Two more women for Marine Infantry Officers’ Course

| February 19, 2013 | 24 Comments

The New York Times reports that two more women will attempt to navigate the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officers’ Course this Spring, says the Corps’ Commandant, General James Amos.

In March, two Naval Academy graduates will become the second set of women to enter the course. Over the coming years, General Amos is counting on dozens more female volunteers to provide him with enough information to decide whether women can make it in the infantry. The outcome, he says, is far from certain.

“I think there is absolutely no reason to think our females can’t be tankers, or be amtrackers, or be artillery Marines,” he said, referring to tracked amphibious assault vehicles. “The infantry is different.”

General Amos said that if too few women were able, or willing, to join the infantry, he or his successor might ask the secretary of defense to keep the infantry closed to women. The deadline for that request is January 2016.

“You could reach the point where you say, ‘It’s not worth it,’ ” General Amos said. “The numbers are so infinitesimally small, it’s not worth it.”

I wish them well. I take offense at the Times’ intimation that we infantrymen consider our branch a “boys’ club”, because to me, this has never been about keeping women out of the infantry. I really don’t care either way, like with the gay issue. But at some point we have to ask ourselves why we’re pushing this so hard. The United States military is better, operationally, than it’s ever been so are we doing this to make the military a more effective fighting force or are we just bending to the political wishes of the civilian masters who don’t understand the consequences of their actions?

I’d like to believe General Amos, that if putting women in the infantry doesn’t make sense, they won’t allow it. However, it’s been my experience that common sense has nothing to do with political decisions made by the generals. I’m sure General Amos means what he says, but as we’ve seen over the last few weeks, what happens in the military has little to do with what the generals say.

For example:

Even if very few women pass I.O.C., enlisted women should still be allowed to join male-led infantry units, said Greg Jacob, a former Marine officer who is the policy director for the Service Women’s Action Network, an advocacy group.

“Leadership is leadership,” Mr. Jacob said. “You don’t need a female leader to lead female Marines.”

Says the guy who won’t have to lead female infantrymen, just like all of the other peckerwoods who are advocating so hard for this purposeless change. It’s the “do something, anything” crowd that wants to plow ahead irrespective of the eventual outcome, regardless of the number of body bags that get filled in the next war. it won’t be them or their kids who will have to deal with that eventuality.

Category: Military issues

Loading Facebook Comments ...

Comments (24)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. NR Pax says:

    Fairness at all costs, no matter who dies. What a shock.

  2. PhillyandBCEagles says:

    The USMC has been able to keep their standards so far with this experiment only because they got ahead of the curve with allowing women to try out in the first place before it was legally mandated that they do so. Once the curve catches up, the lowering of the standards as ordered from the Oval Office will soon follow.

  3. TSO says:

    “Peckerwoods” is a very underutilized phrase.

  4. “regardless of the number of body bags that get filled in the next war.

    I’ll speculate that you didn’t get the message(s) Jonn.

    The military is an unnecessary part of modern life so it is the perfect choice for implementing social change. Once we get past these current (Bush caused) aberrations we can rid ourselves of militaristic jingoism and join the world community as non-aggressive members. We will have to rid the country of veterans and gun owners as well, but it IS a worthwhile goal. The rainbow will be on our new Flag.

    I’ve been told that sort of thing by some folks for 40+ years and I’m almost convinced it is true.

    Or BOHICA!

  5. kp32 says:

    Cipher locks on foxholes?

  6. Twist says:

    @4, Don’t forget that the new anthem will be “I’d like to teach the world to sing”.

  7. ChopIT says:

    @3, so is “clusterfuck”!

  8. beretverde says:

    A waste of tiome and resources for an experiment that won’t work…unless tweaked in the favor of the females.

  9. Hondo says:

    Uh, guys . . . are you aware of the definition of the term “peckerwood”? Let’s just say it ain’t exactly complimentary, and some consider it an ethnic slur.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peckerwood

  10. M Oleman says:

    No end in sight to the madness.
    There’s no way a woman would ever garner the respect needed to lead in the infantry. That’s just the way things are.

  11. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    @8 That’s exactly right, I fear that as more women fail to qualify someone who is far removed from the reality of the infantry the standards will be tweaked to make sure a “fair” amount of women are given the chance to serve as infantrywomen (?).

    With the reduction in standards will come a corresponding reduction in capability and effectiveness. As Jonn points out the beautiful people don’t really care because they and their offspring have little intention of ever serving the red, white, and blue. They only serve themselves to the belongings of others, always have and always will.

  12. Anonymous says:

    The worst part about this whole thing is that with the INEVITABLE lowering of standards that will come from this, will come more males who have no business being in the Infantry. And that is what I am most afraid of. While the number of females who would have the inclination to sign up for Infantry is really very very small, once the door is swung open, the dregs of non hacking males will increase exponentially; ruining the operational capability of the military.

  13. James says:

    The whole reason you need the Officers first was proven in the Navy – when they put the female junior enlisted on the ships with no female officers/senior enlisted, you ended up with with a whole lot of crap situations for those young women…

  14. BohicaTwentyTwo says:

    Maybe there are some enlisted females in the Marines that can qualify, but there is no inequality on the enlisted side of the gender war. Even in the Marines, I bet there are more E-9 slots on the service support side than on the combat side. The only place where gender becomes an advancement problem is at the senior officer level. The problem is that feminists want to see more female generals and division commanders.

  15. Just an Old Dog says:

    “I think there is absolutely no reason to think our females can’t be tankers, or be amtrackers, or be artillery Marines,”

    Spoken like a true idiot. I guess if you wanted someone to just sit on the back of the 5 ton and cheer you on while you hooked up, unhooked and emplaced a huge weapon system. Or give words of encouragement while you handled shells than weigh in excess of 100 pounds,I guess you can scratch the part about filling in as provisional Infantry too.

  16. Just an Old Dog says:

    I’m betting the Commandant’s nickname is a rather unflattering one. “General Anus” because he talks out of his ass.

  17. FatCircles0311 says:

    I love how the Corps continue to tout IOC as the be all and end all of infantry duties. Breaking news: Fleet infantry reqs for deployment and typical exercises are more difficult than that shit. Is the Corps setting the bar up so OIC will be the pinnacle of infantry WM’s output and thus once they get to the fleet they are held to a lower standard? Looks like it to me.

    FYI infantry O’s got it pretty damn skate in line platoons. Daddy platoon sergent is there to make sure they don’t fuck everything up and NCO’s actually do everything. Boot ass LT’s are worthless and redundant as crap. Keep touting infantry O’s as the holy grail though Marine Corps. Anyone that’s been in the gun club knows the real score.

  18. NHSparky says:

    you ended up with with a whole lot of crap situations for those young women…

    Uh, James? Allow me to be the first to throw the bullshit flag on that one, sonny.

    And FWIW, General Amos is walking a tightrope, but yes, he is getting ahead of the game by at least allowing women to TRY to go through The Infantry School. But he’s also right in that resources are finite, and that if the Corps (or any branch) is spending too many resources to put too many women into a school where most if not all will fail, then it’s a waste and those resources can and should be better used elsewhere.

  19. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    This is all part of changing America. That’s all. That’s what obamaman said he was going to do and that is precisely what he is doing. One cannot overhaul the culture and leave its institutions intact. What the obamanistas are hoping is that AFTER the changes have been effected, us common folks will still be debating and discussing decisions such as this one regarding the military. And all the while they are laughing uproariously behind closed doors. Let me know when the revolution starts. I wouldn’t want to miss it.

  20. Stacy0311 says:

    Hey General Anus, I have a suggestion for “standards” It’s called MCCRESS you stupid winger. Load up your ruck. You’ve got 8 hours to go 25 miles. Good times.

  21. Pave Low John says:

    When I was flying MH-53J’s in Korea back in ’99, one of my planners had to go live with the SEALs that were doing a bilateral exercise down at Chinhae. He phoned me a couple of days later and while he was updating me, he told me that one of the junior guys got lippy with the team chief (E-7), so the chief took him outside and settled it the old fashioned way. The junior SEAL had a big bruise on the side of his face and a black eye, the Chief had a couple of gouges on his knuckles. No officers involved, of course.

    I really don’t see women doing well in that kind of environment, and that’s coming from a 24-year retired rotor-head. Prepare for shit to get really stupid in the next three years….

  22. PhillyandBCEagles says:

    @22, and I’m betting the junior guy learned his lesson and proceeded to have a successful and productive career. I’ve only been in about 3.5 years but sometimes the “old fashioned way” is far preferable to the “new way” aka paperwork.

  23. obsidian says:

    The powers in charge will make sure these two women candidates gets through that silly old Infantry course and will be sent to the Line companies to lead Marines like they have never been led before.
    All they have to do is lie, change the truth to fit their vision of reality give more points to make up for the difference between the mens scores and the women’s.
    The Feminist are going to get women into infantry if they have to lower the standards for women. Even if the women have to be excused from taking some test. Even if they have to commit fraud to get their women into the field, stomping one foot down and crossing their arms.

Leave a Reply

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