Post: #1

"New York Times Wrote:WASHINGTON — How many pull-ups does it take to make a female Marine?

The answer, starting next January: a minimum of three, the same number required of male Marines. But even for the pull-ups, the Marines are still making some exceptions. To get a perfect grade, women will have to do only 8, compared with the 20 required for men.

But the new Marine Corps regulations are just part of a sweeping re-examination of fitness standards in the military that Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta’s announcement last week ending the ban on women in combat only accelerated.

As it stands now, service members face a gantlet of overlapping fitness tests throughout the vast sprawl of the American military, from initial ones that recruits have to pass to annual fitness (and weight) tests to specific physical requirements that must be met for combat jobs.

The Pentagon says it will not lower standards for women, but is nonetheless reviewing the requirements for hundreds of what are called military occupational specialties to see if they actually match up with the demands of each job.

Some combat jobs that might open to women may require them to meet only specific requirements rather than a wide range of fitness standards.

“We’re going to ensure that our tank crewmen are fully capable of removing 50-pound projectiles from the ammunition rack and loading them into the main gun in a sustained manner in a combat situation,” said George Wright, an Army spokesman.
---------------
Mr. Jacob, now the policy director for the Service Women’s Action Network, an advocacy group that worked to end the female combat ban, acknowledged the physiological differences between men and women, but said they were overstated. “There are lots of men who don’t have the same muscle mass as other men,” he said. “There is physical diversity regardless of gender.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/us/pol...-home&_r=0

Post: #2

i defer to an article fred reed wrote a few years back
http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilMed.shtml

"From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (report date November 15, 1992, published in book form by Brassey's in 1993): "The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength… An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer [stress] fractures as men."

Further: "The Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony about the physical differences between men and women that can be summarized as follows:

"Women's aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.

"In terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man."

From the same report: "Lt Col. William Gregor, United States Army, testified before the Commission regarding a survey he conducted at an Army ROTC Advanced Summer Camp on 623 women and 3540 men. …Evidence Gregor presented to the Commission includes:

"(a) Using the standard Army Physical Fitness Test, he found that the upper quintile of women at West point achieved scores on the test equivalent to the bottom quintile of men.

"© Only 21 women out of the initial 623 (3.4%) achieved a score equal to the male mean score of 260.

"(d) On the push-up test, only seven percent of women can meet a score of 60, while 78 percent of men exceed it.

"(e) Adopting a male standard of fitness at West Point would mean 70 percent of the women he studied would be separated as failures at the end of their junior year, only three percent would be eligible for the Recondo badge, and not one would receive the Army Physical Fitness badge…."

Post: #3

It's a shame that feminists and hoodrat females like the ones on Worldstar can't be drafted into joining. Since they're always acting like men this is the perfect opportunity for them.

Post: #4

We'll see how people in the U.S. react when their military women are being beaten, raped and beheaded on youtube.

This is what you voted for, America. Reap it.

Post: #5

Just what we need women in the Marines. Wow I feel much safer now!

Maybe they can nag and bitch the enemy into submission?

Post: #6

(02-02-2013 08:57 AM)bacon Wrote:  i defer to an article fred reed wrote a few years back
http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilMed.shtml

From that same article,

Quote:My friend Catherine Aspy graduated from Harvard in 1992 and (no, I'm not on drugs) enlisted in the Army in 1995. Her account was published in Reader's Digest, February, 1999, and is online in the Digest's archives.

She told me the following about her experiences: "I was stunned. The Army was a vast day-care center, full of unmarried teen-age mothers using it as a welfare home. I took training seriously and really tried to keep up with the men. I found I couldn't. It wasn't even close. I had no idea the difference in physical ability was so huge. There were always crowds of women sitting out exercises or on crutches from training injuries.

"They [the Army] were so scared of sexual harassment that women weren't allowed to go anywhere without another woman along. They called them 'Battle Buddies.' It was crazy. I was twenty-six years old but I couldn't go to the bathroom by myself."

It really seems to be a common misconception, not a delusional rationalization. After all these years of grrrl power most people just think girls are - if not as tough - then not much less tough.

Post: #7

@ storm

your right and hollywood only furthers this misconception to womens strength being equal to mens. (think about every time you watched a female knock out a guy with one punch)

classic propoganda to this end was the film GI JANE

Post: #8

To be clear, I am not opposed to letting women in if they meet the same (exceptional) standards. There might be other problems, but in the interest of fairness and whatnot...

However, letting women in and also finding all sorts of loopholes so that their standards are reduced is a damn travesty.

Post: #9

Some of this stuff is being considered out of context. As someone pointed out in another thread, there's overall fitness standards and then there's job-specific standards. The job-specific stuff is what you want to watch. If, by the end of your training, you can't throw 60 lbs on your back and hump 12 miles without stopping to take a knee more than a few times, you have no business being in the infantry. That's an objective standard.

The overall fitness stuff is different. These tests are meant to test a person's level of fitness relative to what is achievable for that person. Of course there are going to be different standards. Even among men the standards are different. What it takes for an 18 yr old to max out the Army Physical Fitness Test is different than what it takes for a 30 yr old. Does that mean the standards have been lowered? No, it's just a recognition of different physiology. So, at 18 you're expected to be able to run faster than at 30, but at 30 you're expected to do more push ups.

Post: #10

(02-02-2013 09:41 AM)j r Wrote:  Some of this stuff is being considered out of context. As someone pointed out in another thread, there's overall fitness standards and then there's job-specific standards. The job-specific stuff is what you want to watch. If, by the end of your training, you can't throw 60 lbs on your back and hump 12 miles without stopping to take a knee more than a few times, you have no business being in the infantry. That's an objective standard.

The overall fitness stuff is different. These tests are meant to test a person's level of fitness relative to what is achievable for that person. Of course there are going to be different standards. Even among men the standards are different. What it takes for an 18 yr old to max out the Army Physical Fitness Test is different than what it takes for a 30 yr old. Does that mean the standards have been lowered? No, it's just a recognition of different physiology. So, at 18 you're expected to be able to run faster than at 30, but at 30 you're expected to do more push ups.

Good point, tests should be about the 'job-specific stuff'. Fred talked about this in the article above.


From what we've seen in this thread it looks like not much will change. There will be a few token tough girls performing at the average male level. Politicians will have their cake. The military will use functional standards to pick roles.

And all the other women will be pushing papers in offices on base and making phone calls.

Post: #11

Agree movies and TV make it look like women are just as tough as men. In reality it is far from it.
As a Russian woman I know said to me. Why do American women want to be men?

Post: #12

"I was perhaps one of the first commanders to have women in a combat command (the 3d Bde, 2nd Armored Div, called "Brigade 75") in Grafenwoehr, FRG, between April 1975-February 1977. In the Order of Battle Section of the MI Detachment which I commanded, the three enlisted intelligence analysts were unquestionably competent in technical skills and surpassingly adept in camp administrative tasks. They gave convincing briefings and, in a brigade which had no women dependents because of its six-month rotation of maneuver battalions (from Fort Hood and back), I never had any problems in getting men to pay attention to them.

However, in field settings, they invariably wore out after 24-36 hours of steady maneuver operations. Small in frame and of typically delicate musculature, I could not assign them to clamber up the 577 tracked vehicle, to string the razor wire around the tactical ops center perimeter, nor to engage in the rapid physical actions required to set up and tear down the gear during our frequent shifts of position. They had to sleep longer hours, to be worked around, and sheltered from harm during times of frenetic activity."

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilWomenII.shtml

Post: #13

Glad I'm getting out.

Post: #14

you only need to do 3 pull ups to become a marine?? I thought these guys were the best in the world.

Post: #15

Yeah the woman KOing men in the movies thing always raises a smile from me.

Post: #16

Women in the Israeli Defense Forces are female soldiers who serve in the Israel Defense Forces. Israel is the only country in the world with a mandatory military service requirement for women. Women have taken part in Israel’s military before and since the founding of the state in 1948, with women currently comprising 33% of all IDF soldiers and 51% of its officers, fulfilling various roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. The 2000 Equality amendment to the Military Service law states that "The right of women to serve in any role in the IDF is equal to the right of men." As of now, 88% to 92% of all roles in the IDF are open to female candidates, while women can be found in 69% of all positions.

Formerly women conscripts served in the Women's Army Corps, commonly known by its Hebrew acronym, Chen. After a five-week period of basic training they served as clerks, drivers, welfare workers, nurses, radio operators, flight controllers, ordnance personnel, and course instructors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_th...nse_Forces

I've always been fascinated by Israel, in that they are the only country to have mandatory military service for women. Historically, women had served in support capacities, and eventually began serving in all areas of the military. Initially, they were only accepted in combat roles due to shortages in personnel - it wasn't out of some need for fairness. The same with flight training - women were kept out, but court challenges got the policy changed. I would think, as a whole, the average Israeli woman is more capable of serving than an American because she knows at some point she'll have to. She's probably more physically and mentally prepared, and some actually look forward to it. They even have a majority female combat unit, the Caracal Battalion. I can't find anything that states that the physical standards for men and women differ.

Post: #17

(02-02-2013 01:59 PM)Teedub Wrote:  Yeah the woman KOing men in the movies thing always raises a smile from me.

I refuse to watch movies with a "heroine" as they are too far from reality to be even mildly believable.

Post: #18

I refuse to watch movies with a "heroine" as they are too far from reality to be even mildly believable.

Luckily they get the romance right, though. Lena Dunham's character would definitely be dating nice looking guy after guy in real life. (This is my pet theme today, my apologies to those who've seen in elsewhere.)

(02-02-2013 02:52 PM)Hotwheels Wrote:  

(02-02-2013 01:59 PM)Teedub Wrote:  Yeah the woman KOing men in the movies thing always raises a smile from me.

I refuse to watch movies with a "heroine" as they are too far from reality to be even mildly believable.

Post: #19

(02-02-2013 09:02 AM)Smitty Wrote:  We'll see how people in the U.S. react when their military women are being beaten, raped and beheaded on youtube.

This is what you voted for, America. Reap it.

One good video of that will put an end to it.

(02-02-2013 09:05 AM)oregonziggy Wrote:  Just what we need women in the Marines. Wow I feel much safer now!

Maybe they can nag and bitch the enemy into submission?

They nagged and bitched at us all the time. It would be a welcome change.

(02-02-2013 11:29 AM)w00t Wrote:  you only need to do 3 pull ups to become a marine?? I thought these guys were the best in the world.

3 to get started. Don't do it in boot camp and you're sent to Physical Conditioning Platoon (PCP). Known affectionately as "Pork chop Platoon". The purpose of boot camp is to break you down and rebuild, both physically and mentally. Guys can easily go from 3 to 20 pullups in 3 months time. And yeah, we are the best in the world.

Post: #20

I really can't understand those americans,all uruguayan ladies i knew would not join the Military to save their lives. I never discussed it with Paraguayan,Argentinian and Brazil girls but i bet they'd have the same feeling. What is the point? are military people in the USA loaded? early retirement? (they have that in Uruguay) ,excellent healthcare for family members?

Post: #21

This is kind of interesting. A transcript from a PBS documentary or show, not sure. I wish I could find the full episode. It's not on youtube or vimeo.

Women Warriors in the Military
SUMMARY
Are women in the military more vulnerable in combat situations? Betty Ann Bowser reports on the role of women in the Iraq War and in previous conflicts.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/..._4-17.html



Here's a letter I found from a retired Air Force girrrl to the CEO of PBS because of that documentary.

Quote:To focus practically the whole issue on physical strength, outdated stories, blatant distortions of fact - and use no data on the accomplishments and achievements of miltary women was truly disgusting.

Not one mention of the Rand Study that concludes that, when a woman is correctly. trained, she can be as tough as any man.

http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/ltrpbs.html

Post: #22

Quote:The report by the US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine at Natick, MA was led by senior analyst Everett Harman. "You don't need testosterone to get strong," Harman concluded.

Not one mention of the Ministry of Defence in Great Britain conducting the same kind of study. The Sunday Times of London reported that "by using new methods of physical training, women can be built up to the same levels of physical fitness as men of the same size and build." The British article also notes that "contrary to the view of many traditionalists, the operational performance of groups improve greatly if both sexes are involved."

Lol at "you don't need testosterone to get strong".

Maybe that's why the fastest women in the world are beaten by 14 year old boys.

If these new methods of physical training are so effective (and new?), maybe they should tell me what exactly they do.

What this article fails to recognize is that it takes training for these women to be just as strong as detrained men. What do these women bring to the military that a man couldn't? Nothing, that's what. Maybe we should put children in the military, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that they can get strong, too.

Post: #23

And this is how my both my countries armies, Spetznaz and Colombian Anti-Guerrilla squadron, become the best in the world, along with the Israeli. Sorry America, it's been unfortunate. We thank you for the training.

Post: #24

So let me get this straight....

You thank us for the training that makes you better than us?

Spetnaz and Sheyatet are pretty good.

Not trained by the US.

The only thing good in Columbia is the tail....

Post: #25

(02-03-2013 05:12 AM)Hotwheels Wrote:  So let me get this straight....

You thank us for the training that makes you better than us?

Spetnaz and Sheyatet are pretty good.

Not trained by the US.

The only thing good in Columbia is the tail....

I think he was thanking the US for putting women in the military. The "training" those two armies would have received is fighting the US, officially or by proxy, without any women in combat play.

Now both those armies (Spetznaz and Sheyatet) are prepared to fight an all male, well prepared US army. What they will get is the PMS brigade.

Wald