Different Military Training Requirements For Men And Women

[4588686]

Let me guess your friend is a lance coolie turd nugget who probably tells everyone about all the "combat" he saw in the stan when really all he did was POG it up.

Those guys definitely exist.

I think he overall likes being in the Marines and he seems to take his job seriously but I've not heard him refer to his time in Afghanistan except in a facetious context. I don't think he really gives a poo. About Afghanistan, I mean. He does feel strongly about drinking and moderate drug experimentation. This is getting away from the point of this thread which is for me to derail it with irrelevant tangents.

[4588686]

Come on quit being rude.

When somebody is being rude to me or people I care about I hum a happy tube and whistle gently.

[4588686]

I can do like 20 push-ups without even getting too tired. I'm plan on trying out for the SEAL teams. I should probably learn to play Call of Duty first. Best show up prepared and well seasoned.

[CatherineM]

Hun sometimes it's best to leave things up to people who actually know what they're talking about

My father and my uncle had ten battle stars between them, and seven medals for valor. I think they did know what they were talking about.

As to me, I'm not you Hun. That's quite disrespectful.

[4588686]

Poo's gettin real

[Semper Catholic]

All those battle stars huh? And 7 medals for valor? Well if battle stars were real I might believe you.

Hasan as for your bud, I'd advise you to advise him that drug experimentation is best left for after you do your tour. Seen plenty of pill heads who thought they'd never hit on the 10% "random" pass test hit on the pics test.

[PhuturePriest]

I can do like 20 push-ups without even getting too tired. I'm plan on trying out for the SEAL teams. I should probably learn to play Call of Duty first. Best show up prepared and well seasoned.

 

My point is if I can do that simply by having done karate all my life, you should definitely be able to do more than 1 pull-up after basic training, regardless of gender. If you can't, it shows either incompetence in training, or incompetence in the person. The military has room for neither.

[CatherineM]

All those battle stars huh? And 7 medals for valor? Well if battle stars were real I might believe you.

My father was awarded the WW2 American Defence service medal with a battle star for anti-submarine warfare, and the European, African and Middle Eastern Campaign medal with four battle stars. One each for the Invasion of Egypt and Libya, air combat in Europe, Tunisia, and Algeria.

He was also awarded the Silver Star, two Distinguished Flying Crosses, three Bronze Stars and four Air Medals.

My Uncle was awarded the Asiatic Pacific Campaign medal with 5 battle stars, for the Capture and Defence of Guadalcanal, and the Battles of Cape Gloucester, Bougainville, Guam, and Iwo Jima. He also received the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Navy Achievement with V, and the Purple Heart.

I realize the Purple Heart isn't technically a medal for valor, but a lot of people consider it to be so. Would you like to see copies of their DD 214 forms?

[Semper Catholic]

My father was awarded the WW2 American Defence service medal with a battle star for anti-submarine warfare, and the European, African and Middle Eastern Campaign medal with four battle stars. One each for the Invasion of Egypt and Libya, air combat in Europe, Tunisia, and Algeria.

He was also awarded the Silver Star, two Distinguished Flying Crosses, three Bronze Stars and four Air Medals.

My Uncle was awarded the Asiatic Pacific Campaign medal with 5 battle stars, for the Capture and Defence of Guadalcanal, and the Battles of Cape Gloucester, Bougainville, Guam, and Iwo Jima. He also received the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Navy Achievement with V, and the Purple Heart.

I realize the Purple Heart isn't technically a medal for valor, but a lot of people consider it to be so. Would you like to see copies of their DD 214 forms?

I think you missed the point. You can start a thread about family members who served their country if you want. Thank them for their service and be a little humble and let them know you agree civilians have no idea what they're talking about on this matter.

[CrossCuT]

I can do 536 push ups and 124 pull ups.

 

[CrossCuT]

But in the serious, according to the article it looks like this pull up rule is mostly based around ground combat which women arent even able to do right now. 

 

It is true the women naturally have less muscle mass than men but it doesnt mean they cant train like any other human with muscles and accomplish the same goal. If thats what you believe then youre cray. The retired Army lieutenant in the article sounds like a sexist old man who doesnt want to see women infect his formerly man dominated former career. 

 

The former marine who was interview in the article said the exact opposite as the lieutenant. He said the women in his charge were made to do all the exact same things...and they accomplished it (albeit after work)

 

It is ALSO simple science that your body adapts to the pressure you put on it.

 

Also note that the ASSUMPTIONS that women COULDNT do it are huge. Because of these assumptions they have never been allowed to be a part of certain areas of the army (infantry, artillery, armor, and ground combat units). So since they were never allowed to be those things, they werent held to the same standard as men...they had a different standard - the flex arm hang. So it doesnt seem like they have ever actually been accountable for this MENS standard. 

 

So its funny that after women have been tested in one standard for so long that people point and scream saying "They cant do it" when they are asked to complete a standard they have never really been tested on before. If you make the standard and actual standard (for men AND women) I think youll see better results. 

 

 

"At first, a lot of women weren't able to do it," Jacob says. "They were able to do one, some were able to do two, but what happened was by having that standard and enforcing that standard, it made my Marines, it made the troops go to the gym and train to that standard."

Within six months, all of the women in his company were doing eight to 12 pullups, he says.

 

But it looks like this will become the standard for everyone so it will be peachy.

 

[Semper Catholic]

But in the serious, according to the article it looks like this pull up rule is mostly based around ground combat which women arent even able to do right now.

It is true the women naturally have less muscle mass than men but it doesnt mean they cant train like any other human with muscles and accomplish the same goal. If thats what you believe then youre cray. The retired Army lieutenant in the article sounds like a sexist old man who doesnt want to see women infect his formerly man dominated former career.

The former marine who was interview in the article said the exact opposite as the lieutenant. He said the women in his charge were made to do all the exact same things...and they accomplished it (albeit after work)

It is ALSO simple science that your body adapts to the pressure you put on it.

Also note that the ASSUMPTIONS that women COULDNT do it are huge. Because of these assumptions they have never been allowed to be a part of certain areas of the army (infantry, artillery, armor, and ground combat units). So since they were never allowed to be those things, they werent held to the same standard as men...they had a different standard - the flex arm hang. So it doesnt seem like they have ever actually been accountable for this MENS standard.

So its funny that after women have been tested in one standard for so long that people point and scream saying "They cant do it" when they are asked to complete a standard they have never really been tested on before. If you make the standard and actual standard (for men AND women) I think youll see better results.



But it looks like this will become the standard for everyone so it will be peachy.

If you read the article it states that the original plan was to make females start doing pull ups starting January of 2014. That plan has been scrapped due to females not being able to make the standard.

At the end of the day it needs to come down to cost efficiency. So far no females have passed infantry officer training. Only 25% have passed enlisted infantry training. For males it's 65% and 95% respectively.

It costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide training for each student. Ammo, fuel, logistical support, replacement gear it adds up. If a student doesn't pass that is a sunk cost. You don't get that money back.

The 2nd marine division currently does not have money to provide troops blank ammunition. Pretty sure we could have used some of that cash.

[CrossCuT]

Well I dont think this should be a male vs female standard debate. It needs to be a "can you do the job" standard debate.

 

I dont like the fact that women werent even ALLOWED to be a part of certain units due to what I like to call sexism (the assumption that women wouldnt be able to pass even if they tried).

 

Rather, if a certain role (the units listed in the article) require higher physical demand then it makes sense that there would be a separate standard for that job. If women want a certain job then it would make sense that they would have to meet the requirements. I do believe they can, it will just be harder for them. Which may or may not be fair but the requirements of a job are  pretty indifferent, its the fact that they previously werent even allowed to TRY was the problem.

[CrossCuT]

Also, maybe Im a dumbo, but can someone explain to me what the correlation is between pull ups and ground combat? Or carrying ammo? Shouldnt you be tested on by how well you carry ammo to carry ammo?

 

"We want to see how many pull ups you can do so we know how much ammo you can carry and for how long."

 

Is there some correlation that we dont know about? I mean, Im sure the person who does more pull ups can most likely carry more ammo further than the one who does less pull ups,

but the tasks are so different I feel like it'd be a real stretch to draw any direct relationship between the two. But the generality of "stronger people are more physically capable" is not incorrect - it's just not really specific enough of a system to base an entire set of physical standards on. We have to get more specific and specialized to make a reliable, efficient system. 

 

So while I dont see the correlation between pull ups and carrying ammo, Im not completely dismissing it. To me it feels like saying "if you always burn eggs, how can you possibly cook bacon?"

 

Well, sure you fry them both, but they cook differently - eggs are easier to burn so if you want to judge someones ability to cook bacon, dont go by their ability to cook eggs.

Edited December 30, 2013 by CrossCuT

[PhuturePriest]

Also, maybe Im a dumbo, but can someone explain to me what the correlation is between pull ups and ground combat? Or carrying ammo? Shouldnt you be tested on by how well you carry ammo to carry ammo?

 

"We want to see how many pull ups you can do so we know how much ammo you can carry and for how long."

 

Is there some correlation that we dont know about? I mean, Im sure the person who does more pull ups can most likely carry more ammo further than the one who does less pull ups,

but the tasks are so different I feel like it'd be a real stretch to draw any direct relationship between the two. But the generality of "stronger people are more physically capable" is not incorrect - it's just not really specific enough of a system to base an entire set of physical standards on. We have to get more specific and specialized to make a reliable, efficient system. 

 

So while I dont see the correlation between pull ups and carrying ammo, Im not completely dismissing it. To me it feels like saying "if you always burn eggs, how can you possibly cook bacon?"

 

Well, sure you fry them both, but they cook differently - eggs are easier to burn so if you want to judge someones ability to cook bacon, dont go by their ability to cook eggs.

 

If you can't do even one pull-up, there's no way on earth you're going to be able to pick up a 180+ lbs man, with a 60 or 80 lbs backpack on you, and on him. You need a ridiculous amount of upper-body strength to do that. That's why we're talking about pull-ups. I have a lot more upper-body strength than my sister (Who is an average-sized girl with average muscle tone for a girl), and I would have a way better chance of accomplishing that than she would (Not that I would accomplish it, but I would be more capable because I have more muscle).

 

The point was not that women are completely incapable of it. It's that after basic training, 55% of them weren't even able to do one pull-up. If I can do 10 with no training at all, and you can't do 1 even after Marine basic training (Which the Marines are known for the toughest basic training and, I assure you, the female basic training would kick my arse and make me really sore in more ways than one), then that means things aren't looking very good. 

 

And I don't think it's necessarily fair to automatically assume women weren't allowed to see the front lines because they were deemed "incapable". Chivalry doesn't approve of letting women get shot at when there are perfectly fit men to do it instead. I read somewhere that women are more prone to PTSD, so this means that when women do see battle, they'll probably be the ones to crack mentally first. I personally don't like the idea of that.

 

This honestly just goes into a debate of feminism vs. chivalry. It's like a feminist saying to me "How dare you open the door for me? Do you think I'm not capable of opening it myself?" It's not that you're not capable, it's that it's simply a sign of showing dignity and respect. Well, back in the day, if you opened a door for a girl to show her honor and respect, you certainly wouldn't let her go into battle when you were more than capable of doing it in her place. I don't think it's fair to deem the men back then as chauvinistic pigs when they were simply following the Code of Chivalry. Were there sexist pigs back then? Yes. There will always be. But just like not every man today is a chauvinistic pig, not every man back then was, either.