Marines conduct the last test of IOC for female officers
The Marine Corps Times reports that the test for integrating females Marines into the Infantry Officers’ Course has ended as abruptly as it began, with the last two candidates failing to complete the initial Combat Endurance Test. The Marine Corps had hoped to test at least 100 females for their test period, but that’s not how it turned out;
The testing period ends with just 27 female volunteers having attempted the course. Two other female officers also attempted the course as part of required ground intelligence officer training. The 0203 ground intelligence officer military occupational specialty was opened to female officers in late 2013, with IOC as a qualification requirement for applicants. None of the 29 female officers made it to the end of the course.
Honestly, I had hoped that some would be able to complete the course and I’m sure there are women out there who could successfully complete the physically demanding school. But the fact that are no graduates will only encourage the social engineers to lobby the Corps for a reduction in standards.
The Army’s Ranger Course is set to accept 6 women into that school this Spring – all 6 have successfully passed the Ranger Training Assessment Course, according to the Army Times;
Thirty-six soldiers successfully completed the two-week course, said Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence and Fort Benning.
The success rate for this month’s rotation was “considerably lower” than normal, said Maj. William “Shep” Woodard, commander of A Company, Army National Guard Warrior Training Center, which runs RTAC.
The typical completion rate for RTAC is about 57 percent, he said.
That’s good news – if there is even one female graduate from the School, that will mean that standards arent out of reach of women. From the beginning of this discussion, that has been my main concern – that standards aren’t reduced so the social engineers can fill body bags.
Category: Politics
‘But the fact that are no graduates will only encourage the social engineers to lobby the Corps for a reduction in standards.’
Agreed. Lowering the standards for any branch will not create an efficient, well-trained, and well-prepared force.
I know I have argued that there are women who can succeed at this and none of you crotch danglers believe me, but they have to volunteer for it and they aren’t doing so. I think that makes them smarter than the social engineers.
There possibly are women in this country who might be able to pass one of the elite ground schools. The problem is that they are professional athletes or fitness buffs that want nothing to do with the military.
Im glad the Army did a screening/prep course prior to the actual School. The 6 who have been selected to attend are going in with their eyes wide open and prepared. No excuses, I only hope that they are given the full extent of training and not some watered down bullshit.
Rhonda Rousey could probably do it. But she’s kind of an outlier.
Or any female MMA fighter of considerable reknown,for that matter.
I know one woman, non-military, who could probably pass. She’s in her early 40s now and a tough Cross Fit, mountain-climbing, rock-climbing badass. She’s spent a number of years living in places like rural China without the creature comforts of home, very adventurous. She’s also really smart and mentally tough, I’ve seen her go toe-to-toe with some of the biggest assholes I’ve known, even though she’s a tiny thing and they tower over her. She doesn’t back down and doesn’t quit.
But most women aren’t like her and even fewer join the military, so it doesn’t surprise me that they haven’t found anyone like her to graduate from their experiment.
It’s good that they allowed the trials though, a good test of the standards and proof that it’s just not a viable idea for most.
If memory serves, at least one source (Jim Dunnigan from StrategyPage IIRC) has cited a study which indicates the majority of women in service do not want to participate in a combat-specific MOS.
Is anybody else looking forward to this coed Ranger school? Its starting to sound like realty T.V were only the producers are supposed to know the ending.
I have mixed thoughts about women in combat. On one hand, the inherent physical differences between men and women are more than significant and as many here point out, we can’t lower the standards to accommodate that.
On the other hand, I’ve served with some serious shitbags, and I think I’d rather have a highly motivated female in my squad than a marginally performing male.
Lyudmila Pavlichencko was a WWII Soviet female sniper, and she had more kills than Chris Kyle. If she could excel in that role then I’m certain that women can be effective combat soldiers under the right conditions.
This leads me to believe that there should be a middle way. The IDF has the Caracal battalion which is a combat unit comprised of about 70% females. I think something like that would be the way to go. Instead of fully integrating women into the infantry perhaps we could find a use for a specialized battalion or two open to both sexes.
The conditions under which Lyudmila Pavlichenko and the female IDF solders operate(d) are vastly different from U.S. combat infantry, and especially our special operations. Female IDF soldiers are almost exlusively home defense, not “find and kill the enemy”.
As I have stated previously, the focus on passing the course is short sighted. Once they get to the FMF the real test begins. The average Platoon Sergeant is in no mood to change and burp a new Lt. but thats part of the gig.
I guess the Corps needs to get some WM Platoon Sergeants first. Lots of luck with that.
As a woman, I can say that I have plenty of “changing and burping” experience 😉
Wouldn’t the easiest way to change the ‘change and burp a new LT’ be to promote only Mustangs?
I have often had the same thought. I had one once, a former Sgt. He was a bit of a prick but he did know his shit.
It is really not fair to the Lt. sometimes. If he gets a Plt Sgt that is unsat, he will most certainly have a short career. At least in the Combat Arms part of the FMF.
I see all kinds of advantages to allowing Warrant Officers to serve as Platoon Commanders. The draw back is, Commissioned Officers would never get the experience of directly leading Marines.
Here’s an interesting article that was written some time ago. Capt Serrano gives an interesting perspective:
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/2014/09/why-women-do-not-belong-us-infantry
A very good read, thanks for the post.
I would like to tell you a little story. I was flying back to the West Coast via Atlanta to Fort Worth. I was sitting next to this guy and we started talking. I learned the he had been in the 73 War as an Israeli tank commander. So I asked him “you all tried the grand experiment” and he said what was that and I said “well, you used to have women in the military, but they were always in the rear organization, but then you put them in the forward combat units, but then you put them back in the rear organizations, why was that?” He told me that it was simply a combat decision. When I asked him to expand on it, he said “the men became risk adverse or defense minded vice being risk proverse or offense minded because they knew what the Arabs would do to the women if they were captured so they went into a protect the women mode.” I told him that was very interesting since I had never thought of that. My previous thinking had been that I am sure a woman can kill other human beings just as well as a man, but why should they have to. I didn’t think that is why they are here on this planet. I would continue on about how tough I think women are and how men would cringe especially if the men became pregnant and went through 9 months of having their bodies distorted to end up with the biggest pain of all, child birth. I don’t think many men could hack that. TTFN
So they make it through the training (*IF* they ever do, watered-down standards or not). Then what? Just how long would they last (physically, mentally, emotionally) in the field under combat conditions? Lower bone density spells major, permanent, disfiguring/crippling injuries. Lack of hygiene is a far greater risk for women than it is for men. ZERO privacy, ever. And on it goes.
You know, the ones pushing this the hardest are too old to be the guinea pigs for this misbegotten abomination of a social experiment.
So long as combat infantry is seen as a fast track to high rank by people – meaning female Os/NCOs – who aren’t climbing the ladder as quickly as they think they should, this noise won’t die down.
In order to make it succeed as a rank enhancer, it has to pander to the lowest common denominator, not those most physically suited to it. It’s a false idea that this is how you get to the top.
Why not instead bring up all the women Os/NCOs who have achieved senior rank without combat infantry affiliation? Those achievements count for something, don’t they?