Page 13 of 52 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 519

Thread: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

  1. #121
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    What would they do if one of their male members got an illness?
    You're arguing with someone who is now just arguing to argue. He is taking the position that a tank platoon goes into combat in total isolation for months at a time, completely cut off from supplies - for which month after month a pregnant soldier would be stuck there. Actually, tanks run out of fuel very quickly.

    In fact, the military requires soldiers allow all sorts of drugs be injected into them - like it or not. Nothing would prevent women in combat to be tested for pregnancy and injected with a month's long contraceptive slow release capsule, which many women now use anyway.

  2. #122
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    You die when you lose the ability to operate as a team, and you die when the combat power of your unit and your support units is degraded. That's why everyone who has been there, been part of the infantry, and has posted on this forum about this subject, shares pretty much the same opinion. Women in the infantry are a distraction - distractions reduce your ability to focus on mission - reduced ability to focus on mission means degraded performance - degraded performance means higher casualties.

    They don't do stuff like this because it's Thursday, they do it because it's becoming such a problem that you have to get a General Officer involved.


    Tell me, Chris. Why do you think that the infantry veterans here all come back with the stories and claims of "yeah, when they brought out females it really effected the unit in negative ways", if that is not true. Are we all making it up?
    Yeah, you're all just making it up. Not one of you has given ONE example of ANY battle incident where it made any difference whatsoever, have you?

    White men in infantry pretty much use to say that blacks in their unit would be very damaging too. So would gays. So would foreigners. They were always wrong.

  3. #123
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Another strawman? No one has suggested that the presence of women in combat will cause the US to lose major battles. We are saying that they will detract from the ability of combat units such as the infantry to function as a single integrated team, reducing their combat efficiency and resulting in increased casualties.
    When has women in a combat units causes even 1 casualty, since that is what you claimed happened?

    Or are you saying that it never has as far as you know, but to believe you that some day it will?

  4. #124
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Well, the "standards" certainly are an issue, aren't they? But, then, the fuss mostly is over changing the standards, isn't it?
    Standards are an issue as they should be. Setting them correctly saves lives. The "fuss' is over lowering the standards for a preferred group.

    Winning battles and wars no longer are decided upon which side had soldiers who would win more arm wrestling contests.
    As much military history as I have studied, I'm not aware of any such event. Ever.

    Thus, we come tot he question of is the best Marine the one who can do the most pull-ups?
    Show me anywhere in which that has been said by anyone other than you.

    For how 95+% will be used in combat, no. Yet people are furious over changing pull-up standards for women (or anyone.)
    As they should be as it makes sense. Lots of upper body strength is required to be an effective combat soldier. Why do you choose to deny such?

    Marines don't meet the standards of Navy Seals. Does that make them inferior Marines who will "get people killed" and therefore should be washed out?
    No. It means they may not meet the standards of the Navy Seals. Different MOS, different mission, different standards.
    An effective military requires discrimination and plenty of it. Physical, mental and behavioral discrimination must be used to enhance combat effectiveness. It decreases lives lost on our side and increases our enemies casualties. So why is it that you don't seem concerned about our soldiers lives?
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  5. #125
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,563

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Yeah, you're all just making it up. Not one of you has given ONE example of ANY battle incident where it made any difference whatsoever, have you?

    White men in infantry pretty much use to say that blacks in their unit would be very damaging too. So would gays. So would foreigners. They were always wrong.
    I can give you plenty of real life examples where lacking physical capabilities can cost lives. Imagine you're patrolling up a mountain in enemy territory, loaded with 100+ lbs of gear, and the entire patrol has to wait for the weakest link, and people have to start carrying that person's gear for them, thus weighing the team down even further. Because of this delay you can't make your rendevous point and your ride out (helicopter, which you have very limited use of), has to come back at another time, so your patrol is stranded in enemy territory. I know, because I've personally seen this happen.

    The fact is simple, women have a fraction of the physical requirements, even in the infantry, that men do. That is a HUUUUGE problem. These women that passed will be the weakest links in their units. I'm confused why you would defend lowering the quality of our combat arms. Physical fitness DOES matter, and it matters a LOT. If women want to be part of combat arms, they should meet the same requirements their teammates do.

    Frankly though, the unit would just put that weak link back in the fob watching a radio or something, but then again maybe she'll complain of discrimination and they'd have to take her anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    You're arguing with someone who is now just arguing to argue. He is taking the position that a tank platoon goes into combat in total isolation for months at a time, completely cut off from supplies - for which month after month a pregnant soldier would be stuck there. Actually, tanks run out of fuel very quickly.

    In fact, the military requires soldiers allow all sorts of drugs be injected into them - like it or not. Nothing would prevent women in combat to be tested for pregnancy and injected with a month's long contraceptive slow release capsule, which many women now use anyway.
    I have personally been outside the wire without resupply for weeks at a time. This is a very real scenario, please do not talk about things you have ZERO idea or experience of.

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Well, the "standards" certainly are an issue, aren't they? But, then, the fuss mostly is over changing the standards, isn't it?

    Winning battles and wars no longer are decided upon which side had soldiers who would win more arm wrestling contests. Thus, we come tot he question of is the best Marine the one who can do the most pull-ups? For how 95+% will be used in combat, no. Yet people are furious over changing pull-up standards for women (or anyone.)

    Marines don't meet the standards of Navy Seals. Does that make them inferior Marines who will "get people killed" and therefore should be washed out?
    Your massive ignorance of the physical requirements of modern combat is undeniable. You seem to picture all war as riding around a tank in the middle of baghdad.

    When in reality it looks like this:

    Last edited by RabidAlpaca; 11-26-13 at 05:29 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  6. #126
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    The important thing is that male members must remember that female members are PEOPLE and human beings, just like they are, and to treat them as a team mate and a colleague instead of a sexual interest just because she happens to be female.
    LOL. You don't plan on winning any war you find yourself in.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  7. #127
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    World War II

    Main article: Soviet women in World War II

    Women, members of Sydir Kovpak's partisan formation in Ukraine


    Women played a large part in most of the armed forces of the Second World War. In most countries though, women tended to serve mostly in administrative, medical and in auxiliary roles. But in the Soviet Union women fought in larger numbers in front line roles. Over 800,000 women served in the Soviet armed forces in World War II; nearly 200,000 of them were decorated and 89 of them eventually received the Soviet Union’s highest award, the Hero of the Soviet Union. They served as pilots, snipers, machine gunners, tank crew members and partisans, as well as in auxiliary roles.[1] Very few of these women, however, were ever promoted to officers.
    Aviators

    For Soviet women aviators, instrumental to this change was Marina Raskova, a famous Russian aviator, often referred to[by whom?] as the ‘Russian Amelia Earhart’. Raskova became a famous aviator as both a pilot and a navigator in the 1930s. She was the first woman to become a navigator in the Soviet Air Force in 1933. Raskova is credited with using her personal connections with Joseph Stalin to convince the military to form three combat regiments for women. The Soviet Union was the first nation to allow women pilots to fly combat missions. These regiments flew a combined total of more than 30,000 combat sorties, produced at least thirty Heroes of the Soviet Union, and included at least two fighter aces. This military unit was initially called Aviation Group 122 while the three regiments received training. After their training, the three regiments received their formal designations as the 586th Fighter Aviation Regiment, the 46th Taman Guards Night Bomber Aviation Regiment and the 125th Guards Bomber Aviation Regiment.
    Land forces

    The Soviet Union also used women for sniping duties extensively, and to great effect, including Nina Alexeyevna Lobkovskaya and Ukrainian Lyudmila Pavlichenko (who killed over 300 enemy soldiers). The Soviets found that sniper duties fit women well, since good snipers are patient, careful, deliberate, can avoid hand-to-hand combat, and need higher levels of aerobic conditioning than other troops. Women also served as machine gunners, tank drivers, medics, communication personnel and political officers. Manshuk Mametova was a machine gunner from Kazakhstan and was the first Soviet Asian woman to receive the Hero of the Soviet Union for acts of bravery.



    German prisoners marched out of Stalingrad. At least they could take joy in not having the indignity of having German women fighting at their side. Just the indignity of losing to Russians who had tens of thousands of Russian combat troops at their side.

  8. #128
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    Didn't see this coming Female Marines have received ample time (over a year) to prepare for this test which, oh by the way, still isn't to the same standard that it is for males. Sure, they have to get the same bare minimum of 3 that males get. However, their max is 8 whereas mine is 20. So, on a maximum 300 point physical fitness test (PFT) where each of the 3 events (pull ups, crunches, 3 mile run) has the potential to give you 100 points, a female Marine only has to do 40% of the work I have to in order to get 100 points for her pull ups on her PFT. I call bogus. That enables her to be as competitive for promotion as me without having to do the work that I do. Not to mention that she can run her 3 miles in 21 minutes to receive 100 points for that while I have to run it in 18 minutes. If you've ever run a 5K, 3 minutes is an eternity between two runners.

    Some of you will say "Well, that score is only part of what is looked at when considering promotion." I will submit this to you. Every promotion board for E-6, E-7, and E-8/E-9 (this board is conducted jointly) in the Marine Corps has an after action review written for it. In every one of those after action reviews, the board members are asked "What is the first tie breaker between two Marines if there is one spot left in their MOS field to promote?" The answer is ALWAYS "Their PFT score".

    Now, some on this site will say that I am butt hurt because 3 females passed our infantry course. That is mentioned in the article. Not the case. When I know that 16 females began the course and only 3 passed, I'm not worried. Of the 16, 9 failed due to performance reasons. That leaves 7. Of those 7, 4 broke due to hip and knee problems. Those are the classic female breaking points that I've seen in most female injuries. Those occur very frequently at Parris Island as well. So, we have the 3 left. Now, for males, approximately 79% make it through infantry training. 10% of them are dropped for medical reasons. That leaves approximately 11% for performance/legal issues. For those of you who are Marines, it's the classic, always spoken of, 10% that fail. Also of note, the females were required to carry each other during casualty evacuation, movement courses, etc. So, a female weighing 110lbs-140lbs is carrying around her equivalent weight while the males are slinging whichever casualty they see over their shoulder. Again, I call bogus. I'm not a big fan of this social engineering crap. DADT was another issue. I wasn't a supporter of that. It wasn't performance based. A gay guy can fireman's carry a casualty just as effectively (though the casualty may be uncomfortable) as a straight guy. But the vast majority of females cannot do the same. This is a performance thing for me. It is a logistical thing. It is a morale thing. Our military is the best in the world yet we want to mess with the very core of its competence. The members of it. I'm not a big fan.

    Corps Delays Pull-Up Requirements for Female Marines | TIME.com
    Yeah - performance overall is the only reason I've opposed let ins with altered standards.

    They should set overall ability standards, and anyone who meets those standards can engage - and those who can't, don't. Gender wouldn't matter. It would result in less women qualifying, but at least they're not qualifying based on their own abilities (or lack of) - thus putting it on the individual and not on engineered social standards.

    Though I'm not quite sure why you're citing injury stats - if one is injured certainly you don't want them in. It seemed, for a moment, that you were arguing the opposite: that the standards were too harsh for both men and women. (though by the end it was clear you weren't)
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  9. #129
    Professor
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    11-30-13 @ 07:05 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,293

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    Logic and social placement are not diametric opposites.
    Oh but they can be and many times are.

    The purpose of the military is to protect society, not have society subservient to the military.
    Good. You got one thing right anyway.

    If the military has practices or policies contrary to best social interests, the practice or policy must be changed.
    Really? So we must change the fact that our military is designed to kill other people? Explain how we gain from such a change.

    FEW soldiers will ever be in combat - and as wars become more technology based even less so.
    Dummies have been saying this type nonsense since the end of WW1. A person would think as many times as it's been proven to be nuts, some people that buy into it would learn better. Guesss not.

    But 100% become members of civilian society - and bring with them the attitudes ground into them during their formative young adult years in the military.
    No, not true. Many die before they ever get the chance to reenter civilian society. But the vast majority of those that do retain the positive attributes learned while serving in the military. Excluding some retired generals of course.

    There is a saying of "once a Marine, always a Marine." So what about the 30, 40, 50, 60 years after they are an active Marine?
    What about it?
    Near complete illogic on your part.
    "“If we don’t deepen our ports all along the Gulf — places like Charleston, South Carolina; or Savannah, Georgia; or Jacksonville, Florida…” -Obama

  10. #130
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, there are only male and female Marines. There are no people, human beings, girls, boys, or any other pansy-ass ****.
    I don't see how this makes any sense.

Page 13 of 52 FirstFirst ... 3111213141523 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •