Page 36 of 52 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 519

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

  1. #351
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,082

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Quit your lying.
    my lying? Everyone who comes in here who is a vet and is telling you about their personal experience is lying to you, and you make this claim on.... what evidence, again?

  2. #352
    Guru

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,940

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

    [

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    What happens in the real world? Basically what you are saying is that it would be expected of the men and women in the unit to be having sexual relations just because of the fact that they are men and women? That is utterly ridiculous.

    This is not something that is happening all the time or even OFTEN relatively speaking, so you are full of it. MOST men and women are perfectly capable of self control in such situations. Those who cannot control themselves, should be disciplined and perhaps dishonorably discharged.
    So what are you basing you saying people are not having sex often on. Is it your experience in the military or what you want to be true because it supports your agenda

  3. #353
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,082

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

    Quote Originally Posted by braindrain View Post
    ChrisL said:
    Today 12:18 PM

    What happens in the real world? Basically what you are saying is that it would be expected of the men and women in the unit to be having sexual relations just because of the fact that they are men and women? That is utterly ridiculous.

    This is not something that is happening all the time or even OFTEN relatively speaking, so you are full of it. MOST men and women are perfectly capable of self control in such situations. Those who cannot control themselves, should be disciplined and perhaps dishonorably discharged.

    What are you basing that men and women are not having sex often on. Is it you experience in the military or what you want to be true
    She has no experience in the military - which apparently doesn't stop her from claiming that she knows more about it than those of us who do.

  4. #354
    Educator Paratrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Al
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 12:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    888

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

    Just to re-iterate we have a slew of Infantry qualified and combat veterans here stating that that based on what they have experienced and witnessed women in general do not have what it takes to make it in the Infantry without reducing overall combat effectiveness of the units.

    I'm not sure how many of you guys are/were instructors but I have trained thousands of soldiers and have seen first hand that the majority of women struggle at Infantry specific tasks (recent females going through Infantry school in the Marine Corps also indicate this)

    A few civilians have rebutted with pseudo science. One quote was that they are better snipers.
    Of the best snipers in modern history exactly one out of ten is a female
    Top 10 Snipers in History - Listverse

    NO ONEis saying women do not bring something to the table in the military, however Infantry and Special Forces is not an area that they excel at or could be integrated without reducing combat effectiveness of those units.
    Last edited by Paratrooper; 11-27-13 at 04:04 PM.

  5. #355
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,082

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratrooper View Post
    Just to re-iterate we have a slew of Infantry qualified and combat veterans here stating that that based on what they have experienced and witnessed women in general do not have what it takes to make it in the Infantry without reducing overall combat effectiveness of the units.

    I'm not sure how many of you guys are/were instructors but I have trained thousands of soldiers and have seen first hand that the majority of women struggle at Infantry specific tasks.

    A few civilians have rebutted with pseudo science. One quote was that they are better snipers.
    Of the best snipers in modern history exactly one out of ten is a female
    Top 10 Snipers in History - Listverse

    NO ONEis saying women do not bring something to the table in the military, however Infantry and Special Forces is not an area that they excel at or could be integrated without reducing combat effectiveness of those units.
    Pshaw. Obviously you are lying. One of Joko's friends watched "The Marine", like, a million times, so, he pretty much knows way better than you what modern combat and its demands are like.

  6. #356
    Student Singe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-12-17 @ 11:17 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    170

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

    Read through all the posts here, and it simply boils down to equal standards or special treatment, right?

    There may be no right or wrong opinion, but it can't be both simultaneously.

  7. #357
    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
    Naturally they are - no one is denying it. And if a man wanted to be in the infantry, and he was a detraction, he wouldn't have the right to demand that "that's what he wants" either. The military does not give you what you want - the military tells you to do what it needs you to do. It's not like any other job. It's not like your job. It's a dictatorship. What you want is irrelevant. If you have a decent chain of command they may try to accommodate (they don't have to, but they might) it, but the instant that your want detracts at all from unit readiness, combat efficiency, or the needs of the military, it ceases to matter.



    I have no problem with women contributing their time or risking their life to protect their country - women are probably actually physically situated to make better pilots (lower center of gravity), and I've served with women (see above) who were fantastic Marines, and supremely competent at their jobs.

    But I am someone who has the experience to know that putting women in the infantry will reduce their combat effectiveness. Again, this isn't about the wants, desires, dreams, or even (within some limits) the rights of the individual. Combat is a team sport. We have, in our history, fought cultures who forgot that. Usually the kill ratios are very lopsided.



    No. Because the introduction of sexual tension and the drama that comes with it into the infantry is a distraction they cannot afford. Horny is pretty much a constant state of being for an 18-22 year old male on deployment. There is no "getting" sex-deprived, you just are. You are on deployment.

    Until they send out the Lioness teams. And that's when every single male Marine in a company of 190(ish) figures he has a 1/40 chance of finally getting laid, and those who think they can win (which, again, the infantry is self-selecting for aggressive, alpha-typologies, and are then trained to think that they are pretty much awesome) those odds, go for it.... distracting from the mission, ruining their focus, creating competition, creating cliques, destroying team cohesion, and degrading combat efficiency.


    It is not fair to ask men to put at risk their lives in because women want to play GI Jane. If you disagree with that relative valuation - again, we have a civilian governed military and we will do what we are told. But you at least owe us a recognition of the trade-off that you are telling us to make.
    I'll ask you the same question. Can you name one incident when women in combat has caused one of our troops to be killed - since that is the incessant claim?

  8. #358
    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
    Pshaw. Obviously you are lying. One of Joko's friends watched "The Marine", like, a million times, so, he pretty much knows way better than you what modern combat and its demands are like.
    Was there a show called "The Marine?" What the hell are you talking about? I told the story of one Marine I know who was a squad leader in Afghanistan, and his view of the future of the American military as he was told it. While extremely effective in what he was assigned to do, he believed it a complete waste producing no permanent benefit. It was not a direct comment about women in the military. It was the obvious that military tactics for the future have to change. They always do.

    If the enemy are locals and they take off their uniforms, the entire definition of war changes.

  9. #359
    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 Paratrooper View Post
    Just to re-iterate we have a slew of Infantry qualified and combat veterans here stating that that based on what they have experienced and witnessed women in general do not have what it takes to make it in the Infantry without reducing overall combat effectiveness of the units.

    I'm not sure how many of you guys are/were instructors but I have trained thousands of soldiers and have seen first hand that the majority of women struggle at Infantry specific tasks (recent females going through Infantry school in the Marine Corps also indicate this)

    A few civilians have rebutted with pseudo science. One quote was that they are better snipers.
    Of the best snipers in modern history exactly one out of ten is a female
    Top 10 Snipers in History - Listverse

    NO ONEis saying women do not bring something to the table in the military, however Infantry and Special Forces is not an area that they excel at or could be integrated without reducing combat effectiveness of those units.
    There are special forces operations potential situations where women could be suited and men would not. Per your example, there are situations where a female team could better infiltrate to get into a sniper position for a critical target.

    I respect your opinion. But I also believe the military serves many roles and that military service has many effects. Among those includes after service effects. How socially functional are ex-service members? While that is a more complex issue of course, I ponder if having young men withdrawn from interactions with women at levels of equality (and even where women can be superiors) for 2, 3, 4+ years does not cause a socially crippling effect for SOME men. It is possible women serving along with men could have an empathy effect that may offset the huge levels of various destructive stress syndromes and even levels of suicide within and after military service.

    Even the Infantry is not just a question of taking and holding territory and seeking out to destroy the enemy. The are much broader questions - unless you truly don't care what becomes of those who service in the military before and after service.

    There also becomes a them-us between civilians and the those in the military. In civil society, there is increasing public (and voter) opposition to ground troops being put into action. Poll after poll shows women FAR more in opposition to putting American troops on the ground. And more women vote than men. Unless the military is seen in a favorable light by the American public - which over 50% means women - it won't matter what the Infantry is capable of doing - because they won't be allowed to do it. It is the vested interest of the military and our nation that women - not just men - have a connect to our military forces.

    My "beef" isn't that there are situational circumstances where mixed units would be unwise or problematical. It is the over-simplification of one-liners such as "women in combat will get people killed!" and that women are inherently incapable of being on-the-ground warriors. A more challenging and complex question is the greater question of the relationship between the military, military service, the civilian population and civilian political leadership.

    In a democratic society, the military cannot become TOO "politically incorrect" (the terminology many are using) and still be fully viable and deployable. In a totalitarian society it would not matter. But in a democratic society what the public thinks of the military can be decisive. We just saw that in the matter concerning Syria in which the public overwhelmingly shouted "NO!" to ANY military involvement and that was even with declaring no plan to deploy ground troops. In addition to other concerns, was a fear this would lead to troops on the ground. What good is an Infantry if political forces prevent it from being able to be used? Or to HAVE to commit to a military conflict promising under no eventuality will any ground troops be deployed? That's crippling.

    The public, ie including women, SEEING women in uniform AND in combat roles would go a LONG way towards favorable support of the military and military deployments. Put as simple as possible, if women do not support usage of the Infantry as a political matter, the Infantry is impotent. And that alone severely harms our nation's foreign policy. The greatest power of the American military - and best usage of it - is FEAR of the American military coming their way. If they believe that American political will won't allow it, that fear-factor is lost.

    And thank you for acknowledging that women do have a place and more than as mere tokens in terms of killing-ability in a military context.
    Last edited by joko104; 11-27-13 at 05:24 PM.

  10. #360
    Educator Paratrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Al
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 12:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    888

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

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    There are special forces operations potential situations where women could be suited and men would not. Per your example, there are situations where a female team could better infiltrate to get into a sniper position for a critical target.

    I respect your opinion. But I also believe the military serves many roles and that military service has many effects. Among those includes after service effects. How socially functional are ex-service members? While that is a more complex issue of course, I ponder if having young men withdrawn from interactions with women at levels of equality (and even where women can be superiors) for 2, 3, 4+ years does not cause a socially crippling effect for SOME men. It is possible women serving along with men could have an empathy effect that may offset the huge levels of various destructive stress syndromes and even levels of suicide within and after military service.

    Even the Infantry is not just a question of taking and holding territory and seeking out to destroy the enemy. The are much broader questions - unless you truly don't care what becomes of those who service in the military before and after service.

    There also becomes a them-us between civilians and the those in the military. In civil society, there is increasing public (and voter) opposition to ground troops being put into action. Poll after poll shows women FAR more in opposition to putting American troops on the ground. And more women vote than men. Unless the military is seen in a favorable light by the American public - which over 50% means women - it won't matter what the Infantry is capable of doing - because they won't be allowed to do it. It is the vested interest of the military and our nation that women - not just men - have a connect to our military forces.

    My "beef" isn't that there are situational circumstances where mixed units would be unwise or problematical. It is the over-simplification of one-liners such as "women in combat will get people killed!" and that women are inherently incapable of being on-the-ground warriors. A more challenging and complex question is the greater question of the relationship between the military, military service, the civilian population and civilian political leadership.

    In a democratic society, the military cannot become TOO "politically incorrect" (the terminology many are using) and still be fully viable and deployable. In a totalitarian society it would not matter. But in a democratic society what the public thinks of the military can be decisive. We just saw that in the matter concerning Syria in which the public overwhelmingly shouted "NO!" to ANY military involvement and that was even with declaring no plan to deploy ground troops. In addition to other concerns, was a fear this would lead to troops on the ground. What good is an Infantry if political forces prevent it from being able to be used? Or to HAVE to commit to a military conflict promising under no eventuality will any ground troops be deployed? That's crippling.

    The public, ie including women, SEEING women in uniform AND in combat roles would go a LONG way towards favorable support of the military and military deployments. Put as simple as possible, if women do not support usage of the Infantry as a political matter, the Infantry is impotent. And that alone severely harms our nation's foreign policy. The greatest power of the American military - and best usage of it - is FEAR of the American military coming their way. If they believe that American political will won't allow it, that fear-factor is lost.

    And thank you for acknowledging that women do have a place and more than as mere tokens in terms of killing-ability in a military context.
    There is allot more to being a sniper than simply sitting on a ridge and patiently waiting for your shot. In Iraq for example snipers were set up in urban environments and and "a safe distance from the action" can turn into a close quarters battle quickly.

    It is not just our opinion that women in general do not perform well in combat arms, it has been tested and consistently proven. In every situation that has been tested (recently with marine infantry training) women have fallen out or become injured in significant numbers. It is about budget and efficiency. It is not efficient to run a program where you have a 80% or greater injury/fallout rate (with the exception of elite groups where you simply must have the best of the best in these cases the standard will consistently get tougher because you can only take on a limited number and you always want to choose the best.)

    There are already positions where women can engage and be engaged in combat, Military Police, Female Engagement Teams (even support units since we really don't have "front lines" anymore ).

    It is the specific tasks and missions of Infantry and Special Operations that make them different.
    Manning a .50 mounted on a MRAP, or working a guard tower, or an ECP is not the same as patrolling through the Afghan mountains, conducting complex attacks on enemy forces, doing a HVT kill/capture mission etc.

Page 36 of 52 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... 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
  •