Mabus: Marines’ mixed-gendered experiment was biased
According to The Hill, the Navy Secretary, Ray Mabus, disputes the findings of the Marine Corps’ 9-month study involving mixed-gender units. He thinks that the study is biased for political reasons;
“They started out with a fairly largely component of the men thinking this is not a good idea, and women will not be able to do this,” he said in an interview with NPR.
“When you start out with that mindset, you’re almost presupposing the outcome,” he said.
[…]
Mabus said some of the report’s conclusions were based on generalizations and not the women’s performance.
“Part of the study said women tend not to be able to carry as heavy a load for as long, but there were women who went through the study who could,” he said.
“And part of the study said we’re afraid because women get injured more frequently that over time, women will break down more, that you’ll begin to lose your combat effectiveness over time.
“That was not shown in the study, that was an extrapolation based on injury rates,” he said.
I guess that he gets his talking points from Ellen Haring. The fact remains that the women volunteered for the study which means that they wanted it to succeed. Some of the women had initial training, some of them had no training, you know just like some of the guys that I’d get in my unit. They all volunteered, they all wanted to succeed, like the ladies.
Basically, Mabus is vocalizing that which we’ve always known about this administration’s civilian leadership of the military – they don’t trust the services to give them good advice. Mabus, himself, presupposed the outcome of this study and he’s resistant to information to the contrary and he’s willing to throw his flag officers under the bus because they tell him that his preconceived notions are wrong.
Mabus and Haring and the rest of the social engineers don’t care that their plans will kill male and female Marines – they just care that they’ve given up those Marines for sacrifice on the alter of their religion.
Category: Marine Corps, Navy
And Mabus is basing his dispute on his vast experience with Marines in field conditions, right?
Oh, wait, “He also served two years in the Navy as a surface warfare officer from 1970 to 1972 aboard the cruiser USS Little Rock (CLG-4)…”
FIRST! What did you expect from an nobama appointee? Perhaps… oh wtf!
WTF… SECOND!
Somebody send that boot fuck to Camp Geiger please. Then the second before he even gets out of the vehicle he can see for himself the ridiculous amount of female marines on crutches just from MCT.
Getting real tired of these fake ass leaders that have no clue in the military. This guy is so oblivious its outrageous.
I’m really, REALLY, getting a belly full this PC B.S.
Perhaps POTUS Hildabeast can get it done.
(extra sarc and a verp sorry)
They started out with a fairly largely component of the men thinking this is not a good idea, and women will not be able to do this,” he said in an interview with NPR.
“When you start out with that mindset, you’re almost presupposing the outcome,” he said.”
When you start out with a fairly large component of someone thinking that this is a good idea (or at least the folks who pay and promote you), aren’t you also almost presupposing the outcome?
Amen, brother. Although that kind of reasoning is not PC.
As long as this bunch of know-nothings and never-been-theres run their mouths, this is what will happen.
Just remember that the PC crowd doesn’t have a chokehold on all of it and what little hold they do have is not permanent.
And someone should sew Mabus’s mouth shut.
Sweet talker
It’s almost as if he didn’t read any of the GCEITF sit reps.
The real story will never be released, but voluntary drops (DOR) were astronomical….the numbers were so bad that after about 6 months they stopped reporting the numbers…..and it was both genders asking to leave the unit.
…..and that was with unattached leadership trouble shooting issues from the rear.
It is time for RAY to gooooooo I hated serving under him.Glad I retired didn’t have him or this POTUS singe shit both Bush’s ya I know it was secretary but I was good with that. No shit I refused to get a letter from them and my COC tried to yell at me but what could they do.
I guess with Dempsey gone, there was an opening for someone to step in to be the dumbshit.
Mabus was a perfect fit with his lack of knowledge, experience, extensive training and combat record.
Tits meet boar.
This isn’t so much about a knee-jerk inability to trust the military.
This is about those involved with this idiocy being Social Justice Warriors (SJW).
SJW always lie.
SJW always project.
SJW are congenitally incapable of being honest on matters that matter to them. SJW always assume everyone else has the same malfunction.
SJW are living proof of the accuracy of the following quote:
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
– Theodore Dalrymple
Some might try to claim that SJWism is not nor has ever had any connection to commiescumism.
Idiots.
Some SJW are devout commiescum. The rest are useful idiots for commiscumism.
While not all destructionism is commiescumism, all commiescumism is destructionism.
… all enemy, foreign and domestic…
You beat me to it! Also don’t forget:
SJW’s always double down.
This clown is a classic case.
So the science is settled when it isn’t settled? I guess that one river doesn’t exist in Africa anymore.
“Hey, Mabus.”
“Come here!”
“Real close, right next to Ol’ Sarge..”.
“…Yeah, that’s right.”
(Stares right into Mabus’s vacant little eyes and studies his f**k face)
“You’re a dick.”
(Ol’ sarge turns around quickly and saunters off with both hips wobblin’ from carrying heavy loads for a decade, pulls a pack of luckys out, cloud of smoke billowing around him as he grumbles to himself rounding the corner)
You, Sarge, are my hero. Well, I agree with you anyway!
Here’s a goofy rhetorical question:
Does anybody who was around during the ’60s remember any of the rad-fem bra burners ever demanding that women should be included in the draft when the real possibility existed they might have to hump a ruck in the land of tall grasses and live rounds? I don’t.
It strikes me that Mabus is getting his buttons pushed by the same faction of complainers who would turn around, and complain even more if they got what they say they want.
The military has always been about the potential of having to give the last full measure at both an individual, and at a societal level. Somehow, this has gotten lost in the wider discussion.
No, there was no noise of any sort like that, not in the 1960s, not in the 1970s. Steinem and her ilk began to fade away when the newness wore off.
What goes on now is not an uptick of that. It is something entirely different, mostly rabble rousing by the SJWs, who are in essence spoiled brats that need a good, hard set-down, something that would curl the hair on their heads. They haven’t a clue and don’t want to get one.
Bring that up now and all you hear in retort is something along this method of debate:
“YOU WANT TO BRING BACK THE DRAFT!”
“No, I want to have equal opportunity for folks and want to change the law so that women at 18 have to register as well. ”
“YOU WANT TO DRAFT ALL THE POOR NON-WHITE FOLK TO FIGHT THE EVIL CAPITALIST WARS!”
“No… You know what forget I even thought about it.”
No, Charles. You have to keep pounding at them until they actually LISTEN to you. They only hear what they want to hear.
Easy way to test his theory – the next time he wanders into a mildly dangerous zone make his PSD all female. He can be the poster child for putting his money where his mouth is.
I hope that when we mention mixed-gendered we mean hot exercise between a man and a women or at least that French thingy called manushee twa …
I am so confused!
I just hope that the military can keep whatever vestige it has of warfighting ethos left in it until the pieces of shit infesting DC under the head turd O’Bumbler are tossed out in the 2016 election.
What ticks me off is why are they even doing this in the first place? The cost of training, injuries, time lost, equipment changes, logistics changes, etc. Of adding women to these combat fields far exceeds the cost of an equivalent male. Given that the civilians in charge are trying to reduce the military, it makes no sense to spend the extra dollars to put women in when nomen are being cut. And that is not even taking into account the costs of actually fielding a mixed gender unit in combat. Such a teeny tiny percentage of women want and/or can make it in a unit that they will never fill their quotas anyways, unless standards are relaxed…
…My father – USMC 53-60 – has told me that this is causing a massive uproar in the Marine community because of SECNAV’S implication that the Marines lied. My favorite comment so far is that either SECNAV presents proof that the books were cooked, or retract his statement…or have his seconds ready.
Mike
Oooooh Code Duello, how I pine for Thee …
If you look at that shit-eatin’ grin on mabus’s face, you know what the answer is to your complaints. He won’t accept anything that does not meet with bodaprez’s notions, so he’ll lie his ass off and expect to be given fabricated crap to justify keeping his job.
This is, as I said elsewhere, only going to increase in volume of noise over the next two years. The damage, however, is not irreparable.
I think these women should at least be given SOME credit for volunteering to do this. You can do that, can’t you? You’re all grownups, rights?
Ex PH-2, My issue is the reason they are there in the first place.It is strictly politics where there should not be any. There is nothing, NOTHING that is showing that this is making troops more combat effective, and THAT is what we need to be basing this off of, not some misguided attempt to be ‘fair’. My issue is not with the women who volunteered. They have proven that they have what it takes to make it in the Infantry… for now. But as the study pointed out, they have the propensity to get injured more, regardless of whether they are the peak physical specimen or not. Carrying the loads an Infantryman is expected to carry will put a toll on their body, and I DOUBT any of the SJW’s are even considering the fact that we are going to have a LOT of unnecessary injuries from this, just finding the women qualified to do this. The Sheer number of females it took to weed through to get the two, TWO females capable of making it were ridiculous. In both the Army and the Marine Corps experiments, only 10 percent passed and made it to the end. You and I BOTH know the Social Justice Warriors will use that as an excuse for the ‘Big Mean men keeping the standards unrealistically high for women, and the standards need to be lowered’ B.S. to make things more ‘gender neutral’. NO, women need to accept that the double standard of PT test scores needs to go away first, if they TRULY want to do this. They need to step up their game ACROSS the military and accept that the military isn’t a skittle shitting unicorn factory. If you want something, you have to EARN it. And if they want to be taken seriously, then ALL of them need to step up their game and ‘woman up’, so to speak. I’m just waiting for the first woman who gets assigned to one of these high speed units to turn around and sue the government for not being able to have children because… Read more »
No argument from me, RayRay.
I think this is a ridiculous idea, even though I have repeatedly argued on behalf of the women who are doing it. If they can handle the load, fine. If they can’t the DoD has to accept that and NOT drop the standards, period. They are in place for a reason. And I would like to remind you that under severe stress, both men and women who can barely lift a finger have frequently done remarkable things.
WE all know Mabus’s nonsensical accusation of bias comes from the White House.
There are enough combat-related positions open to women now that do not require being in the hot zones. I know that the majority opinion expressed on TAH is that putting women in the trenches under direct fire is meant to weaken the military, but my opinion (nothing else) is that it is done out of sheer stupidity by people who have never had that kind of experience themselves, never mind serving in the military at all.
The routine complaint here has been about women whose morals were somewhat lower than an embezzler’s or a politician’s. But when I inquired about THAT bias – were you all saying that ALL the women were like that – the answer was ‘no, there were plenty who were NOT’, yet you all go on grumbling about those who WERE and have said next to nothing about those who did NOT behave like that. Why were those other women so unremarkable?
That problem has to be resolved well ahead of putting any women at all into combat infantry, because that is what destroys unit cohesion, not whether or not someone can carry a heavy load.
The real problem with this program is that if not enough women volunteer WHO CAN PASS the training session, then the standards may or will be changed/lowered to satisfy the social morons who think that the military is just another corporate entity.
It was a lot lower than ten percent. We had over 300 women go through ITB alone, with only 2 making it to the end. That puts it at about .007 percent in the Marine Corps, not counting Infantry Officer Course.
Passing ITB is not some great feat, as it is entry level training. it is not like they passed A&S, the Q Course or BUDS.
ITB (or ITS back in my day) isn’t that hard.
The fleet however will bust your balls (or ovaries if Ray gets his way) along with your back, your knees, your ankles and your health overall.
What I tell all my students when they show up here to ITB:
“Welcome to the second easiest thing you will do in the Marine Corps.”
“Part of the study said women tend not to be able to carry as heavy a load for as long, but there were women who went through the study who could.” Um, that’s called the exception, Mable. The average height was lower for the women than the men, too, but there were some women who were taller than some men.
“And part of the study said we’re afraid because women get injured more frequently that over time, women will break down more, that you’ll begin to lose your combat effectiveness over time.”
No part of the study spoke of fear. That’s Mable ad-libbing. The injury rates were greater for women than for men and the injuries were related to physical stress: pulls, tears, strains, and sprains. Humping a load will do that to people unaccustomed to muscular and joint stress. What’s more, the study incorporated multiple, consecutive rest days, something an enemy will not accommodate.
Yeah, Mable is all about the pc. Unlike the scientifically conducted study, he has absolutely no contrary or opposing study results that support him. All he has is bullshit.
Mabus has his nose so far up his political master’s rump that I’m surprised he can open his mouth wide enough to breathe. (Maybe he uses some kind of tube as a snorkel.) Of course he’s going to say what the handlers of Current Occupant, 1600 Penn Ave, Wash DC tell him to say – truth be damned.
Here’s the standard the Marines will have to meet: The Standard.
In other words, did any females meet the standard for Marine infantry or not?
If so, they have to open. If not, they have a case to keep it closed (maybe)*
All they have to do is maintain their standards. If no or very few women make it, so be it. No one can question them if they are maintaining their well documented standards.
My guess is that there are very few women out there that can, but those few would probably remarkable Marines.
*Maybe. Just because we’ve never seen a black swan doesn’t prove they don’t exist. Just because we haven’t seen a female that can meet the infantry standard doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist exist.
There are black swans. I have pictures of them.
It’s shorthand for the Black Swan Problem describing the problem of induction- you can’t prove that something doesn’t exist.
Actually, you can indeed prove things do not exist – like a rational square root for 2, for example. The technique is called “proof by contradiction”.
In general, the method requires you to assume the truth of the proposition in question. You then show that that assumption leads to a conflict with another known fact.
The simplest real-world example is called an alibi. Here’s an example:
Prosecutor: “You had a beef with Joe Blow. He was found dead, shot with a .38 special – and you own a .38 special. So you were the one who shot him.”
Defendant: “Don’t think so, Mr. Prosecutor. Talk to my two friends Bill and Tom – they’ll each tell you I was more than 200 miles away all night the night he was shot. We were out until 6AM doing the town over 200 miles away.
Oh, and here’s a credit card receipt proving I paid for dinner and drinks at Ristorante La Dolomite at 10:07PM that night. Check their security cameras if you don’t believe me. And Visa’s transaction logs should further confirm that fact.
You said earlier Joe Blow was shot at around 10:00PM that night – right? At a place over 200 miles away from Ristorante La Dolomite?”
Prosecutor: I never said what time Joe Blow was shot. You did.
Yourr example doesn’t make sense here. For one, it doesn’t address the existence of a physical thing, it addresses the whereabouts of a thing at a certain time (in this case, a person). Secondly, it is framed within jurisprudence (here the burden of proof in a court of law). I am discussing epistemology.
From the appearance of that wide white grin, he’s been enjoyin’ hssself some manmayo sammich from Boathouse Barry.
What a turd burgling cocknocker.
Worst SECNAV in history, what a tool, lapdog of 0sama oops 0bama, ###BLACKHAWKSDOWNMATTER.
Of course he is- the Secretary is appointed by the president to organize, train, and equip the Navy and undue his policies (specific language below)
Generally speaking, Service and Defense Secretaries agree with the Presidents policies, but even if they didn’t they would just be fired or asked to resign and their acting replacement would do whatever it was they didn’t want to do.
The Service Chiefs work for the Secretaries- in this case Dunford works for Mabus. He does have the authority and responsibility to provide military advice to the President, but he can be overridden and fired as well (Eric Shinseski and Don Rumsfeld can fill you guys on how that works)
The Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) is responsible for, and has the authority under Title 10 of the United States Code, to conduct all the affairs of the Department of the Navy, including: recruiting, organizing, supplying, equipping, training, mobilizing, and demobilizing. The Secretary also oversees the construction, outfitting, and repair of naval ships, equipment and facilities. SECNAV is responsible for the formulation and implementation of policies and programs that are consistent with the national security policies and objectives established by the President and the Secretary of Defense. The Department of the Navy consists of two uniformed Services: the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps.
Should say ‘pursue’, not ‘undue’
Everything conducted during the study at SOI was on the up and up. With the amount of eyes on the project, it would have been impossible to “cook-the-books” so to speak. Further, every female Marine after leaving the program, either through graduation or attrition, took an exit survey. In those exit surveys, no one was allowed to be in the room with them, to ensure impartiality. If the system was rigged, you would think something would have been stated in those exit surveys.
I was there when this test started and I saw it all the way through to completion. When we received our first females, I pulled my entire platoon in and stated unequivocally (some would say crudely, I am just a dumb grunt afterall), that it did not matter what genitalia you had between your legs, myself and my instructors only have one job, and that is to make the best damn basically trained infantrymen we can. I would like to say that is what we did, regardless of our opinions on the matter. No one received improper treatment, unfair treatment or special privileges.
But I guess I am lying and that we rigged it from the beginning.
I keep telling you guys: it ain’t the facts that bother them. It’s the fact that you TELL them the facts. That’s what bothers them.
” With the amount of eyes on the project, it would have been impossible to “cook-the-books” so to speak.”
Very, VERY, good point. But, let’s not confuse the SJW’s with facts …
The only good thing about having girls in the infantry is that it will only take one man to carry the bodybag to the dustoff bird. I fear that female casualties will deplete the combat efficiency of mixed units at a rapid rate. Some day this country will look back on The Obama years and say, “What the fuck were we thinking?”.
I knew I’d remember it eventually:
“Figures don’t lie, but liars always figure.”
Mabus, go suck start a shotgun.
Hey, Mable! This is really not as complicated as you would have us believe.
First, standards are established to ensure that potentials participants are capable of learning then doing a job, any job. (This principle applies to every job in existence.) The JOB determines the standards. Wishful thinking has nothing to do with it, so please, leave that out of the discussion.
Second, it appears that the only people who benefit from skewing results of this particular training are those who demand that people who may or may not be qualified for the job are trained to do it anyway, and that standards be adjusted to make sure that completion of the training course is guaranteed.
I’ve read all the articles I could find on this- none of them seem to state what the standard is or how many women met or failed to meet them. Most just tell you that men did better than women.
Here’s why this is important: All of the Marines, regardless of gender, met the individual standard to be in the experiment. Some, men and women, were ‘provisional riflemen’, who like all Marines did the 29 day short course at SOI. Some, men and women, were no kidding, 8 week ITB fully trained 0300 infantry Marines (although the women werent allowed to earn the MOS and had to go do their day job for awhile).
Men outperformed women in the collective tasks and in areas like marksmanship (rounds on target) during collective live fire events. This is not the same as a qualification range- this is a squad maneuvering under load through the desert and firing as a group at a realistic target array under realistic conditions. The Marines were trying to compare how similarly trained men and women would perform under these conditions. it turns out (surprise!) that men are generally stronger, faster, have more endurance, and get injured less.
Great, we kind of knew that, but now we can prove it with a lot of empirical data.
What I haven’t seen is a lay down of the standard for that task. During the live fire Men hit 44% of targets, women hit 28%. We know that gender is not a determining factor in marksmanship, so this was probably due to the fact that the women were fatigued, hat higher heart rates, moved slower to a good firing position, etc. great stuff, and the Marines will be able to do a lot with this data (as will the Army).
But what is the standard for rounds on target for an individual rifleman during a live fire? How many women met this standard? Did any men fail? What happens to them? Are they out of the infantry?
That’s what the marines are up against here.
And to continue the logic here, say if they found out that lefties do better/worse would we have preferential treatment or exclusively left handed grunts or none. As a taxpayer and a former 11B IDGAF how I’m kept safe so long as it’s moral and efficient.
To that point, f*** Mabus.
No, if lefties in general did worse we would ask the same question of the individual: Can this person meet the standard?
I don’t care that the average lefty doesn’t shoot as well as a normal person; if a lefty can qualify on their individual weapon and meet all other standards, then let them in.
Of course, there are other issues with lefties that can’t be addressed by the standards. The maintenance costs of switching magazine release levers around and purchasing brass deflectors alone make it not really worth it, but we lost that fight a long time ago. I just can’t get used to watching them write with the wrong hand, I guess.
Ha! “..wrong hand.”
Yes, average and standard. I’m not going to post the definitions here because we all know them.
I take issue that the administration is waxing right over these for the sake of, hell, insert talking point here.
To that point, f*** Mabus.
All standards come out of NAVMC 3500.44 Infantry T&R. All physical standards were based off the male Marine standard.