good the USMC made her the CO of the Officer candidate school. I just selected the SgtMaj of the unit to head up our senior enlisted academy at Camp Lejeune, NC. No one went in to this with the mentality that we did not want this to succeed. No Marine, regardless of gender would do that. With our limited manpower we cannot afford to not train eveyone to the best of their abilities. This was as stacked as a unit could get with the best Marines to give it a 100 percent success rate as we possibly could. End result? The best women in The GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below in most all cases to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study. They are slower on all accounts in almost every technical and tactical aspect and physically weaker in every aspect across the range of military operations. SECNAV has stated that he has made his mind up even before the release of these results and that the USMC test unit will not change his mind on anything. Listen up folks. Your senior leadership of this country does not want to see America overwhelmingly succeed on the battlefield, it wants to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to persue whatever they want regardless of the outcome on national security. The infantry is not Ranger School. That is just a school like any other school and is not a feeder specifically to the infantry. Anyone can go to that school that meets the prereqs, just like airborne school. Kudos to the two women who graduated. They are badasses in their own right. In regards to the infantry….there is no trophy for second place. You perform or die. Make no mistake. In this realm, you want your fastest, most fit, most physical and most lethal person you can possibly put on the battlefield to overwhelm the enemy’s ability to counter what you are throwing at them and in every test case, that person has turned out to be a man. There is nothing gender biased about this, it is what it is. You will never see a female Quarterback in the NFL, there will never be a female center on any NHL team and you will never see a female batting in the number 4 spot for the New York Yankees. It is what it is. As a country we preach equality. But to place these mandates on the military before this country has even considered making females register, just like males, for the selective service is in all aspects out of touch with reality. Equality and equal opportunity start before you raise your right hand and swear and oath to this country. Yes, we are an all volunteer force at the moment. Should this country however need to mobilize rapidly again to face the threats of the world like our grandfathers did, it will once again look to the military age males of this country to fill the ranks because last I checked, we did not require women to register for the selective service. Until that happens, we should not even be wasting our time even thinking about opening up the infantry to women."
-Justin D. LeHew, the Sergeant Major of the Training and Education Command
-Justin D. LeHew, the Sergeant Major of the Training and Education Command
(7)
(0)
Sgt Jamie Grippin
I totally agree. The secretary didn't like the results therefore the study must be bad. It wasn't mentioned that the Marines had previously put together a platoon of women together to see if there was a way to train them up to the same standards as their male counterparts. The average woman is not going to compete on the same field as the average man anymore than the professional female athlete is going to compete equally with male professional athletes. Biology is biology.
(2)
(0)
25
25
0
PO1 John Miller
I think they were missing a third group...at least...for a fair and impartial experiment. They should have had at least one group of all females. Women are going to cut less slack for other women, in my opinion and experience, and I believe this would show another layer to the study...if they were actually interested in find out about women in combat. Of course, no one is interested in a fair and impartial experiment, and this is going to happen and all the services were given their marching orders a long time ago. Of course this is going to cause more death and destruction across the Armed Forces in the next major conflict, but particularly in the Marines and Army, so of course the Marines want to be able to point fingers at other when the American people are horrified by their baby girls being blown apart. So kudos to the Marines for having the fore thought to have this report ready to say, 'We told you so'.
I think they were missing a third group...at least...for a fair and impartial experiment. They should have had at least one group of all females. Women are going to cut less slack for other women, in my opinion and experience, and I believe this would show another layer to the study...if they were actually interested in find out about women in combat. Of course, no one is interested in a fair and impartial experiment, and this is going to happen and all the services were given their marching orders a long time ago. Of course this is going to cause more death and destruction across the Armed Forces in the next major conflict, but particularly in the Marines and Army, so of course the Marines want to be able to point fingers at other when the American people are horrified by their baby girls being blown apart. So kudos to the Marines for having the fore thought to have this report ready to say, 'We told you so'.
(25)
(0)
Cpl Jeffery Reiber
The thought of the third group, while interesting, is unrealistic in my opinion since during operations it would be a mixed group. Unless, Of course you put them into a femal only Platoon/company, and wouldn't mind them screaming about bias and segregation because we all know from the mantra thats been quoted for the last 20 years "women are just as good as men in every aspect." Thats why we dont have separate events in the olympics right?
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
Cpl Jeffery Reiber
I do not believe anyone in the study was not aware it was a study. IF you were part of the study and you were a woman, and you looked around and saw your team, squad, platoon, or company was all women, I think you would be able to figure out what group you were and not be concerned about bias or segregation...and if they were, that would be one of the highlighted bullet points in the study.
I do not believe anyone in the study was not aware it was a study. IF you were part of the study and you were a woman, and you looked around and saw your team, squad, platoon, or company was all women, I think you would be able to figure out what group you were and not be concerned about bias or segregation...and if they were, that would be one of the highlighted bullet points in the study.
(0)
(0)
SSG Walter Corretjer
I have been saying this for a long time already, about the women downperformace, in rolls that require: stregth,desterity,resistance,
accuracy and good judgement,under the stress of direct combat,and specially on those situations, were close hand to hand encounters,could be met.
The aforemention scenario apply to any kind mission,independently of branch or specialty,were direct combat areas are known to exist.
accuracy and good judgement,under the stress of direct combat,and specially on those situations, were close hand to hand encounters,could be met.
The aforemention scenario apply to any kind mission,independently of branch or specialty,were direct combat areas are known to exist.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Elizabeth Koeneman
I have said before, if they want females in infantry, make an all-female unit. Not being sexist, but men are somewhat hard-wired to protect the females. A mixed unit like that will never succeed because too many men will get hurt/killed trying to protect the women.
(0)
(0)
15
15
0
It is very surprising that female Marines who lacked prior combat arms training would fail to perform as well as male Marines who received such training. (Sarcasm, hooah.) Obviously, there were two major variables-gender and prior combat arms experience. It would be imprudent to draw broad conclusions from this experiment, especially since some of the tasks (such as weapons marksmanship) do not advantage males in any clear way.
(15)
(0)
Cpl Brad MarkW
Maj (Join to see) - The article below has been posted and re-posted several times. I'll summarize - The best women were hand selected to stack the deck as much as possible. The entire exercise was setup up for success - the results? Integrated units did not perform as well as non. What is left to argue?
"Ok, been silent long enough on this. I have been a part of this process from the beginning and I am just going to put it out there. The Secretary of the Navy is way off base on this and to say the things he is saying is is flat out counter to the interests of national security and is unfair to the women who participated in this study. We selected our best women for this test unit, selected our most mature female leaders as well. The men (me included) were the most progressive and open minded that you could get. The commander of this unit was a seasoned and successful infantryman. The XO of this unit was as good as they get, so good the USMC made her the CO of the Officer candidate school. I just selected the SgtMaj of the unit to head up our senior enlisted academy at Camp Lejeune, NC. No one went in to this with the mentality that we did not want this to succeed. No Marine, regardless of gender would do that. With our limited manpower we cannot afford to not train eveyone to the best of their abilities. This was as stacked as a unit could get with the best Marines to give it a 100 percent success rate as we possibly could. End result? The best women in The GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below in most all cases to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study. They are slower on all accounts in almost every technical and tactical aspect and physically weaker in every aspect across the range of military operations. SECNAV has stated that he has made his mind up even before the release of these results and that the USMC test unit will not change his mind on anything. Listen up folks. Your senior leadership of this country does not want to see America overwhelmingly succeed on the battlefield, it wants to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to persue whatever they want regardless of the outcome on national security. The infantry is not Ranger School. That is just a school like any other school and is not a feeder specifically to the infantry. Anyone can go to that school that meets the prereqs, just like airborne school. Kudos to the two women who graduated. They are badasses in their own right. In regards to the infantry….there is no trophy for second place. You perform or die. Make no mistake. In this realm, you want your fastest, most fit, most physical and most lethal person you can possibly put on the battlefield to overwhelm the enemy’s ability to counter what you are throwing at them and in every test case, that person has turned out to be a man. There is nothing gender biased about this, it is what it is. You will never see a female Quarterback in the NFL, there will never be a female center on any NHL team and you will never see a female batting in the number 4 spot for the New York Yankees. It is what it is. As a country we preach equality. But to place these mandates on the military before this country has even considered making females register, just like males, for the selective service is in all aspects out of touch with reality. Equality and equal opportunity start before you raise your right hand and swear and oath to this country. Yes, we are an all volunteer force at the moment. Should this country however need to mobilize rapidly again to face the threats of the world like our grandfathers did, it will once again look to the military age males of this country to fill the ranks because last I checked, we did not require women to register for the selective service. Until that happens, we should not even be wasting our time even thinking about opening up the infantry to women."
-Justin D. LeHew, the Sergeant Major of the Training and Education Command
"Ok, been silent long enough on this. I have been a part of this process from the beginning and I am just going to put it out there. The Secretary of the Navy is way off base on this and to say the things he is saying is is flat out counter to the interests of national security and is unfair to the women who participated in this study. We selected our best women for this test unit, selected our most mature female leaders as well. The men (me included) were the most progressive and open minded that you could get. The commander of this unit was a seasoned and successful infantryman. The XO of this unit was as good as they get, so good the USMC made her the CO of the Officer candidate school. I just selected the SgtMaj of the unit to head up our senior enlisted academy at Camp Lejeune, NC. No one went in to this with the mentality that we did not want this to succeed. No Marine, regardless of gender would do that. With our limited manpower we cannot afford to not train eveyone to the best of their abilities. This was as stacked as a unit could get with the best Marines to give it a 100 percent success rate as we possibly could. End result? The best women in The GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below in most all cases to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study. They are slower on all accounts in almost every technical and tactical aspect and physically weaker in every aspect across the range of military operations. SECNAV has stated that he has made his mind up even before the release of these results and that the USMC test unit will not change his mind on anything. Listen up folks. Your senior leadership of this country does not want to see America overwhelmingly succeed on the battlefield, it wants to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to persue whatever they want regardless of the outcome on national security. The infantry is not Ranger School. That is just a school like any other school and is not a feeder specifically to the infantry. Anyone can go to that school that meets the prereqs, just like airborne school. Kudos to the two women who graduated. They are badasses in their own right. In regards to the infantry….there is no trophy for second place. You perform or die. Make no mistake. In this realm, you want your fastest, most fit, most physical and most lethal person you can possibly put on the battlefield to overwhelm the enemy’s ability to counter what you are throwing at them and in every test case, that person has turned out to be a man. There is nothing gender biased about this, it is what it is. You will never see a female Quarterback in the NFL, there will never be a female center on any NHL team and you will never see a female batting in the number 4 spot for the New York Yankees. It is what it is. As a country we preach equality. But to place these mandates on the military before this country has even considered making females register, just like males, for the selective service is in all aspects out of touch with reality. Equality and equal opportunity start before you raise your right hand and swear and oath to this country. Yes, we are an all volunteer force at the moment. Should this country however need to mobilize rapidly again to face the threats of the world like our grandfathers did, it will once again look to the military age males of this country to fill the ranks because last I checked, we did not require women to register for the selective service. Until that happens, we should not even be wasting our time even thinking about opening up the infantry to women."
-Justin D. LeHew, the Sergeant Major of the Training and Education Command
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
1LT Scott D. - ... But they haven't to have some formal infantry training to make it through boot camp... Right? Not saying you are wrong, Sir but don't all Marines have to go through the School of the Infantry?
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
MAJ (Join to see) - Sir, correct me if I am wrong but don't all male Marines have to go through the School of Infantry? That whole every Marine a rifleman?
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
1LT Scott D. - True, Sir. Though honestly I would like to see an Army version of this test. I personally don't see why females would be a good idea in what is essentially America's assault troops
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google