Posted on Sep 11, 2015
Mixed-gender teams come up short in Marines' infantry experiment. What do you think?
47.8K
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
4
4
0
PO1 John Miller My answer to this issue is the same as always:
There are unassailable, in-arguable, scientific facts standing in the way of this doomed social experiment: typically speaking, women have less dense bones and muscles (blame God or evolution, take your pick, this is FACT, not misogyny), and less respiratory capacity. There are exceptions, so some rare, exceptional women are going to make it into these units (because the PC crowd will never stop until they do, no matter how many damaged female hips or joints it takes to get them there). But they will be few.
There are unassailable, in-arguable, scientific facts standing in the way of this doomed social experiment: typically speaking, women have less dense bones and muscles (blame God or evolution, take your pick, this is FACT, not misogyny), and less respiratory capacity. There are exceptions, so some rare, exceptional women are going to make it into these units (because the PC crowd will never stop until they do, no matter how many damaged female hips or joints it takes to get them there). But they will be few.
(4)
(0)
PO1 John Miller
SN Greg Wright
I agree, it is fact. But, if a woman CAN meet all the same standards and not need any extra assistance, they should be integrated. BUT, standards should not be lowered in any way.
I agree, it is fact. But, if a woman CAN meet all the same standards and not need any extra assistance, they should be integrated. BUT, standards should not be lowered in any way.
(3)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
Cpl Michael Oeser - You're ignoring the part where the incidents of injuries were higher for the women. Simple fact is, it's a numbers game. Throw enough women at it, and you'll find some that are successful, because there are always statistical outliers. This doesn't lessen their worth in any way. I'm just saying, they're going to be more rare.
(0)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
Cpl Michael Oeser - I have to disagree. They're failing it (for the most part) because their physical composition is different. Are you advocating lowering those standards?
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
I think that this "study" spent $36,000,000 to show what every 0369 that I know said in a survey that was sent out in 2012.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Jeez and why would that be? Could it be just Physical traits, could it be really Physiological? Could it be that's the way it is according to Created Creation? For me at least the Photo says it all, 3 marines occupied [wasting time] helping one female climb the obstacle, 'cause due to her shorter height/legs and lack of Muscle/bone mass and Strength she could not make it over first or on her own. The Military being a Rubber Stamp of the Politically Motivated Executive branch of Government, overseen by the other equally Politically Oriented branch aka Congress, have to do what they are told to do. And that is; give them a Pass or lower the Standards.
I think that only females that are Olympic/professional athletes like Rhonda Roussey, Lolo Jones, the Williams sisters, Jamaican sprinters, et al and others, could meet those Physical Standards. But then why would women like them choose/join the Military? Having said that however, I do admire them trying and their commitment. Anyways, at my age and being so out of shape even they can beat me to it thru and thru, but that would be a NON-accomplishment for them.
I think that only females that are Olympic/professional athletes like Rhonda Roussey, Lolo Jones, the Williams sisters, Jamaican sprinters, et al and others, could meet those Physical Standards. But then why would women like them choose/join the Military? Having said that however, I do admire them trying and their commitment. Anyways, at my age and being so out of shape even they can beat me to it thru and thru, but that would be a NON-accomplishment for them.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
It's a physical profession and as long as women are meeting the same standards, there shouldn't be a problem. If they are being held to a different physical standard then of course there is going to be a problem.
(3)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SSG (Join to see)
So the only consideration is the physical standards? Nothing about the combat readiness, unit cohesion, ETC? Just interested to hear your thoughts.
So the only consideration is the physical standards? Nothing about the combat readiness, unit cohesion, ETC? Just interested to hear your thoughts.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
MSG Brad Sand - I believe women are already held to the same standard when it comes to combat readiness. Unit cohesion shouldn't be an issue if the woman is pulling her weight, if it is then it's the leadership that has a problem. If she is unable to pull her own weight, she should be treated the same as a male in the same unit who isn't able to pull their weight.
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SSG (Join to see)
I don't disagree. I retired a couple years ago and didn't know that they changed the Female PT standards to match Male standards.
I don't disagree. I retired a couple years ago and didn't know that they changed the Female PT standards to match Male standards.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Not surprising when you understand the physiological differences between men and women. Stop the madness now!
(3)
(0)
Cpl Mark McMiller
Cpl Roger Shultz I agree. Sexual attraction is biological and not something that can be simply turned on and off; it is a distraction in a civilian workplace environment; it is a potentially deadly distraction in a combat environment. However, I still think the greater issue is whether or not women are physically capable.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
If they can hack it go for it but equal standards all the way around. No female standards vs male. Lets face it not all men are even cut out for the job. And as far as being a distraction? Pull your head out of your 4th point of contact and do your job. The "instincts" that are being talked about are not something that everyone has. You won't find me blubbering come crunch time that's just not me. I was in basic with those blubbering idiots who cried about not being able to have makeup or a curling iron. And I mean literal crying in formation. Wtf did they think they signed up for?
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
3
3
0
3
3
0
Maybe they will reach a compromise and have a all women's Infantry division. That way they can be a band of sisters and there won't be any males to compete with. lol
(3)
(0)
SPC Luis Mendez
There will be males in actual, real combat. Hopefully they'll be just another third world ragtag, undernourished, unhealthy, ill equipped, undertrained, drugged rabble like....mmm... never mind.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Hmm I will await the release of more detailed information.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google