NOW can we be done with the silly, "women in combat roles" debate?

AMRUSMCR said:
LE has it figured out. The military needs to nut up, quit listening to outside opinions with an agenda, and implement the same standards & requirements across the board.
Click to expand...

In regards to LE having it figured out, that is not quite the case. While some agencies have one standard, more have male/female standards as well as a varying standard for age. Most, if not all agencies that follow the Cooper Institute's standard subscribe to this, even though Cooper will tell you that that only correct and legal standard is t0 have one standard, which is supported by case law.

As for the arguments of which job is harder based on tasks, the comparison is doesn't make sense. Hell, it isn't even appropriate. A clerk isn't an infantryman and neither are cops. The problem in LE is that a 6'5" 220 pound asshole who decides he doesn't want to go to jail doesn't care which PT standard you passed, just like an 80 pound ruck + food, water, ammo, etc. that needs to ascend 5,000 feet doesn't care what the PT standard is. The job is the same for everyone performing it regardless age or sex.
 
I agree. The job is very similar when you are in a fight for your life. Fighting hand to hand in home town USA or overseas a fight is a fight. The tools and back up we bring to the fight is similar at times but often very different.


policemedic said:
There's no question but that being an Infantryman is more physically demanding than being a cop. Now, there are times when things even out--I've had to climb to the top of a 25 story building, for instance--but the Infantry regularly demands more effort than police work does.

Police work is to a large degree somewhat sedentary. Most cops drive cars most of the day, and get out when/as necessary. When physical exertion is necessary, it's often an all-out effort, but if police work is done correctly you don't fight too many people (even when working really bad neighborhoods). Now, I'm talking about patrol division cops here. Detectives and other investigators are even more sedentary by the nature of their work.

Now, I've walked footbeats all day, and that does suck a bit. Soft body armor and the Batman belt do wear on you after 8 hours. But it's not rucking.

With that said, the need to be physically fit is equal. Accomplishing that goal happens much more frequently in the Infantry than it does in America's PDs. And that's a shame. There are any number of reasons for it--some are even valid--but we must work harder to stay fit despite the challenges we face that our military brethren don't.

Harmony Church was exponentially more physically taxing than the police academy, even though the academy was longer. In fairness, the academy was much more intellectually taxing.

We've had women on our SWAT team, and so does Philadelphia. I know one or two female SWAT cops with more shootings under their belt than most male cops, and I'll trust them with my life. They've earned their place. We don't alter our standards for selection on our team; the PT test is the PT test and there's only one standard. The shooting test is the shooting test etc. I can't speak for all SWAT training schools, but the Philadelphia Police SWAT school has unisex standards and so does the NTOA school.

Even in SWAT the physical demands don't compare to the Infantry (although there are exceptions). The gear is the same; my vest and plates weigh as much now as they ever did (and they're set up about the same). My aid bag damn sure isn't any lighter. But I get to drop the aid bag outside the objective now. I don't need to hump it for 25 miles in less than 8 hours to make sure the unit is certified good to go like I used to. Even on long operations like barricades the physical stress is mostly from wearing the gear, carrying a shield, porting windows or whatever. It's not the same as doing a long movement over shit terrain and then doing a raid. Teams swap out and relieve each other; the concept of not sleeping for 24 or more hours during an operation is completely foreign to LE.
Click to expand...
 
RustyShackleford said:
In regards to LE having it figured out, that is not quite the case. While some agencies have one standard, more have male/female standards as well as a varying standard for age. Most, if not all agencies that follow the Cooper Institute's standard subscribe to this, even though Cooper will tell you that that only correct and legal standard is t0 have one standard, which is supported by case law.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh. Thanks for the correction. Based on previous posts it seemed that the examples provided and the experiences had been a flat standard across the board, as a common in the LE community. I didn't research this further, but am interested in the case law aspect to it, so definitely will.

RustyShackleford said:
As for the arguments of which job is harder based on tasks, the comparison is doesn't make sense. Hell, it isn't even appropriate. A clerk isn't an infantryman and neither are cops. The problem in LE is that a 6'5" 220 pound asshole who decides he doesn't want to go to jail doesn't care which PT standard you passed, just like an 80 pound ruck + food, water, ammo, etc. that needs to ascend 5,000 feet doesn't care what the PT standard is. The job is the same for everyone performing it regardless age or sex.
Click to expand...

This is what I agree with. The different standards just irritate me. If the job is the same for both genders, then the standards need to be the same. You can either do it, or you can't. If you can't, and won't, then you never will. Accept it and move on. The WM's they interviewed all stated that they had to put forth effort to train to do it, but once they did, they were able to meet/exceed the minimum.

I realize I'm pretty verbose on this subject, and I apologize, but it just lights a fire under my ass. If women want to be accepted on equal footing in the combat MOS's that are being opened up to them, they also need to prove they can do it. When standards get lowered so that they can make it and so that everyone looks / feels good about themselves, then they're going to be that much further in the hole in re: to attaining respect from many that they have to serve alongside. You have to earn respect... it's not handed out just because someone with a well intentioned but misguided women's rights agenda or a politicians say it should be so.
 
That's another reason I like the fire service. Do we help each other? Yes. But the stress training we do is very very individual. You either do it or you fucking quit. We do it till people quit, since those with the heart might end up falling out (which happens) but they'll get right the fuck back up and continue dragging the hoseline or hitting the sled, etc. The people that fail and continue to try even after failing are better by thousands of times than those that might fail or don't even fail, and quit.

Here's a flavor test for ya.

8 lb sledge on a Kaiser sled, back and forth 2 times
446990888.jpg
The sled weighs what it weighs. You move it or fail, period.

2.5" 200' line advancement on a flaked charged line (S-flaked parallel to the starting line, it gets heavier the further out you go and the more smoked you get) It weighs approximately 549 lbs.

Dummy drag on a 200 lb dead man

Ladder raise on a 35' ladder, all upper body. Ladder is affixed to training building for safety purposes.

Enter 2nd story building through ladder climb. Pick up hose pack (about 50-75 lbs) and walk down and up 3 story stairs twice.
Go to window, pull up 2 hose rolls with a rope hand over hand. Lower controlled, go to bottom floor.
Get handed 1.75" line with smoothbore nozzle, advance through building with line flowing on your own.
Move outside, carry Hurst hydraulic tools (jaws of life and all associated equipment ) 200' off engine to where wrecked training car is and set up tool station appropriately (tarp, etc)
Move back to building, go through obstacle course consisting of entanglement/entrapment/convoluted obstacles we encounter while under blackout conditions
Come out, change air pack bottles, then get tested mentally through emergency regulator/mask failure situations as well as Mayday protocols (Mayday's are trained/tested throughout in the entanglement obstacles by proctors hounding you worse than Drill's) while you're absolutely fucking smoked.

Oh yeah, the whole time you're on SCBA air and have to maintain positive control of your chosen weapon IE pickhead, Denver tool, Halligan, etc.
 
We still have a one standard combat fitness test (agility test, 15km weight bearing pack march and firemans carry), an age/sex standard based fitness test (2.4km run, push push and sit ups), but have recently introduced an employment based physical standard test that progresses from all corps standard, to arms corps standard to individual corps specific standard.
So far the Infantry one (15km route march bearing 40-45kg/88-100lb, 1km fighting order run in 8 minutes at 22kg - 23kg/48-50lb, 72m fire and movement with 18m leopard crawl, 35kg/77lb box lift and place and a 10m 80kg/176lb casualty drag) hasn't to my knowledge been passed by a female soldier or officer.

In service applicants can (but as of yet haven't to my knowledge) attempt to transfer into Infantry, by 2016 females will be able to attempt to enlist off the street.
 
For everyone who wants to see women in combat with infantry and SOF, I wonder how you feel about first putting women in the NFL.

Mandatory female runningbacks throughout the NFL.
 
digrar said:
We still have a one standard combat fitness test (agility test, 15km weight bearing pack march and firemans carry), an age/sex standard based fitness test (2.4km run, push push and sit ups), but have recently introduced an employment based physical standard test that progresses from all corps standard, to arms corps standard to individual corps specific standard.
So far the Infantry one (15km route march bearing 40-45kg/88-100lb, 1km fighting order run in 8 minutes at 22kg - 23kg/48-50lb, 72m fire and movement with 18m leopard crawl, 35kg/77lb box lift and place and a 10m 80kg/176lb casualty drag) hasn't to my knowledge been passed by a female soldier or officer.

In service applicants can (but as of yet haven't to my knowledge) attempt to transfer into Infantry, by 2016 females will be able to attempt to enlist off the street.
Click to expand...

This is a great idea, a PT test based on the job you do. :thumbsup:
 
Who cares anymore this argument is over, get ready for the standards to fall to pre-ww2 levels. I think we should let women fight the next war all by themselves, they can show us what we have been doing wrong in Iraq and Astan. :rolleyes:
 
Just read this yesterday, it'll be interesting to see the results but I think they should have used a higher % of female soldiers in it.

http://m.military.com/daily-news/20...-unit-to-women.html?comp=7000023317828&rank=1

The Marine Corps will open a stateside combat unit to women to collect data for the military's overall effort to integrate them into combat roles by 2016.

Females will make up a quarter of the 460-Marine unit and be placed in infantry squads, artillery gun sections, and tank crews, officials said. A male Marine will serve as the commander and a female Marine will be placed as the task force sergeant major.

The unit will be called the Ground Combat Element Experimental Task Force. Its purpose will be to "evaluate the physical performance of individual Marine volunteers in the execution of individual and collective tasks in an operational environment," according to a release from the Corps.
Click to expand...
 
I haven't read the whole thread, so go ahead and jump on me if this is a repeat.

Here's what they've been doing- They'll take a standard like 12 miles with 35 pounds in 3 hours. Then they'll say, "but is that really a good standard? How many times do you actually do that in combat? Maybe we should change it to 200 yards in 2 minutes to simulate running to the truck since more forces are mounted these days."

The people that are pulling the strings and pushing the issue obviously want women in the force, for political reasons or otherwise. They are bending and breaking the rules to see it come to fruition.
 
JBS said:
For everyone who wants to see women in combat with infantry and SOF, I wonder how you feel about first putting women in the NFL.

Mandatory female runningbacks throughout the NFL.
Click to expand...

Hell, just let female cadets and midshipmen play for the NCAA football team. The uproar from alumni would be awesome.

pardus said:
This is a great idea, a PT test based on the job you do. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

IIRC, the DOD tried this in the 70s. DACOWITS shot it down because too many women couldn't pass the tests for the more physical jobs.
 
Etype said:
I haven't read the whole thread, so go ahead and jump on me if this is a repeat.

Here's what they've been doing- They'll take a standard like 12 miles with 35 pounds in 3 hours. Then they'll say, "but is that really a good standard? How many times do you actually do that in combat? Maybe we should change it to 200 yards in 2 minutes to simulate running to the truck since more forces are mounted these days."

The people that are pulling the strings and pushing the issue obviously want women in the force, for political reasons or otherwise. They are bending and breaking the rules to see it come to fruition.
Click to expand...

It's not even speculation; here's the quote from the horse's mouth: “Importantly, though, if we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn't make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?"

IMO, the very concept of any regiment, any branch, any service having to justify maintenance of their standards is deeply disturbing, especially when the driving factor for that question is in no way tied to operational capability.
 

Similar threads

LimaOscarSierraTango
USMC changes fitness requirement for women
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
Gunz
Gunz
TheWookie
.Fix Recon
2
Replies
35
Views
16K
leonrazurado
leonrazurado
Back
Top