Ok...what's her argument here? She seems all over the place and contradicts herself when you watch the news clip.

 

I personally was against the lifting of the ban of women in combat roles/MOS's last year.

 

A Marine's story: Women set up to fail USMC?s most grueling test

I thought her message was pretty clear:

 

1) She wasn't capable to meet the physical demands of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course.

2) They should not change the standards required by the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course to meet a lower standard for women. The standards should be the same for men and women because those standards are required to complete the job.

3) As a woman who could not complete the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course, she should be allowed to re-test, just as a man who can not compete the course is allowed to.

4) There needs to be a discussion address possible changes to the way women are trained and prepared for military tests of physical ability such as the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course. (She gave the example of women not being trained in the military for upper-body strength in the same way that men are, and she was suggesting changing the way women are trained so they are more capable to meet the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course training requirements when they enter the course.)

Without knowing more specifics of what the course requires its hard to comment. That said if women aren't trained like men the Marines need to step out of the 50s.

I agree with CWB.

I don't have a problem with what she said in the interview. she really didn't contradict herself, it was the reporter who was trying to turn the interview in a direction to make it sound like it was discrimination.

 

Everytime she was asked if the testing should be different from the mens testing she repeated that there in no way should be any difference int he testing and the testing should not be changed. When the reporter asked if it wasn't fair to women with the physical aspects of the test she stated that women should just train harder to prepare themselves before the test etc.

 

I think it was more the reporter trying to make something out of nothing more than the Lt claiming sexual discrimination.

Are Marines allowed to work out on their own, either in their barracks or in gyms on base?

Are Marines allowed to work out on their own, either in their barracks or in gyms on base?

 

Many divisions of the military have people they have hired for the purpose of training their troops. Similar to a strength & conditioning coach for a team, but with more of a "tactical" emphasis.

Many divisions of the military have people they have hired for the purpose of training their troops. Similar to a strength & conditioning coach for a team, but with more of a "tactical" emphasis.

 

So it's possible this lady could have done more on her own to prepare herself?

Are women structurally built the same as men in the upperbody for strength? I would think men are stronger with upper body by far.

I personally was against the lifting of the ban of women in combat roles/MOS's last year.

 

 

Why?

I have seen a few points that I think are valid arguments against women in combat roles. I'm curious to see how they are going to be addressed.

 

1) Facilities. Forward position outposts used to require only one bathroom, one shower facility, and although some did have them, they didn't have to have separated bunking facilities. Now that is going to be addressed.

2) Field cleanliness. Fact is fact. Men can very easily pee standing up, and women can't. Men also don't menstruate or require the sanitary products to address a menstrual period. This can particularly present problems in field operation settings. Additionally, men don't go through monthly hormonal changes like women - it's been a proven fact that hormonal changes/PMS can cause involuntary changes in emotional and mental states in women. It is still relatively unknown what impact that can/will that have on a woman in a combat situation.

3) Torture. Both male and female prisoners are at risk of torture and rape, but misogynistic societies and male captors in general may be more willing to abuse woman prisoners. Also, research has been performed that consistently shows that male prisoners are more likely to give in to their captors when their "sisters in arms" are being tortured than when their "brothers in arms" are undergoing the same torture techniques.

 

 

I think my opinion on women assuming active combat roles is honestly fairly dependent on how the military shows capability to handle those three points.

Are women structurally built the same as men in the upperbody for strength? I would think men are stronger with upper body by far.

 

Prepubescent boys and girls have essentially zero differences. When puberty kicks in the production of estrogren increases fat deposits and breast development in women while the production of testosterone in men increases bone formation and protein synthesis.

 

Women are close to men in terms of absolute strength with the lower body, but in the upper body they fall much shorter. In terms of relative strength the differences are much smaller between men and women. Relative lower body strength is very similar but the upper body still falls short.

 

Women can increase their strength at and equal and often greater rate than men (having a lower baseline number attributes to this) but in terms of percentage increases of absolute strength the men will increase more.

Why?

 

I believe there are things meant for women to do, I believe there are some things meant for men to do. Combat is one of those things meant for men.

 

I served in a combat unit for 4 years, though luckily I never had to actually experience combat. This is just a very basic example but it holds a ton of water. At 6'5 230 pounds when I was in the Army, there were several men in my unit that would have a hard time dragging me out of a foxhole or putting me in a fireman's carry to get me off he field of battle should that need have ever arose. I never met one, not one female soldier in my 4 years that could have accomplished that feat. Granted, there weren't a whole lot of female soldiers at Ft Ord in my day, but I met other female military personnel as well at other places and I never met one that could have accomplished that feat. basic, but in my experience very factual.

 

There are other reason that CWB mentioned above as well that you will hear a lot when this topic is discussed.

 

But, to be honest, the ban on combat MOS's for females was always kind of a farce anyway. There are plenty of jobs though not considered combat positions that end up being in combat roles regardless. For example, there are transportation MOS's that though technically not combat positions, a soldier in that role can very easily find themselves on the front lines or near enough to easily see a combat situation, and women have been allowed in those positions for years.

Prepubescent boys and girls have essentially zero differences. When puberty kicks in the production of estrogren increases fat deposits and breast development in women while the production of testosterone in men increases bone formation and protein synthesis.

 

Women are close to men in terms of absolute strength with the lower body, but in the upper body they fall much shorter. In terms of relative strength the differences are much smaller between men and women. Relative lower body strength is very similar but the upper body still falls short.

 

Women can increase their strength at and equal and often greater rate than men (having a lower baseline number attributes to this) but in terms of percentage increases of absolute strength the men will increase more.

 

On average, women have 80% of the lower body strength of a man, 50% of the upper body strength. I believe those numbers actually widen when you talk about those that actually strength train.

I don't have a problem with what she said in the interview. she really didn't contradict herself, it was the reporter who was trying to turn the interview in a direction to make it sound like it was discrimination.

 

Everytime she was asked if the testing should be different from the mens testing she repeated that there in no way should be any difference int he testing and the testing should not be changed. When the reporter asked if it wasn't fair to women with the physical aspects of the test she stated that women should just train harder to prepare themselves before the test etc.

 

I think it was more the reporter trying to make something out of nothing more than the Lt claiming sexual discrimination.

 

I think she kind of did contradict her self at the end and pretty much said she thought women should be treated differently, which was the exact opposite of what she said earlier. I might have to watch it again but that's what I picked up when I first watched it. But the whole interview...it just seemed to me to allude in the beginning that there is an issue here, then the LT didn't really confirm that though the interviewer was really trying to get her to, then in the end the LT to me kind of changed her tune a little. Maybe I was reading too much into it.