Skip to comments.Are Women Headed to the Infantry?
Posted on 10/05/2012 3:55:13 PM PDT by presidio9
Women could be poised to breach the final frontier of military macho. For the first time yesterday, women were included in a Marine Corps infantry officer training, a grueling three-month course at Quantico, Virginia, where Marines are schooled in making command decisions under extreme stress.
Women have fought and died in every American war, and more than 280,000 of them have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, but they are still barred from the infantry. In February, as my colleague Adam Weinstein reported, the Department of Defense urged Congress to allow women to serve in more combat-related jobs, and has since then opened up new jobs for women closer to the front lines. This training program is part of a Pentagon experiment to develop "gender-neutral physical standards," and collect data on whether women's bodies can actually handle this kind of Rambo job. .
Advertise on MotherJones.com
According to USA Today, the training program involves being dropped into the woods pre-dawn with scant instructions and some 70 pounds of gear. They do he-man feats and march for miles, never stopping to rest all day. A quarter of men drop out or don't pass.
Predictably, some think even letting women on the training program is taking gender equality a step too far. After all, as Maj. Scott Cuomo, director of the Infantry Officer Course, told USA Today, "Sometimes... Marines are fighting with their bare hands against the enemy." Grrrrr! Others worry that allowing ladies in could water down standards and makes us bad-guy targets.
But "[t]he women are expected to do everything that the men do," Marine Col. Todd Desgrosseilliers, who commands the organization responsible for basic Marine officer and infantry training, told USA Today. "We haven't changed anything."
In the face of discrimination and assault, women have been slowly moving their way into the ranks in recent years, now serving on submarine crews, living at forward bases, and flying combat aircraft. But females make up only about seven percent of the Marines, the most male-dominated of the armed services. (Women comprise 14 percent of active duty forces as a whole.)
For his part, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. James F. Amos, has lots of faith in the future of women in the armed forces. "I'm not one bit afraid of the results of this," he told the New York Times in April. "I'm very bullish on women."
Oh brother. Here we go. "Gender-neutral physical standards" only means that they go in one direction - DOWN!!
A woman dies, a whole family dies.
Nope—As soon as a war starts they will be pushed to traditional roles: Cooking and washing and keeping records, serving important roles mind you-—Only a small % of an army is on the front lines— Woman may have to fight if the enemy makes a breakthrough—like at Battle of Bulge. But the division of labor is ancient and works well—All armies who tried to break it—suffered in the end.
The enemy should be aware of this and try to figure it out before even sneezing or taking a footstep.
social experiment to destroy the military
That's quite an assertion and one that is not supported by the facts. For example, women did not fight in WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam though certainly some died in these conflicts while serving as noncombatant nurses and auxiliaries. This statement exposes the article and the feminist movement position - it has nothing to do with the military or women in combat, it's just a ploy to advance an agenda that creates a special victim group that includes more than half of the population.
And when there is a DRAFT, the GIRLS BETTER BE DRAFTED, TOO!!! All the women LIBBERS will INSIST on it....NOT!
Here's how this works. Women are allowed into a training course, branch, or military specialty. Leaders proclaim that nothing has been changed, the standards remain exactly as they were before women were admitted. Then statistics reveal that graduation rates among women lags far behind the men. Standards are changed at that point until the graduation rates come back in line. The result is a military that is less capable of doing the job the country expects them to do.
I attended West Point from 1988-1992. Much of our first and second summer’s training was Infantry based....and women were included.
While I’m sure there are exceptions to every rule...in general, the women could not do everything the men could. No offense to women...its just how nature made us different.
But beyond that, a few other considerations:
1. Infantrymen use a buddy system, and practically sleep on top of each other.
2. Infantrymen change clothes in front of each other.
3. Infantrymen do tick checks on each other.
There are valid reasons to keep the Infantry unisex.
I suppose there are a handful of women out there who are both capable of being in the Infantry, and want to....and their career possibilities may be limited by their exclusion.
But, is it worth changing the entire military, to accomodate a few?
You’re right about this. While the draft isn’t presently in effect 18 year old males must register. Why not women? What happened to equal justice under the law?
That is exactly what my husband says, who was an officer in the military. He also says (I think with a bit of satire, although I am not sure), that an all-woman military, however, would be better than an all-male military, as women are a lot meaner and tougher than guys...I normally punch him when he says that.
I’ll DEMAND IT!!!!! And my LIBERAL in laws can wave goodbye to their granddaughters!!
I hope not. Men and women are not the same, and a society that does not recognize their differences will not flourish.
Any society that sends its women to fight before it sends the non-shaving boys and cane-borne old men is fatally flawed.
Today’s US Military. Where Political Correctness trumps fighting effectiveness.
It’s bad enough when a young man is killed, but when a young woman is killed in combat, the enemy kills our future. Make all women eligible for the draft.
To echo and reinforce your remarks. I was teaching at West Point (DMI) to include running committees at Beast and at Buckner when women were first admitted. I can tell you that the standards were revised before the first woman raised her hand on the Plain based on extensive physical tests of female enlisted soldiers. Women (and their male classmates) did not see the same training that was in place before women were admitted. The standards were revised once again while I was there to adjust to performance metrics. I suspect that there have been changes since I left. I have a good friend who is currently the Comm, I haven't asked him about the current situation, it would put him in an uncomfortable position.
I lived next to a lady who was a Olympic Shotputter.
She could do it. Carrie Nation could hold her own in a bar (true she carried a hachet). Calamity Jane was fairly famous for being tough as nails. Ginger Rodgers did everything Fred Astaire did, backwards, in heels.
Keep the standards, and let who qualifies qualifies.
A bank was sued because they gave a test to pregnant women. They were not allowed to work if they couldn’t stand with their toes touching the wall. The court ruled that all employees had to take the test. They lost one pregnant clerk, and 3 vice presidents.
Why would they want to?
I’ve asked a couple dozen vets of Iraq and Afghanistan what they’re really doing in the field.
The first problem I see for “women in combat” is that the typical, average woman simply cannot hump 100lb loads. Period, thanks for playing.
It’s the same deal with me: I can’t hump 200lb loads.
When you get near to carrying your own body weight, you simply cannot do it for long.
My God......they want the women dead before they can get pregnant. The country club Democrats aren’t going to have their little princesses in the Infantry. A dead woman bears no children. They would have to include women in the draft. Where would you put all the inner city women? In the Infantry. This is just another attempt by the Democrat party to reduce the number of Blacks in our country.
You are correct. while a few women can do it, that number is less than 5%.
As an old retired guy, nothing looks dumber than mixed gender PT - the women sweating, the guys trotting along.
Women In the Military Program (WIMP).
I served in the Marine Infantry in the 80’s and I can tell you it was full of a bunch a filthy mouthed, sexist, nasty, men with the minds of adolescent boys. A perfect bunch IMHO to kill people and break things. I could not imagine any women even being around us. With the exception of the Marine Corps Ball, most guys would rarely allow their wives or girlfriends anywhere near us.
See my comments #11 and #22. That's the great fallacy of this whole nonsense.
I left out homophobic.
One American service woman died as a result of enemy fire in Vietnam.
Lt. Sharon Lane was a nurse and was killed when a piece of shrapnel from a commando led mortar attack hit Ward 4 of the 312th Evacuation Hospital, Chu Lai.
Women in the infantry are great......in the movies.
Liberal policies, always trying to fool Mother Nature, always failing.
and to be clear, lots of “men” today can’t carry 100 pounds for a long time, much less 200. i could do maybe 80 fairly comfortably. but i’d be wiped at end of the day.
Good picture, except... This individual is an Air Force close air support specialist who jumped into Northern Iraq with the 173d Airborne Brigade in 2003. The point remains valid.
“Liberal policies, always trying to fool Mother Nature, always failing.”
Agreed. I grew up during the feminist bra burning era. I was the daughter of parents educated at top colleges. It’s basic common sense. Sure, teach women like the Israelis do to defend the home front for survival, but don’t send them off to the front lines. Common sense- a commodity in short suppy.
As I’m sure you know, there’s a massive difference between training everyone to the Infantry standard versus assigning women to Infantry Platoons.
When you get shot you know that 120 pound gal next to you will be ready to throw you across her shoulders and dog trot you to the pick up zone.
The guys I’ve talked to who have been up front in these two wars have told me that when you get all the crap together, they’re up to 100lbs - easily.
Some guys end up getting washed out by the load, but those who don’t are humping 100 easy. The guys who are going spec-ops or long range are humping more than that.
The armor our people are wearing is a big part of the load.
in Spec Ops humping near your body weight is not uncommon!
CSA Ordierno is pushing females into the Ranger Course starting in FY 13. That’s how FUBAR things have become in the Army.
Kruschev would be so proud.
Whatever. Women stopped being feminine a long time ago, hence guys like me (40, single, never married).
Young men and women, continually learn to be more frugal and healthy. Become more self-sufficient each month. Learn to produce something useful. Practice self-defense diligently for the rest of your lives. Be humble. Be nonpolitical. Don’t enlist.
And with it the society dies. Women through the raising of children perpetuate societies. That's a human axiom as it was taught to me in cultural anthropology years ago. I haven't seen anything that makes me doubt it. Most Americans are fine with feminism and by choosing this path choose the nation's destruction.
I know a young lady who served in the green zone in Baghdad. She is beautiful and weighs 100 lbs sopping wet. The physical damage caused by her carrying 70 lbs of body armor has left her with a documented disability from the VA.
In daily PT runs women always always fall out long before men.
To think this will work in infantry is inviting defeat.
That’s what I think. What woman would want to be in the infantry? I don’t know why they want to be on submarines either. Does this mean it would be required or voluntary?
There are usually some babes who are part of the heroic characters in the story line and what do you often see them do in the action part of the films. They get in there and mix it up with the males be they be bad guys or just a friendly bar room fight. You will often see some 120 lb gal knock out with one punch some 260 lb 6 foot 6 inch bad guy (or absorb several of his punches before she lands the coup de grâce .)
Now really! Think about it!
Women on average have half the physical strength of men. (I have seen figures as low as 40% of the strength & as high as 60%. I will split the difference and say 50%) It's not really strength its also the ability to absorb punishment. Women's bodies just don't have the structure to take that many physical blows without a debilitating injury occurring. (Or stress on the joints! There are some revealing labor injury statistics on this !) Men on average can and yes there are always exceptions (And this is NOT the same thing as pain of childbirth!). Every time I see this type of stuff on TV, I start pointing out the physical absurdity of it. My wife yells at me its TV...It's TV!
We have probably had 30 years of this sort of “visual conditioning”. It's no surprise to me that modern “decision makers’ have confused that fantasy with reality.
Confusing fantasy with reality seems to be a common thread in modern society these days.