All male vs mixed gender marines

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

Kenemet made a good point. I would consider police and fire units as a life and death situation just as much, and yes men and women work together with no problem there. Living on a military base for years, I see both genders work professionally together.

Frankly, I'm believing you Father, that you are not sexist, but one has to realize that there is also a responsibility for one's behavior more. And women too can be ....................... attracted too, to put it innocently. The bottom line, the job, and the job comes first and adults are quite capable of performing without letting their behavior get in the way. There will always be any sort of 'complications' in any job, the goal is to be professional.

To assume that emergency services are under the same sort of life and death situations as special forces soldiers is completely absurd!

I have every respect for the police and fire crews but to compare their working environment to that of a specialist soldier shows how little you know about either professions!

[Leonardo]

To assume that emergency services are under the same sort of life and death situations as special forces soldiers is completely absurd!

I have every respect for the police and fire crews but to compare their working environment to that of a specialist soldier shows how little you know about either professions!

It is true that the "working environment" in those different professions does not bear exact comparison, but I feel the most relevant factor here is how long men and women have been working together - rather than what the "working environment" is like.

In the emergency services men and women have been working as teams for some time, so having women working in what was once perceived as a "man's job" is now quite normal. This is not the case in the front-line military, particularly the "special forces". Naturally there will be a period of adjustment and it is to be expected that performance may take some time to stabilise back to previous levels. That does not mean women are not suitable to being members of special forces teams.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Leonardo

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

It is true that the "working environment" in those different professions does not bear exact comparison, but I feel the most relevant factor here is how long men and women have been working together - rather than what the "working environment" is like.

In the emergency services men and women have been working as teams for some time, so having women working in what was once perceived as a "man's job" is now quite normal. This is not the case in the front-line military, particularly the "special forces". Naturally there will be a period of adjustment and it is to be expected that performance may take some time to stabilise back to previous levels. That does not mean women are not suitable to being members of special forces teams.

Police, fire crew etc all get to go home when the shift is over to their partners and families, a typical tour of duty depending on what branch and regiment can be anywhere from 6 months to over a year, so no comparison can be made between the emergency services and special forces! They are worlds apart in every single aspect!

Id be quite prepared to accept single sex units within the special forces with units being made entirely of women, as they are just as capable dealing with the etreme circumstances and horrifc situations that the profession throws at you, but mixed sex troops are only adding extra strain and tension to young men (and women) who are denied female (or male) companionship for months at a time! Like i said before, the tan/maroon/black beret doesn't change the fact you are only human! And i dont see the need/point to add further potential problem causing variables to an already massively stressful, emotional, psychological battle that every special soldier inherits with the title!

I may be old school! But old school works!

,ive witnessed my best friends torn down by gun fire and blown to bits by IED's, that was bad enough, you carry on but never fully get over it but speaking as a gentleman, if i had witnessed female soldiers under the same same terrible situations, i dont think i would have been able to cope!

[Leonardo]

,ive witnessed my best friends torn down by gun fire and blown to bits by IED's, that was bad enough, you carry on but never fully get over it but speaking as a gentleman, if i had witnessed female soldiers under the same same terrible situations, i dont think i would have been able to cope!

And that is what I am talking about - how we (males) have been socially and culturally indoctrinated to treat women as "needing protection" rather than being "equal partners". This is perhaps why male soldiers, unfamiliar with working with women in front-line situations, do not perform as well as when it is only men in the team.

But that can, and would, change as the exposure to mixed-gender units increased over time - and that is why I would suggest this initial report/study by the Marines should not be taken as "authoritative" with respect how effective mixed-gender units can be in front-line military forces.

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

And that is what I am talking about - how we (males) have been socially and culturally indoctrinated to treat women as "needing protection" rather than being "equal partners". This is perhaps why male soldiers, unfamiliar with working with women in front-line situations, do not perform as well as when it is only men in the team.

But that can, and would, change as the exposure to mixed-gender units increased over time - and that is why I would suggest this initial report/study by the Marines should not be taken as "authoritative" with respect how effective mixed-gender units can be in front-line military forces.

But why try and make it work! Why take the risk just to make things PC! We are now more worried about offending somebody rather than doing what is right!

[Leonardo]

But why try and make it work! Why take the risk just to make things PC! We are now more worried about offending somebody rather than doing what is right!

It's not about "making things PC" it's about treating people as equal. If a woman wants to join the special forces, and shows the necessary capabilities to do so, why should she not be allowed simply because she is female?

[Doc Socks Junior]

I mean sure, "if they show the necessary capabilities".

And if you read the study results, you'd see that yes, lower accuracy was a gender issue, not a sociology issue. Increased injuries were a gender issue, not a sociology issue. So the whole social/cultural angle is a nice theory, but doesn't really hold up to the actual results.

()Hint: look under "Lethality" and and "Health and Welfare of Marines".

[Leonardo]

I mean sure, "if they show the necessary capabilities".

And if you read the study results, you'd see that yes, lower accuracy was a gender issue, not a sociology issue. Increased injuries were a gender issue, not a sociology issue. So the whole social/cultural angle is a nice theory, but doesn't really hold up to the actual results.

()Hint: look under "Lethality" and and "Health and Welfare of Marines".

I did "read the results" and the only result that possibly indicated a gender-based difference in performance was in "accuracy" - however, no data was posted so there is a question about whether what was reported was accurate as to it pertaining to the performance of each individual.

All the other results simply indicated the women involved did not perhaps meet the necessary standards of physical fitness to join a Marine squad. They did not suggest that mixed-gender teams comprising both men and women who met the required standard would be any less effective than single-gender teams.

I did, however, particularly note this passage...

The tests come with at least one important caveat: As the Marine Corps Times notes, many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.

So, how would the "mixed-team" fare if they replaced the women with men straight out of infantry schools or noncombat jobs?

Edited September 11, 2015 by Leonardo

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

I did "read the results" and the only result that possibly indicated a gender-based difference in performance was in "accuracy" - however, no data was posted so there is a question about whether what was reported was accurate as to it pertaining to the performance of each individual.

All the other results simply indicated the women involved did not perhaps meet the necessary standards of physical fitness to join a Marine squad. They did not suggest that mixed-gender teams comprising both men and women who met the required standard would be any less effective than single-gender teams.

All short term simulations to quench political and statistical thirsts,

But serves no actual real life implications!

[Leonardo]

All short term simulations to quench political and statistical thirsts,

But serves no actual real life implications!

I agree the study was rather pointless, after all who would expect Marines joining straight from academies or noncombat roles to be immediately as effective as soldiers who had actual combat experience?

A better study would have been comparing teams of new recruits - one mixed vs one single gender. As it was, this "study" was designed to 'fail' the female Marines.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Leonardo

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

No test or simulation is ever going to bring about the real life implications of long term deployment,

[+Liquid Gardens]

Its not about oogling them, its about the units dynamics, its about the trust and bond of your fellow soldiers, its knowing that everybody is 100% focused and dedicated, with no favouritism or fluctuations amoung the unit, if you mix sexes in any working environment there will always be tension and distraction

If you mix people there will always be tension and distraction, and favoritism and fluctuations. Not all male soldiers are going to be distracted by women in their unit, just some, just as some soldiers may have racist inclinations and may be tense and distracted by those of another race in their units. Since they seem to be able to handle those distractions, not sure why mixing sexes is that much different.

[Doc Socks Junior]

I did "read the results" and the only result that possibly indicated a gender-based difference in performance was in "accuracy" - however, no data was posted so there is a question about whether what was reported was accurate as to it pertaining to the performance of each individual.

Well, yes. If you decide to start with the assumption that the study is inaccurate, you might come to the conclusion that the study is inaccurate. You're starting with a biased viewpoint. Might as well not even read the study. Just toss out sociology/culture and ignore the results.

All the other results simply indicated the women involved did not perhaps meet the necessary standards of physical fitness to join a Marine squad. They did not suggest that mixed-gender teams comprising both men and women who met the required standard would be any less effective than single-gender teams.

So you're saying that if physical ability is equal, physical ability would be equal. Scorching take right there. As it is, the women involved did meet the standards of physical fitness necessary. That's why they were there. Are those physical standards stringent enough? Maybe not. It is worth noting that the study notes that the top 10 percent of women match the bottom 25-50 percent of men in several physical categories.

I did, however, particularly note this passage...

And particularly ignored the next sentence in the passage. It's like you're trying to show your bias. From the article you quoted:

One task force unit, a provisional rifle platoon, attempted to mitigate this problem by comparing the performance of male and female troops who received no formal infantry training.

And from the actual report. Feel free to ignore the numbers though.

Male provisional infantry (those with no formal 03xx school training) had higher hit percentages than the 0311 (school trained) females: M4: 44% vs 28%, M27: 38% vs 25%, M16A4w/M203: 26% vs 15%.

So, how would the "mixed-team" fare if they replaced the women with men straight out of infantry schools or noncombat jobs?

Your question has been answered. In the study.

[+OverSword]

What im saying is that no matter what the profession or industry, when men work along side women there are allways complications! Whether it be affairs, discrimination, jealously, sexual tension, it happens all the time,its basic human nature! and in day to day life in run of the mill jobs it dosnt really effect things, but in life or death situations it matters alot!

I dont expect the average civilian to understand just how intense a special forces position is! Every aspect is magnified, every emotion is multiplied. Its not a 9-5 filing reports, its not putting out fires or selling insurance or delivering parcels, its killing human beings! Its being shot at! Its being under the constant threat of IED's and snipers, its about holding your best friend as they bleed out after taking an RPG proximity hit, every step you take could be your last! And you dont go home every night to your wife or partner, you cant sleep because you are haunted by the horrifc scenes you have witnessed that day! All you have is your unit and the unbreakable bond and trust that gives you a reason to get up the next day and do it all over again!

So believe me when i say im not being sexist, im not suggesting women are not capable, what im saying is you are operating under the most intense psychological and physical pressure with absolutely no room for distraction, or any change in unit dynamics that may comprises the overall mentality of everybody involved! Unfortunately the special forces is the one profession where a slip in concentration or an emotional quandary simply cannot be allowed to occur!

On top of everything Father Merrin says above the study which is the subject of this thread shows that mixed gender military units are less effective. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that Flombies unit would get their asses handed to them by Merrin's.

[MeOnlyMe]

If the study was conducted on females who actually had the same training as men, I would take it seriously.

good thread

[+OverSword]

I really apologize for offending you and I could have worded it differently FM.

[CRYSiiSx2]

I'm actually in middle of joining the Army. I've always wanted to do it. My family has a long history of serving the Army.

[Lucas Cooper Merrin]

I really apologize for offending you and I could have worded it differently FM.

Dont worry about it Oversword, its all the nature of debate, its just a topic that i feel particularly passionate about! You can pick the topics my friend

[+OverSword]

To be fair, a lot of the good people that enlist just don't have the time or the will to research the complexities of our foreign policy and history. All they know is there are people across the ocean that hate us and behead our fellow countrymen. In that respect, you can't blame them for wanting to fight.

I get that. War is glamorized in our media, celebrated at sporting events, honored in public spaces, encouraged by our leaders.

But back on subject, I side with Merrin on this subject. These marine tests have shown, despite flombies perceptions of his experience, that mixed gender combat units are outperformed by non mixed gender units. It seems a no brainer. Women should not be in combat units. Like I said earlier there are more ways other than combat to serve your country with honor, pick one.

[+and-then]

To assume that emergency services are under the same sort of life and death situations as special forces soldiers is completely absurd!

I have every respect for the police and fire crews but to compare their working environment to that of a specialist soldier shows how little you know about either professions!

The very fact that these guys are insinuating they know better about another man's specialty says a lot. Thank you for your service.

[Bama13]

God behold, what if a woman might actually be better than a man!

Now you are just being silly!

[Leonardo]

I get that. War is glamorized in our media, celebrated at sporting events, honored in public spaces, encouraged by our leaders.

But back on subject, I side with Merrin on this subject. These marine tests have shown, despite flombies perceptions of his experience, that mixed gender combat units are outperformed by non mixed gender units. It seems a no brainer. Women should not be in combat units. Like I said earlier there are more ways other than combat to serve your country with honor, pick one.

With all due respect, OS - no, they don't.

They do show that new recruits are outperformed by experienced soldiers, however.

[Bama13]

The Russians used women in WWII and from all accounts I have read many of them performed admirably. There was one unit of night bombers that were so effective that the Germans named them the "Night Witches". Now these may have been all female units, I'm not sure. Maybe that is the answer. Not mixed units but units made up entirely of males or females, although that would be like the segregated US army units in WWI and WWII which was a shameful practice and a waste of valuable manpower.

[+OverSword]

With all due respect, OS - no, they don't.

They do show that new recruits are outperformed by experienced soldiers, however.

Nope. Read it again. Note the highlighted areas. Gender mixed squads did not perform as well. Edited September 11, 2015 by OverSword

[Dark_Grey]

Hot off Monday's press, "Grunt life: Marines dish on the Corps' women in combat experiment"

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/09/07/grunt-life-marines-dish-corps-women-combat-experiment/71632666/

"Over time, your body breaks down," Sheffield said. "Our backs were hurting. Out of 100 female Marines, I'm going to say a good 20 could do this."

Infantry platoon volunteer Sgt. Jeremy Bradshaw arrived at the same conclusion about women capable of living the grunt life following his time in the task force.

"It's a very small number; I'd say two out of 10," he said.

While videos and photographs released by the Marine Corps show women excelling at combat tasks, Bradshaw said they omitted the moments of failure. He watched a four-woman team struggling for more than seven minutes to move a 200-pound dummy, without success, he said. Another time, he said, female Marines failed to clamber over the top of the shipping container during movement-to-contact assessments."

Looks like Father Merrin might have a point after all?

"The female variable in this social experiment has wrought a fundamental change in the way male NCOs think, act and lead," Augello wrote in the 13-page paper he presented to Marine leaders, which he shared with Marine Corps Times. "A change that is sadly for the worse, not the better."