| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
| Locked on 08/08/2017 7:35:49 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator, reason: |
Posted on 08/08/2017 7:03:39 AM PDT by itsLUCKY2B
US Marines Test All-Male Squads Against Mixed-Gender Ones – And The Results Are Bleak August 6, 2017 By Brittany Soares
In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines — 100 of them female — trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every aspect of their experience measured and scrutinized. All branches of the military faced a January 1, 2016 deadline to open all combat roles to women, and the Marine Corps used this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate. The Corps’ summary of the experiment concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women. Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 69% of tasks evaluated (93 out of 134). All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says: All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4. ... All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy. All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties.
In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines — 100 of them female — trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every aspect of their experience measured and scrutinized. All branches of the military faced a January 1, 2016 deadline to open all combat roles to women, and the Marine Corps used this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate. The Corps’ summary of the experiment concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women. Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 69% of tasks evaluated (93 out of 134). All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says: All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4. ... All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy. All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty) The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment. While the conclusions make it look like having women in combat isn’t a good idea, one important caveat of the tests is that many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs. Hopefully, with more training in combat, women will be a strength for the military, but the most important thing to remember is that risking the lives of a military unit in combat to provide career opportunities or accommodate the personal desires of an individual is not only bad, but very dangerous military judgment.
Paragraphs.
Otherwise I think I know the conclusion.
skimmed thru - didn’t see mention if they did research on all woman team?
Maybe that’s what’s needed? all men teams and all woman teams? maybe they just don’t do well mixed groups, but could compliment each other as gender specific groups?
Then I suppose we’d need more groups for those with confused genders?
2) No paragraphs.
In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces.
That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines — 100 of them female — trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every aspect of their experience measured and scrutinized.
All branches of the military faced a January 1, 2016 deadline to open all combat roles to women, and the Marine Corps used this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate. The Corps’ summary of the experiment concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women.
Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 69% of tasks evaluated (93 out of 134). All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says:
All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.…
All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.
All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty)
The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment.
While the conclusions make it look like having women in combat isn’t a good idea, one important caveat of the tests is that many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.
Hopefully, with more training in combat, women will be a strength for the military, but the most important thing to remember is that risking the lives of a military unit in combat to provide career opportunities or accommodate the personal desires of an individual is not only bad, but very dangerous military judgment.
Meaning reality trumps fantasy.
Thanks for cleaning it up
Hope, the most important part of combat readiness.
In a couple of years that “all woman” team will be all men.That aspect of the transgender phenomenon might be the saving grace of the combat arms it the trannies are not successfully flushed out of the military. If they need x% of women in a unit then x% of the troops “feel like a woman” today and the transition is made effortlessly.
“...And The Results Are Bleak...”
_____________________________________
And The Results Were Expected...
There!!! Fixed that....
All you have to do to determine whether women can do the same heavy work as men is to watch “Cops” or “Live PD”. It’s laughable! I always hear them yell “get on the ground” then stand behind the male policeman!! It’s laughable! ha ha
“Hopefully, with more training in combat, women will be a strength for the military,”
So why spend additional resources to fix a “problem” that is easily avoided. Not to mention all of the other problems caused by this. It’s just so stupid.
Give them the same physical tests given Marines in 1942. If they pass those exactly as it was written.......welcome aboard jarhead.
DEmocrats DO NOT WANT such testing to take place because they are afraid of the results, which are obvious to anyone except democrats.
...the conclusion.
No matter how it’s sliced/diced, it’s a Bologna-Salami samitch - a Blivet.
Thanks for fixing it.
Good article - thanks for posting Lucky.
Have to laugh at the headline: “The Results Are Bleak.” Bleak for who? If this rigorous study gets women OUT of combat, then the results are just what we need to restore sanity and rationality to our armed forces. That is hardly bleak. It is only bleak for those kooks that think there are zero physical differences between the bodies of males and females. That we even entertain that notion just shows how stupid the nation and our society have become. We are truly a brain-dead nation from pre-school to dotage if we think men and women are the same.
Women can serve honorably anywhere except on the front line in combat. Why isn’t that good enough? Why must the nation waste its precious limited resources proving empirically what almost everybody knows just by growing up?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.