It’s unlikely there’ll be any female infantrymen in the Marines

| November 26, 2012 | 22 Comments

Kristina Wong writes in the Washington Times that the prospect of having a female infantryman in the Marine Corps any time soon is unlikely. Not because of the course standards, exactly, but because volunteers are few and far between;

Only two of about 80 eligible female Marines have volunteered for the course — a grueling, three-month advanced regimen conducted at Quantico, Va., that was opened to women to research their performance.

Of the two female volunteers, one washed out on the first day, along with 26 of the107 men, and the other dropped out two weeks later for medical reasons, a Marine Corps spokesman said.

The research effort was launched after the Pentagon opened to women more than 14,000 jobs that could place them closer to front lines and combat.

The Marine Corps wants to test at least 90 more women in the course before making any decision about women serving in infantry roles, the spokesman said.

But, we were told that there were just oodles of females chomping at the bit to join the infantry, that they were disillusioned because they couldn’t get into the infantry because of the restrictions placed on them. Much like the gays were supposed to be swarming the recruiting offices after Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was lifted from the social burdens that the military had placed on them.

Of course, most of the people who were telling us those obvious fallacies had never served a day in uniform and the people who had served were merely making excuses for their own personal failures in their respective careers. it had nothing whatsoever to do with equality or opportunity, it had to do with unwavering acceptance of those things that didn’t really matter anyway.

The only recourse that the Marine Corps has at this point is to either lower their standards or force women to participate, neither of which is acceptable or conducive to producing an effective fighting force.

The Pentagon ordered the services to issue a progress report on the jobs it opened to women and to look into other areas, including the infantry, that could be opened to women.

Those reports and research are to be sent by the end of this month to Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta, who will issue any policy changes and recommendations to Congress.

So, time is getting tight.

Category: Military issues

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (22)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. USMCE8Ret says:

    You’re right, Jonn. The Marine Corps isn’t going to lower the standards or force women to participate in any “social study” as it relates to Infantry MOS’s. That said, if nothing else, the Corps is looking at raising the bar for women’s PT fitness (change the “dead hang” to “pull ups” for one), although the requirements for score would differ for women than their male counterparts. I don’t anticipate a long line of women waiting to attend the Infantry Officer’s Course or the School of Infantry for enlisted personnel, and medical studies on the rigors of such training hasn’t been done yet as far as I can tell. If nothing else, I believe the Marine Corps will conduct its study smartly, and DoD will have to accept the findings.

  2. John says:

    Read the article it says that only newly mented female lieutenants are able to go through the training that might have something to do with not having many volunteers.

  3. OWB says:

    Good for the Corps! Allow an opportunity, but if none want to take it, or those who try simply do not make it through, then that is what needs to be reported.

    And hats off to the two women who did try. They will likely take a lot of ribbing, but they gave it a go.

  4. The Dude says:

    Maybe some of these great generals we have should stop trying to get laid and make the simple observation that many other grunts have made (to include myself) That women don’t belong in the infantry..

  5. 2-17 Air Cav says:

    “It had nothing whatsoever too do with equality or opportunity, it had to do with unwavering acceptance of those things that didn’t really matter anyway.” True dat.

  6. PFDRbrendan says:

    Hit it right on the head,

    “Of course, most of the people who were telling us those obvious fallacies had never served a day in uniform and the people who had served were merely making excuses for their own personal failures in their respective careers. it had nothing whatsoever to do with equality or opportunity, it had to do with unwavering acceptance of those things that didn’t really matter anyway”.

    Can the rest of the Country please stop using us as a social experiment?

  7. NHSparky says:

    John–when only 2 of 80 eligible even VOLUNTEERED for the school (a rate of 2.5 percent) in a service that is “riflemen first” and combat-arms heavy, that’s a telling stat right there.

  8. PhillyandBCEagles says:

    “The only recourse that the Marine Corps has at this point is to either lower their standards or force women to participate, neither of which is acceptable or conducive to producing an effective fighting force.”

    This assumes that the politicians give a rat’s ass about producing an effective fighting force….in the eyes of the current Administration, I have a feeling that weakening the military’s fighting capabilities in the name of social engineering is at best a necessary evil and at worst an added benefit.

  9. PintoNag says:

    I agree with OWB. The door has been opened, and the opportunity offered. Let the women try who will. Let truth and reality provide further guidance in the future, not political correctness.

  10. Rerun0369 says:

    @1 They already ran the test phase on the new female PFT standards, and immediately scrapped it. Turns out the average Female Marine is only capable of a single dead hang pullup. Not a knock on women,but a telling statement on the physiological differences between men and women.

    We can only hope that the Corps will stay the course and make the proper well thought decision after ample observation time. Unfortunately, as we all know, in the end it ultimately is not up to us in the military to make those decisions, somebody seeking re-election makes them.

    I wonder if anybody has looked at the logistics of all this? I know Joe Public is under the impression that we all live on big comfy FOB’s with A/C and ice cream (thanks to movies like The Hurt Locker), but what about the majority of us lowly grunts living in platoon or smaller PB’s and OP’s? Where do I put the women? Lord knows Mom and Dad back home will have a fit if they find out their Little Suzy is bunking with Johnny, or even showering together (if there are showers that is).

  11. RandomNCO says:

    Gives a new meaning to that term us Grunts all know and love:

    “What’s the matter? You got sand in your pussy?!”

    “YES! AS A MATTER OF FACT I DO!”

  12. USMCE8Ret says:

    @#2 Jonn – The article also mentioned “… that the Marines have yet to implement the research option for female enlisted Marines who volunteer to train at the Infantry Training Battalion, the all-male advanced regimen at the Corps’ School of Infantry at Camp Geiger, N.C., a spokeswoman said.” That’s what I was keying in on with my first comment, as to suggest the Corps may have considered allowing enlisted female Marines to attend SOI to further their study.

    @#10 – I wasn’t aware the idea had already been scrapped. I recall the change was being considered prior to my retirement. As for the logistics, I dunno. I can’t imagine what the 52 or 62 area (and elsewhere) aboard Camp Pendleton would go through to accomodate female 03XX’s.

  13. FatCircles says:

    Any Marine will tell you what will be a result of females failing the current standards and that is reevaluation and lowered separate standards to met social goals. The absurd double standards already exist in the Corps both officially and unofficially regarding female Marines so it’s only a matter of time until the Corps goes full retard.

    Hey Rerun0369, greetings from a fellow infantry Terminal Lancer!

  14. DaveO says:

    I give the Corps a year before new standards are fully in effect. And a Rainbow Ribbon is authorized for wear on promotion photos to show the boards how correct the Marine is.

  15. melle1228 says:

    They will just skew and rewrite the Progress report to fit their progressive agenda. It is what they did with that “survey” of servicemembers about gays serving.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Personally as a woman who served in the Marine Corps who now has the second generation of women serving in the Corps I am ok with women NOT serving in combat roles. Even when i was in the best shape of my life I could not have served in a combat unit. Physically we are not equals. And I am against lowering the standards to accomodate women. There are enough roles we can fulfill and do a good job doing it. Just my .02

  17. BohicaTwentyTwo says:

    Here’s a website I saw Yon posted recently that I find moderately related. It might show some insight into the mind of some of the newly commissioned females we are seeing these days.

    http://warvirgin.com/blog/

  18. David says:

    they want experience from 90… and 2 have volunteered so far. Given new classes every six weeks (are they that often?) we should get definitive data by about, oh, say 2017 or so.

  19. jacke says:

    Surprise, surprise, surprise… all the guys who got their tit in a wringer and blowed me out of the water over the weekend also support women in the infantry… figured… For the rest of you – ask the moderator/host to repost my replies to his silly remarks on that dumbshit at Arlington last week. Maybe a little un-censoring is in order.

  20. AJ says:

    While I am in the AF and we usually get made fun of by every other service, I am still a woman aircraft maintainer in a special ops unit. I did my job on the base and support those that go into danger to the best I could. I have proved my ability on the flight line to myself and any guy that has doubted me but I still don’t feel that women should be joining infantry or special ops units. Working on planes in a deployed location is close enough for me. I’m sure most of the people that are shouting for women to join the infantry have never been in the military and don’t really get how the social interaction is in each unit…oh wait, it’s Congress. Of course they don’t have a clue. Let’s send the Congress women into combat and I’m sure a support role would be just fine for them. We all have our roles and where we are in the pecking order of things. I’m content not being in a combat role so please don’t try to throw me into one.

  21. AJ says:

    BohicaTwentyTwo…holy crap! That website is ridiculous. Yet another reason I’m glad I’m still enlisted. Apparently they brain wash girls and make them crazier at the academies.

  22. Rerun0369 says:

    @12- The USMC already had female instructors from MCT selected to move over to ITB and train the females. It was going to be one platoon of enlisted female students at Camp Geiger. Not really sure why they scrapped the idea, I know in order to move the female instructors over, they were going to have to attend ITB as a student first. This was mid-2012 when all this was going down.

    @13- Awww shit!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *