Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Marines’ mixing of men and women in combat experiment gets mixed results

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Marines’ mixing of men and women in combat experiment gets mixed results

    Marines’ mixing of men and women in combat experiment gets mixed results

    By Thomas Gibbons-Neff
    The Washington Post
    © September 9, 2015

    Over the past nine months, the Marine Corps tested a gender-integrated task force in both Twentynine Palms, Calif. and Camp Lejeune, N.C. in an attempt to gauge what the Marine Corps might look like with women in combat roles.

    According to a recent report in the Marine Corps Times, only a small number of women were left by the experiment’s conclusion -- two of the roughly two dozen that started -- mostly in part because of the physical and mental stress that comes with combat rolls. Both the men and women in the task force also reported a break down in unit cohesion with some voicing a perceived unequal treatment from their peers.
    Read the rest here - http://hamptonroads.com/2015/09/mari...478.1410618841

  • #2
    I don't get the fuss. Are American women (or men for that matter) wired that differently? Some states around the world are simply too small to exclude women from certain branches of the military; maybe they make a virtue of necessity but Norway's forces for instance haven't run into the same kind of problems.

    Comment


    • #3
      No fuss, just reality. This is yet another example of how men and women are not the "same", they are different. If you are able to use a computer, log-on to this web-site and can't understand those natural differences, no one can help you. Norway is, well Norway. They are not the standard with which one can mirror their nation on for a number of reasons. As I have stated numerous times before, what is 'good' for one nation, may not be 'good' for another. Simple.

      I salute the 'Corp for spending time on this study and they only validated what has been discovered before, men and women are different. (hell, men themselves are different, some run fast, some swim fast, etc.) Many of us would have NO problem with allowing women into these positions (which women are not clamoring for, to begin with) we already know by experience what the USMC just verified. Our problem is that the feeble-minded want to ram this through not realizing (nor do they really care) that most women cannot meet the basic entrance standards for these various specialties. Let alone complete the entire course of training, IQ alone is not the subsequent determining factor. Yes, two made it through the study, TWO! (small return on such a large investment.) Two in the ranks, that is fine with us, problem is, we know the political bureaucrats and DoD senior leadership won't be happy with that number. In particular, if in five years all there are a few women, a year completing these courses. That will not provide the needed "equality" these yahoos envision. So the powers that be will have standards "modified" in order to allow more women to pass.

      Let me state again, right now, each branch of service has its own Physical Fitness Test (PFT) or Physical Training (PT) test (some specialties/rates have their own, in addition to the branch-specific test) These tests have been segregated into Male and Female categories, the next is by Age. For example: a 50-year old man does not have complete what a 21 year old man has too. So, pray tell, with formula can they produce that makes it the same for men and women!? I have yet to see it. If you have to run 4 miles in 30 minutes, then that's the requirement! You cannot produce some "gender-neutral' matrix that will apply to both sexes. (not without lowering the callisthenic repetition, swim distance/times or run,ruck distance/time)

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by haze99 View Post
        They are not the standard with which one can mirror their nation on for a number of reasons.
        Reasons like…?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by haze99 View Post
          No fuss, just reality. This is yet another example of how men and women are not the "same", they are different. If you are able to use a computer, log-on to this web-site and can't understand those natural differences, no one can help you. Norway is, well Norway. They are not the standard with which one can mirror their nation on for a number of reasons. As I have stated numerous times before, what is 'good' for one nation, may not be 'good' for another. Simple.

          I salute the 'Corp for spending time on this study and they only validated what has been discovered before, men and women are different. (hell, men themselves are different, some run fast, some swim fast, etc.) Many of us would have NO problem with allowing women into these positions (which women are not clamoring for, to begin with) we already know by experience what the USMC just verified. Our problem is that the feeble-minded want to ram this through not realizing (nor do they really care) that most women cannot meet the basic entrance standards for these various specialties. Let alone complete the entire course of training, IQ alone is not the subsequent determining factor. Yes, two made it through the study, TWO! (small return on such a large investment.) Two in the ranks, that is fine with us, problem is, we know the political bureaucrats and DoD senior leadership won't be happy with that number. In particular, if in five years all there are a few women, a year completing these courses. That will not provide the needed "equality" these yahoos envision. So the powers that be will have standards "modified" in order to allow more women to pass.

          Let me state again, right now, each branch of service has its own Physical Fitness Test (PFT) or Physical Training (PT) test (some specialties/rates have their own, in addition to the branch-specific test) These tests have been segregated into Male and Female categories, the next is by Age. For example: a 50-year old man does not have complete what a 21 year old man has too. So, pray tell, with formula can they produce that makes it the same for men and women!? I have yet to see it. If you have to run 4 miles in 30 minutes, then that's the requirement! You cannot produce some "gender-neutral' matrix that will apply to both sexes. (not without lowering the callisthenic repetition, swim distance/times or run,ruck distance/time)
          One of the biggest issues is always logistics. The reality is that women should have separate latrines, showers, lodging, etc., in a base camp. To set up a duplicate set of these facilities, albeit smaller, just to accommodate 2 out of say 100 people makes no sense.

          Comment


          • #6
            Applaud the Marines on doing such a test, and fairly assessing the results.

            I chimed in on this issue over at MP.net, give it a go again here.

            What the Marine Corps and the participants in this trial observe is similar to what I did while I was in the Army.

            Our Brigade Enlisted barracks was essentially a trailer park in the middle of the desert. Flat, with open fields usually along battalion organizational lines.
            http://www.ls3p.com/wp-content/uploa...8-1250x430.jpg
            (What it largely looked like when I was there, has developed in the photo and since.)


            This Smartass Soldier image isn't a joke, I saw this occur more than once. Where this story comes into relevance with this subject is I saw these fights begin internally within a battalion twice, and only once between two separate battalions. The former battalion was integrated (Brigade Support Battalion), where as the two battalions fighting each other was largely segregated (5-8% female? +/-).

            On the argument that women can't meet the physical demand, I openly admit that some women are capable to perform the tasks demanded within "combat arms" as duty demands. I begin with my story and believe the root of the greater issue is observed here...

            Lance Cpl. Chris Augello, a reservist who prior to the experiment was pro-integration, submitted a 13-page essay -- which he shared with the Marine Corps Times -- on why he had changed his mind. “The female variable in this social experiment has wrought a fundamental change in the way male ⅛non-commissioned officers⅜ think, act and lead,” he wrote, referring to the female presence and its effect on how Marine Corps small-unit leaders do their job.
            Augello, according to the report, also noted that relationships between the female and male Marines in his platoon sometimes turned romantic and in turn became a distraction. Integration, Augello wrote, is “a change that is sadly for the worse, not the better.”

            http://hamptonroads.com/2015/09/mari...478.1410618841
            When SNCOs and Officers had to sort through each little mini-riot to find the cause, turned out that "romantic/sexual relations" were the reason each time(in unit, shared relation between units).

            Every Soldier, Sailor, Marine, or Airmen I have talked to that has served in a mixed unit (Male, that is) has had numerous complaints on the subject. When you are around someone nearly 24/7 for extended periods of times, you grow intimate bonds. It largely develops into comradery for most combat arms units, (you may not like someone you serve with, but you have his back). From what I have witnessed and largely from I have heard Logistics & Support can be very clique-y. Crowds develop because relations of whatever magnitude develop, corresponding resentments grow and are furthered by gossip.

            I have not served abroad with integrated units, but I simply do not believe that the integrating concept provides gains in any manner to the performance of our combat arm within the U.S. Armed Forces.

            It would be nice if I could say I have enough respect for the average members of the U.S. Armed Services to not try to fuck like rabbits in the guise of national security responsibility, but I don't.

            Some Women can meet the immediate physical expectations, but the issue ends (for me at this time) that Female Soldiers can effectively be integrated into combat units while maintaining that same long-term unit cohesion that would be dire during a time of war(one considerably worse than we have faced now).

            TL; DR: Mixed combat arms is not for U.S.

            Would also appreciate Kap's POV as been "the other shoe" so to speak.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by JimHPTN View Post

              One of the biggest issues is always logistics. The reality is that women should have separate latrines, showers, lodging, etc., in a base camp. To set up a duplicate set of these facilities, albeit smaller, just to accommodate 2 out of say 100 people makes no sense.
              Why would they require separate latrines, showers, lodging etc etc?

              Comment


              • #8
                Because Americans are shy.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sniffit View Post

                  Why would they require separate latrines, showers, lodging etc etc?
                  You've never been on a US military installation have you. At TQ in Iraq they even went so far as to have separate female port-a-johns for the females. It was ridiculous. We ran an exercise on Ft. Drum in the early 2000's. The Brits, Germans, and Estonians came over. The Estonians had two female Infantry Lieutenants with them. They slept in the same tents as the men. I had to stop one of them from stripping down to her underwear to head to the shower, and explain to her that she needed to head over the the "female" shower area to change. She looked like completely confused, and I had to go into this long explanation of how we did things in the US. All she could do was shake her head and mumble something under her breath in a language I didn't understand as she stormed off.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dominique View Post

                    You've never been on a US military installation have you. At TQ in Iraq they even went so far as to have separate female port-a-johns for the females. It was ridiculous. We ran an exercise on Ft. Drum in the early 2000's. The Brits, Germans, and Estonians came over. The Estonians had two female Infantry Lieutenants with them. They slept in the same tents as the men. I had to stop one of them from stripping down to her underwear to head to the shower, and explain to her that she needed to head over the the "female" shower area to change. She looked like completely confused, and I had to go into this long explanation of how we did things in the US. All she could do was shake her head and mumble something under her breath in a language I didn't understand as she stormed off.
                    One, but that was Camp Mike Spann and reminded me more of a school trip to Auschwitz then a place fit as quarters for man.

                    I can understand her confusion. We had the same showers, slept in the same rooms, same tents etc. etc. never caused any problems.
                    Well, twice. Once we were reported by a female Soldier for sexual harassment because we asked her NOT to show us her boobs and once I shared a double room with a (super hot) female soldier when we were away on a course.
                    -Andy wake up!
                    I open my eyes and there she stands, bent over ass towards me, in nothing but a thong.
                    My newly woken up 19-year old body only had one response.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sniffit View Post

                      One, but that was Camp Mike Spann and reminded me more of a school trip to Auschwitz then a place fit as quarters for man.

                      I can understand her confusion. We had the same showers, slept in the same rooms, same tents etc. etc. never caused any problems.
                      Well, twice. Once we were reported by a female Soldier for sexual harassment because we asked her NOT to show us her boobs and once I shared a double room with a (super hot) female soldier when we were away on a course.
                      Damn, I wish my last deployment had those issues.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Shermbodius View Post
                        Damn, I wish my last deployment had those issues.
                        You are in the AF.. You have strippers in the mess, free BJ's clean sheets and not to mention OBAMA!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Sloppy Joe2 View Post
                          Applaud the Marines on doing such a test, and fairly assessing the results.

                          I chimed in on this issue over at MP.net, give it a go again here.

                          What the Marine Corps and the participants in this trial observe is similar to what I did while I was in the Army.

                          Our Brigade Enlisted barracks was essentially a trailer park in the middle of the desert. Flat, with open fields usually along battalion organizational lines.
                          http://www.ls3p.com/wp-content/uploa...8-1250x430.jpg
                          (What it largely looked like when I was there, has developed in the photo and since.)


                          This Smartass Soldier image isn't a joke, I saw this occur more than once. Where this story comes into relevance with this subject is I saw these fights begin internally within a battalion twice, and only once between two separate battalions. The former battalion was integrated (Brigade Support Battalion), where as the two battalions fighting each other was largely segregated (5-8% female? +/-).

                          On the argument that women can't meet the physical demand, I openly admit that some women are capable to perform the tasks demanded within "combat arms" as duty demands. I begin with my story and believe the root of the greater issue is observed here...


                          When SNCOs and Officers had to sort through each little mini-riot to find the cause, turned out that "romantic/sexual relations" were the reason each time(in unit, shared relation between units).

                          Every Soldier, Sailor, Marine, or Airmen I have talked to that has served in a mixed unit (Male, that is) has had numerous complaints on the subject. When you are around someone nearly 24/7 for extended periods of times, you grow intimate bonds. It largely develops into comradery for most combat arms units, (you may not like someone you serve with, but you have his back). From what I have witnessed and largely from I have heard Logistics & Support can be very clique-y. Crowds develop because relations of whatever magnitude develop, corresponding resentments grow and are furthered by gossip.

                          I have not served abroad with integrated units, but I simply do not believe that the integrating concept provides gains in any manner to the performance of our combat arm within the U.S. Armed Forces.

                          It would be nice if I could say I have enough respect for the average members of the U.S. Armed Services to not try to fuck like rabbits in the guise of national security responsibility, but I don't.

                          Some Women can meet the immediate physical expectations, but the issue ends (for me at this time) that Female Soldiers can effectively be integrated into combat units while maintaining that same long-term unit cohesion that would be dire during a time of war(one considerably worse than we have faced now).

                          TL; DR: Mixed combat arms is not for U.S.

                          Would also appreciate Kap's POV as been "the other shoe" so to speak.
                          Interesting and well stated opinions based on your observations. I am interested to see how others have dealt with this issue and how this will develop.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            And a follow up story

                            Marines experiment finds women get injured more frequently, shoot less accurately than men

                            By Dan Lamothe
                            The Washington Post
                            © September 11, 2015

                            Women in a new Marine Corps unit created to assess how female service members perform in combat were injured twice as often as men, less accurate with infantry weapons and not as good at removing wounded troops from the battlefield, according to the results of a long-awaited study produced by the service.

                            The research was carried out by the service in a nine-month long experiment at both Camp Lejeune, N.C., and Twentynine Palms, Calif. About 400 Marines, including 100 women, volunteered to join the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, the unit the Marine Corps created to compare how men and women do in a combat environment.
                            Read the rest here -
                            http://hamptonroads.com/2015/09/mari...978.1441868670

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Studies be D*@Ned, states the Secretary of the Navy (my paraphrase)

                              http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ng-women-perf/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X