(cache) Marine Corps’ women-in-combat experiment gets mixed results : news

"The three pullups is already the minimum required for all male Marines. Now the Marine Corps has postponed the plan, and that's raising questions about whether women have the physical strength to handle ground combat, which they'll be allowed to do beginning in 2016."

Marine officers would not talk to NPR on tape. They said they delayed the pullup requirement to avoid losing not only recruits but also current female Marines who can't pass the test.

The Marine Corps has been using it to test upper body strength for men for more than 40 years. And that upper body strength, they say, is necessary to serve in ground combat: to pull yourself out of a canal in Afghanistan, to climb over a mud wall, to carry an ammunition box"

For years, female Marines have had to meet a different standard — an exercise called the "flexed arm hang" (holding one's chin above the pullup bar for at least 15 seconds).

But beginning in 2016, women in the Marine Corps and Army will be allowed to serve in infantry, armor and artillery units. And they'll need to be strong enough to climb those mud walls and carry ammunition.

Obviously some women can pass it, but it's going to be a small minority.

[+]zanda250 スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7ポイント-6ポイント-5ポイント 4日前 (12子コメント)

[–]asiltopbr 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4日前 (11子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]ArkadyBogdanov -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

[–]mgzukowski 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4日前* (0子コメント)

[–]TroggyDoggy 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4日前 (2子コメント)

[–]zanda250 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4日前 (1子コメント)

Ranger school grads. Women of nearly every sport. 120+ women who graduated Marine infantry school. All women who show that your statements are retarded bullshit by doing physical feats just as difficult or more so then what you described.

You are not a Marine, this is not your area of expertise.

You claim to be an expert then? Your standards for what women need for combat is retarded. You want them to do 200 Sit-ups in 2 min? So you want them to do 100 situps every 60 seconds. According to your bullshit the only women who get to go into combat literally have to do world record speed situps in 2 minutes. Here is the part that makes you really look dumb, MARINES DO CRUNCHES! The number of crunches to MAX the test is 100 for both men and women. So you want women to do double the MAX for men, and more then 4 times the minimum that men have to do as a minimum?!? Seriously? Not to mention having to do 7 times as many pullups as the men and run way faster.

Thing is, I have personally seen women do all of those things except the situps (because it's impossible) and the dragging out of a kill zone (because they don't let women enter those unless it's an ambush, and I haven't been ambushed near marines before). I have seen them carry 200+ pound people around to simulate it, so yea, they can do that too. So get out of here with your ignorant bullshit requiring women to meet way higher standards then men just to try doing what they have already proven they can do.

So go back to claiming to know what you are talking about, while setting physically impossible standards that most male marines can't meet, and ignoring the women who routinely do the realistic standards you describe.

[–]noex1337 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

[–]frewfrew 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 3日前 (1子コメント)

[–]zanda250 -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 3日前 (0子コメント)

[–]admronoc 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4日前 (1子コメント)

Here's the deal. Women are not men. They should be treated equal to men under the law, but let's be realistic.

If we want women in combat roles, maybe the role for women and lighter men will have to be created. A light infantry with less equipment and emphasis on stealth, marksmanship, and transportability. Instead of the average solider and ruck being 250 lbs what if this was 180lbs in those units? More soldiers per helicopter than regular infantry. Women on average are more accurate, why not take advantage of that with lighter more accurate weapons?

What holds the majority of women back from combat isn't skill, enthusiasm, or esprit de corps. It's their general lack of upper body strength, small stature, and weaker frame.

These women would make excellent candidates for powered body armor or lighter, smaller, and more nimble tanks.

[–]bimyo 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

[–]Crowmakeswing 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4日前 (1子コメント)

[+][削除されました] 4日前* (31子コメント)

[deleted]

[–]indoninja 15ポイント16ポイント17ポイント 4日前 (6子コメント)

[–]Dreadlifts_Bruh -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 4日前 (5子コメント)

[–]indoninja 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 4日前* (4子コメント)

[–]Dreadlifts_Bruh -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 4日前 (3子コメント)

[–]indoninja 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4日前 (2子コメント)

[–]Dreadlifts_Bruh -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 4日前 (1子コメント)

[–]indoninja 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

[–]FlyingFistsOfFury 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 4日前 (1子コメント)

[–]DrEHWalnutbottom 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

You wanna test that out? Confront the hard ass dykes marching down a sidewalk. I would have no problem with one of them shooting and extracting next to me if they are qualified.

As a side note, though, you may be referring the the "freeze in place" nervous system response that the brain can launch in some people, male and female, in some situations. (When a hawk shrieks, some mice freeze (hide by staying still) and others bolt (fun for cover). That kind of thing. Both kinds can survive, depending on circumstances.) If one rape victim freezes (caused by the brain's override, not controllable) in order to save her own life, that doesn't mean there is something wrong with her or that "women lack the fight or flight response." A team of heavily armed felons charge into your bank branch and hold the place up? Men and women both will freeze in place. Others, both men and women, will want to do a hard take down.

[–]stillclub -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4日前 (19子コメント)

[–]asiltopbr 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 4日前 (18子コメント)

[–]UnchilledGuru -5ポイント-4ポイント-3ポイント 4日前 (16子コメント)

[–]asiltopbr 6ポイント7ポイント8ポイント 4日前 (14子コメント)

[–]spockontop 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4日前 (13子コメント)

[–]asiltopbr 0ポイント1ポイント2ポイント 4日前* (12子コメント)

[–]UnchilledGuru -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 4日前* (11子コメント)

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a18339/women-in-uniform-15015967/

According to the 2010 study, a recent IDF report found that female combatants maintained alertness better, were more knowledgable and professional when using their weapons, and had better shooting abilities than men. But even still, like in many other nations, a good number of combat positions remain closed to them, including much of those on the front lines. And though there was a 400 percent increase in Israeli women military careerists between 1999 and 2009, the brass ceiling in many ways still remains.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130125-women-combat-world-australia-israel-canada-norway/

A study on the integration of female combatants in the IDF between 2002 and 2005 found that women often exhibit "superior skills" in discipline, motivation, and shooting abilities, yet still face prejudicial treatment stemming from "a perceived threat to the historical male combat identity."

Double home run. Never mind the fact that Norway among the other countries listed hold women to the same physical fitness standards as the men, as well as it should be.

Also if you have an actual source for your claim that is not a grossly misguided American news article, which ignores the fact that 57% of all IDF officers are women, that the reason only 3-4% of combat roles are filled by women is because women have to volunteer for them and often don't, and the reason the other 8% of roles are still being blocked is because of dissent from Israel's version of the religious right, and that men in the military get eye injuries twice as often and have a much, MUCH higher suicide rate than women as the U.S. has already found (although male shortcomings are rarely if ever brought up by people like you), that'd be great.

And that according to studies on IDF women that looked into the stress fracture thing, stress fractures didn't cause women to quit after 3 years and that the main reason both men and women quit had nothing to do with that.. Quote from the study:

At 18 months, 76% of females and 68% of males were still serving as combat soldiers. Three-year attrition was (28%, CI 22–34%) for females and (37% CI 26–48%) for males. The main reasons for not completing service were nonmedical (Table 4). Medical reasons for attrition are detailed in Table 5. Survival analysis demonstrated that female soldiers survived months (mean SE) and males months. Females who dropped out had a statistical trend of weaker quadriceps force than their counterparts who remained in the unit (79 kgF versus 87 kgF, ) and a slower running time (12 : 44 versus 12 : 15, ) but no difference in O2max. Attrition was significantly related to having back pain during training. Females with backache were significantly more likely to drop out (37%) than males (23%), . Rates of nongynecological hospital admissions were 12% for females and 16% for males during the 36-month period.

With the exception of stress fractures and anterior knee pain, which were higher in females, there was no difference in the incidence of the other types of overuse injuries between females and males. In spite of the high incidence of stress fractures and the physical and physiological differences between the women and men of Karakal, their attrition rates because of medical reasons were the same.

And other studies have shown that the higher rate of stress-fractures and such injuries incurred by women than men isn't a function of gender, but because women enter training less physically fit than men do.

RESULTS: Women experienced twice as many injuries as men (relative risk [RR] = 2.1, 1.78-2.5) and experienced serious time-loss injuries almost 2.5 times more often than men (RR = 2.4, 1. 92-3.05). Women entered training at significantly lower levels of physical fitness than men, but made much greater improvements in fitness over the training period. In multivariate analyses, where demographics, body composition, and initial physical fitness were controlled, female gender was no longer a significant predictor of injuries (RR = 1.14, 0.48-2.72). Physical fitness, particularly aerobic fitness, remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS: The key risk factor for training injuries appears to be physical fitness, particularly cardiovascular fitness. The significant improvement in endurance attained by women suggests that women enter training less physically fit relative to their own fitness potential, as well as to men. Remedial training for less fit soldiers is likely to reduce injuries and decrease the gender differential in risk of injuries.

[–]asiltopbr 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 4日前 (10子コメント)

They are not in combat roles, I have no idea how you people are failing to grasp this.

I've sourced everything I've claimed, I've got news for you pal if women were in some way superior to men they wouldn't be failing every physical req over and over again.

Females in the IDF never actually fight, as the article said they're on the border with Jordan/Egypt.

They're also not allowed in battle tanks.

Most women straight up do not want combat roles, carrying all of your equipment on top of ammo is going to be too hard for the majority of them.

I have no problem with women in the military, but the standards should not be lowered period.

If women can pass the same tests men do more power to them, if they can't tough luck.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/172549

I've already linked this, this guy isn't making up a story.

[–]UnchilledGuru -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4日前 (9子コメント)

They are not in combat roles, I have no idea how you people are failing to grasp this.

Women in the IDF have served in the majority of combat positions since 1994. They fought in Israel's war for independence in 1948.

The Caracal units fight on the border. They thwarted a terrorist attack in 2012.

You are speaking from a position of sexist ignorance. No one thinks that the standards for women should be lowered. NO ONE. Nor does you citing the ignorant opinions of other sexist and unenlightened men in the military (who probably feel as though they stand to lose because they perceive women as a threat to their position and their identity, and others have already called bullshit on here) counteract the years and years of documented evidence, from the IDF itself, that women do just fine in the military (and in combat roles; using a gun to shoot somebody isn't that hard, go figure), and studies that render commonly-held complaints against women in combat moot. Even bullshit about women not being allowed in battle tanks will be yet another barrier kicked down in the march toward equality just as women had to sue to be allowed to be in combat roles in the first place in Israel in 1994.

Well, would you look at that. South Korea is already allowing women to drive tanks. Guess women are capable of driving a vehicle after all.

You're gonna come to the 21st century with the rest of us if we have to drag you there kicking and screaming.

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]bangorthebarbarian -3ポイント-2ポイント-1ポイント 4日前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 3517 on app-38 at 2015-09-14 16:32:28.445628+00:00 running 052994d country code: JP.

news

調停者