Here’s What Happens When Male Marines Go Up Against Mixed-Gender

a reply to: mOjOm

well how about we start by having the same physical qualifications on all PRT's??

let me tell you something, women will not be able to achieve the same run times and pushup/pullup counts on average it's impossible they don't produce high levels of test

just a fact

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: mOjOm

there is great rolls for women, such as recon

women can collect data way easier than men in fact they already do that in the CIA and in Army SF

It's called 'INTEL".

a reply to: InTheLight

whaaaaaatever

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Well yeah, ya think that might change it a bit??

Here we have trained and experienced combat soldiers and here we....don't. Ok who can shoot better. Duh. I'll place whatever I have in my wallet on the combat ready side.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
This experiment was done wrong and incomplete. It failed to account for an all-female control group and draws from two different sets of experience levels in regards to the sex of participants.

However, at this point, it’s certainly worth noting that the male participants involved in the experiment had previously served in combat units, while the female participants came directly from noncombat jobs.

I agree with the conclusion based on my personal beliefs and experience. But the conclusion needs to be drawn from a more comprehensive study that accounts for these factors, otherwise it is bias IMO.

As always, it needs to be repeated by other researchers - just to make sure. (?)

originally posted by: cenpuppie
a reply to: InTheLight

Look, its obvious your confused at how things work around here. Women aren't equal to men, at ANYTHING, except those roles women have done traditional. I know it sucks but that's the way its been so that's the way it is and that's the way it will be, forever.

Now that the sarcasm is out of the way, it's funny how other military's around the world have no issue in integrating women in, some are looking forward to it.

America? Where arguing about semantics. The same crap people are saying about women, were said about black men when they tried/where serving.

We're not talking about estrogen-laden women, though, we are now talking about a transgender of hormones.

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: InTheLight

whaaaaaatever

Ever...and ever.. what did you say?

a reply to: toysforadults

Have whatever physical tests or whatever you want. I mean that's how you know who can do what after all. We have a volunteer military so they should not only have reasons to deny someone but ways of finding out where they can fit best.

Some people might just pass some tests but kick a** in some other test where you just know that's what they would be good at. I mean I know lots of people that served and not all were in the sh*t, so to speak. You can drive a vehicle loaded with crap or an electrician on a ship or a million other things too. They need to be filled. Plus I don't think the military is just overflowing with cadets and people serving anyway. I wold think they'd want as many folks as possible doing their part.

a reply to: toysforadults

Integrating women into these rolls is a problem. It erodes good order and discipline and damages the unit cohesion. The military is not designed to be an instrument of social change.

The issue with the above is they said the exact same thing about Black people. The unit adapted and overcame and was strengthened because of it.

The litmus test should be can the person do their job and can they rely on each other, trusting their lives to those people.

Simple question: Will including women, transexuals, and homosexuals make our military stronger or weaker? To me the answer is obvious and evidence is overwhelming.

By the way, I do not hate any group or individual. But when it comes to national security, individual feelings come in a distant second place to effectiveness.

originally posted by: AnonymousCitizen
Simple question: Will including women, transexuals, and homosexuals make our military stronger or weaker? To me the answer is obvious and evidence is overwhelming.

What evidence?

originally posted by: RedDragon
Idk, my sister is in shape and had to call men to change her car battery because she was too weak to carry about half a mile. No man alive can't lift a car battery for half a mile. I wouldn't feel safe having women in my squad because you never know which situation they will get you killed in.

**Tank runs out of fuel**
"Go get me that 250 lb oil drum across the street!"
Woman tugs on oil drum, barely able to drag it... gets shot b/c she's taking forever.
Everyone dies.
The end.

I would bet there are more men that can't carry a car battery a 1/2 mile than you think. Lol
I tell you what though, back in the spring I put 2 batteries into my father in laws 40ft boat while it was in heated storage.
Group 31 deep cycles...about 75lbs each, climbed up a 10ft stepladder just to the swim platform and then up and down a couple of other ladders and stairs into the bilge.
Then the old batteries back out the same way...I am not a bodybuilder but I am in decent shape.
I was winded and I thought the crappy plastic handles on them were going to break every inch of the way lol

There are women out there that are as good or better at certain things than the average man. There's absolutely no reason to put gender/sex-based restrictions based on that fact. The more it's accepted, the more they will be integrated, the more of those equally qualified women there'll be. There will always be women that don't belong in certain situations and they can and should simply choose not to participate, there will always be men that don't belong in certain (often the same) situations and they can and should simply choose not to participate. But we should never tell an *individual* they can't do something simply and only based on gender, sex, race, color, height, etc.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: toysforadults

Integrating women into these rolls is a problem. It erodes good order and discipline and damages the unit cohesion. The military is not designed to be an instrument of social change.

The issue with the above is they said the exact same thing about Black people. The unit adapted and overcame and was strengthened because of it.

The litmus test should be can the person do their job and can they rely on each other, trusting their lives to those people.

The military has one purpose...to conquer.

a reply to: InTheLight

I'm familiar...

a reply to: toysforadults

By and large, you are correct. There are exceptional women who can match men, but they are indeed exceptional. There is no way that I could keep up in that scenario. Even in the best shape of my life, I wouldn't have made it. I am 5'2" and 110 pounds. I literally, just can't carry the weight required. There are some women who could, and keep up, but the ones that could and still be an asset are few and far between.

As far as the marksmanship... meh... I'm a better shot than most men. I know lots of women that are as well. That deficit doesn't match my real world experience. But, then again, my real world experience is with hunting not combat.

I think whatever physical standards should be maintained regardless of gender. If she can cut then she can cut it. If she can't then she can't.

a reply to: redhorse

I think whatever physical standards should be maintained regardless of gender. If she can cut then she can cut it. If she can't then she can't.

Totally agree the outcome will not be comfortable for many in society however, I just know from being involved in sports my entire life

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: redhorse

I think whatever physical standards should be maintained regardless of gender. If she can cut then she can cut it. If she can't then she can't.

Totally agree the outcome will not be comfortable for many in society however, I just know from being involved in sports my entire life

So, you don't know, is that right?

a reply to: AnonymousCitizen

when it comes to national security, individual feelings come in a distant second place to effectiveness.

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: AnonymousCitizen

when it comes to national security, individual feelings come in a distant second place to effectiveness.