Pentagon discusses separate training for female soldiers
Bobo sends a link to the Washington Times in which they report that some “senior officers” hinted to Congress that they’re contemplating separate male & female training for combat arms positions. Just looking at the issue from that perspective it almost makes sense, until you read what members of the House Armed Services subcommittee said about the plan;
The idea was presented by Rep. Niki Tsongas.
“To put in place a training regimen that is ill-suited to maximizing the success of women is not really the outcome any of us want to see,” she said.
What does “maximizing the success of women” mean? Either she is saying that men are going to hold women back, like in “GI Jane”, or that they’re going to hold women to a different standard than men in order to make sure that more women qualify for combat arms jobs.
Army Lt. Gen. Howard Bromberg, deputy chief of staff for personnel, agreed.
“We are looking at that, and we’re not looking at it just for the integration of women,” Gen. Bromberg testified. “We’re looking at it for the total soldier, because just as you have a 110-pound male who may lack some type of physiological capability or physical capability, he or she may both need to be trained differently. We’re trying to expand our understanding of how we train.”
Now, I was a 128-pound private and I’ll admit that training was probably more difficult for me than for, say, Tim Martin, who was built like a bull and went on to be one of the first Delta soldiers. But the standard remained the same for both of us because the standard doesn’t change for bullets.
Now, if the General means “trained differently” to reach the same standard of performance, well, that’s fine, but if they’re talking about defining the standard down to compensate for their size and ability, that’s just wrong. Combat has a single standard, irrespective of size and gender, and that’s how they should be trained.
[Marine Lt. Gen. Robert Milstead Jr. said] “They need to be nurtured different. They just need different steps as they go. They end up in the same place, the United States Marines.”
I didn’t know that the Marines knew how to use “nurture” in a complete sentence, and I’m sure that there are some DIs who would disagree with the General that “nurturing” is in their job descriptions. And it’s a disturbing trend in the language that indicates to me that the standards are going to plummet along with the combat effectiveness of the total force.
Category: Big Army
#43 – Exactly. I am not, nor have I ever been, in the military. That said, I am SOOOOO beyond tired of women who have no intention of undertaking a given task, much less how to accomplish that task, talking about how if women can’t do it, it must be unfair. Or, better yet, how the standards should be changed. How condesending. One standard. Period. Meet it or get another job.
Some military jobs require a generally physically fit individual. Gender norms for these fields are fine. However, when the job requires certain physical abilities, if you can’t perform the task, quit whining and move on. These women need to remember that the trigger pulling is the easy part, it is the getting there and getting back that suck. Further, this is a life and death matter, not a social experiment. I do not want my family members put in additional danger to advance your flippin career!
/rant off
My guess is that if they are going to go with separate training for women. You will probably have a new specific MOS to go along with it.
Probably something like 11Z or some nonsense or another. A formal MOS for an enabler. So basically FET’s are not going to be civil affairs units but infantry units.
The problem is how are they going to differentiate female officers. Are they going to make a side branching for an officer pipeline as well?
IF they go this route, how do enabler’s make the infantry more lethal outside of COIN ops?
I know anecdotes aren’t empirical evidence, but 13 years in Marine Corps infantry gives me a certain perspective. At NCO School during our field exercise, guess who had to hump the radios and crew served weapons? As an instructor at NTA (Camp Gonsalves now) guess who didn’t spend as much time in the field (5 days for mixed units versus 11 days for infantry)? And more anecdotes from 14 years as an Army officer (armor). Training at Fort Bliss for deployment to Iraq, 8 mile road march (IOTV w/plates, basic load) 19 of 20 females fell out. The one who didn’t fall out was our PT stud (more reps on sit ups, push ups and fastest run in the company. wouldn’t cut it in the infantry because she was only 63″ 110lbs). So it doesn’t matter how much they’re “nurtured”, they’re not going to be able to hang in the infantry, armor, or artillery. Women can be great soldiers, sailors, Marines and AF pukes within their capabilities. If only the ‘yes men’ asskissers in the Pentagon would realize that fact
Nurtured. Might as well say pampered.
24 years as a 31Q, 31M, 25Q, 31W and 25W. Lots of females at the mid and senior NCO level, but damn few that can handle the heavy lifting and sweat required at the troop level. Now we’re gonna do that in combat arms? I weep.
Separate training makes perfect sense to me. No need to train on the 240, 249, javelin, ASIP radio. No breaking track, or slinging 120mm rounds. All that’s for the men. Easy. I’ve knocked down infantry OSUT by 25% and armor OSUT by even more, since everything on the tank is heavy. Have fun with that!
Spoiled… can’t let the precious little snowflakes experience failure or they might quit or not enlist!
Stacy0311, an 8 mile ruck huh? wow 2/3 the way to a standard infantry ruck. add the time limit and last 4 miles and see if even your PT stud finishes.
Back in the day at Ft. Jackson (1976) we got the same type of training as our male counterparts, we were just segregated. Trust me, the DS didn’t show us any mercy or slack. The nicest thing I got called was “goat smelling asshole”. It was team building, (learning to rely on yourself and your combat buddy) as well as preparation for the nasty business of war. Most of my DS were Vietnam vets. And at least one of them showed signs of PTSD before it was ever recognized by the medical community. All I know, is that if you’re a Soldier, you damned well better be willing and ready to go where you’re needed to break things and kill people. That’s what the Army does.
Oh, just so ya know, Stacy0311: I averaged 70 pushups on the PT test, and I humped radios, rucks, and weapons. I still lift weights even though I’m retired and I have pretty good upper body strength. Not everyone can hack it, even some guys. That’s from 30 years (10 Reserve, 20 Active, two tours in Iraq) experience.
congrats jane, 70 PUs is almost an acceptable infantry score, but that is a feat i never saw a woman accomplish when i was in. i am not going to claim there are not women that can do the job, but they need to be held to the standards in place now, not some “re-evaluated” standards.
i have other complaints about women in infantry in general other than physical ability, but that isnt the conversation we are having here
I think the word “nurture” was used in a sentence for the first time by LtGen Milstead, who is a Cobra pilot my original trade. I think he’s out of his lane here, since he’s never served on the infantry side or at either one of the MCRD’s in the training pipeline.
I just wish these people would just call it what we all know it is – lowering the standards.
@61 should read “…Cobra pilot by original trade.”
Judge by the same standards as my male counterparts that is fair, but do not deny me what I have rightfully earned because of my gender. That is all I have asked for in 30 years.
@57-yeah I know that 8 miles doesn’t make the EIB/Air Assualt standard. This was also an FSB company, so I wasn’t expecting much (and yes, the female PT stud DID make it through Air Assault, barely). But I’m pretty sure the 25 mile MCCRES hump (if they still do it) would break 99.9% of the females who attempted it. As for GIJane, 70 push ups. Isn’t that special. I stop at 60 these days, since I don’t get any points after that. But when the new standards are “validate”, what are the odds that’ll 12 mile standard will be determined to be “invalid”
One question, and I didn’t read through all 64 comments that proceeded mine.
Will the enemy be firing segregated at the women?
@65, thats been my point all along, are bullets going to be “reevaluated” to make sure they dont hit as hard anymore?
@64, we still did the 25 in 02, ive heard rumor its 15 now, but i cant confirm that, and to be honest, dont want to.
@63, i will deny no one what they have earned, but will always hold that the infantry is no place for anyone with 2 ‘X’ chromosomes
What grinds my gears is the over lack of deception by the FOGO in all of this. They tell the American people there will be two standards, 10,000 years of combat history be damned.
#66 if a woman can meet the physical standards that men meet for a job, why should it be off limits?
haha thanks mate, I hope you win them, if you do thanks to the above research, then that is my job done. Good luck!