SJW Haring sets the USMC up for female integration failure
We’ve discussed former Lieutenant Colonel Ellen Haring before. She once sued the Pentagon because she wasn’t qualified to lead a female Engagement Team in Iraq (my guess is that she was physically unable and mentally unfit) and so her dream of being the first SJW in combat went unrealized and her career was stunted as a result. Even though she wasn’t in combat, she once watched the famous “To Hell and Back” movie and decided from Audie Murphy’s heroic escapades portrayed in the movie that physical attributes weren’t a necessary disqualifier for women in combat. She also once wrote about stolen valor and claimed that there was no valor that could be stolen. And, oh, by the way, she once wrote about the Marines’ test unit for gender-integrated performance was flawed – even before the results of the test were published.
Mostly, Haring is just a social justice warrior who likes to make excuses for her failures. Her sad military career is everyone else’s fault. Her civilian (SJW) life’s work – getting more women killed in combat – will fail because it’s everyone else’s fault.
Today, her brain droppings are published in the pages of Stars & Stripes;
“If your leaders don’t back a change, it won’t happen,” said Ellen Haring, a retired Army colonel who is a senior fellow at Women in International Security and on the board of directors of the Service Women’s Action Network, which spearheaded the push for women’s’ integration into combat roles.
“Any leadership that refuses to get on board has to be moved out,” she said, “and there doesn’t seem to be any willingness to move out leaders who are not getting behind this change.”
That kind of sounds like she’s calling for a political purge of the ranks. I wonder if she prefers that they be lined up against a wall or poisoned at a social event as an example to their peers.
Of course, if this new reordering of the social norms fail, it won’t be because the SJWs were wrong, it will be because the USMC’s leadership weren’t “on board” – you know, whether they were or not.
My favorite Female Marine, Kate Germano, was at the same panel discussion as Haring;
Germano, a Marine lieutenant colonel who brought up the performance rates of women as commander of the corps’ only female recruit training unit, was fired last year after her superiors said she’d created a poor command climate. Germano and her supporters insist she was just demanding the same standards from women as their male colleagues.
[…]
“If we maintain the status quo all we are going to do is maintain the perception that physical weakness is the natural condition of women,” Germano said. “If we expect women to fail, they will fail.”
While Haring offers only excuses for the failures for the women Marines, Germano offers solutions to help them succeed. I’d follow Germano into combat, I wouldn’t let haring lead a detail to burn latrines.
Category: Big Pentagon
Lars in 3-2-1.
Shhhhhh!
Lars would follow his feminist hero Harding into any feminist battlefield… with a months supply of Midol!
The discussion on this particular blog post would be far less likely to end up being about me if you stopped trying to make it about me.
So maybe you should just SHUT UP and ignore obvious provocation.
It is self-evident that you can’t resist the need to have the last word, or to get a dig in. My suggestion: take a deep breath, then don’t reply. Ask yourself if doing so will contribute to the discussion, or just stir shit up.
“But he/she/they started it!” is not a valid excuse.
Lars, just go away and go GET A LIFE, loser!!!
After I signed my 4651, and the 4856s from my commander and career counselor, the Unit Administrators said that they had everything they needed to process my retirement packet. I also gave them a copy of my 20 year letter. I stopped going to drill after that.
The enlisted folk at my unit accuse me of being a nonpar, but they’re wrong. I’m retired on inactive duty. My commander keeps calling me about my MEDPRO, but I refuse to answer because nothing in the call would tell me who this Jack Shit fellow is.
I have been wondering where COL. Ellen stands on mandatory draft registration for females.
I think COL. Ellen is a retired bird colonel.
So, she’s a former, LTC, right?
Yeah. Can’t believe I fell for that. I will go haze myself now.
“Any leadership that refuses to get on board has to be moved out.” And this is the position of our political string pullers. There cannot be opposition, however sincere and well articulated. There is no tolerance for those who would resist, whether it be in the military or elsewhere in government uppership (yeah, I just made that word up b/c leadership seems too decent for this bunch.) I am grateful that Ellen (Red) Haring came right out and said it, although her handlers will not like it.
Any so called leader who pushes an agenda instead of giving careful thought to the matter and doing an even handed evaluation needs to be fired as incompetent.
It takes about 5 years to test and evaluate a weapons system. These SJW are trying to use 1 year of data that disagrees with their position to push something on the military.
I can’t wait for the first close combat injuries that occurs when male recruits are fighting female recruits.
Who am I kidding……..
The sad thing is that Male and Female recruits get pretty much the EXACT same training. The Academic Instruction Unit, Weapons Field Training Battalion, Close Combat Instructors and those that run the fitness Course are DIs from both sexes.
Having them train separately ensures that the physical match-ups and pace of the training is geared toward the average female body.
There is absolutely nothing to be gained by integrating a female platoon into a Male Company.
Nothing to gain that is of practical military use, but it sure would further more than a few agendas.
Meanwhile in Moscow, Vlad the Imploder is doing a jig. SJW and their enablers are going to ruin this country with their ‘good’ intentions.
But I’m a bully…
I do not know enough about this Colonel or her career to evaluate the credibility of her position.
However, there is an issue with the way women are being integrated and evaluated in the military. Their career outcomes are not reflective of a system that does not have some discriminatory influences.
We need an honest and transparent evaluation of what is going on over the course of the careers of female officers.Right now we are working too heavily off anecdotes and limited studies to know.
I have seen anecdotes as well. A female team leader removed from her team because the team was assigned to a combat outpost. A female soldier that ended up stuck overnight at a combat outpost due to a route going black being locked in a MRAP with a guard standing outside overnight “for her own protection”, and a excellent female NCO being denied a non-combat assignment based entirely on her gender because the billet would require her to potentially be deployed behind the enemy forward line of troops.
Here’s an honest and transparent evaluation: Here’s your ruck. Saddle up and hump buttercup.
For old school reference I suggest reading “A Soldiers Load and the Mobility of a Nation” or Google the report on infantry loads in Afghanistan.
Then come back and tell me how many women can hack it.
For the miniscule numbers that can, is it worth the logistical, medical and other costs?
And can you put a value on combat effectiveness and how adding females to infantry (and armor and artillery) will increase it?
Any answer that includes the word “opportunity will be discounted and more than likely mocked.
I consider it two different issues.
1. Reviewing our processes and the effects of our processes to determine if women are being justly evaluated and promoted in the military career fields in which they are authorized to serve.
2. Determining the extent to which women can be effectively integrated into combat arms. And making the changes necessary for the integration that is possible.
I do not need to read about soldiers loads. I understand the weight they cary. I often carried rucks over 85 lbs and as high as 109 lbs. I met two women in my career that I know for certain could do it because I watched them do it. I am not sure how their injury rate would have compared to the males. Neither were injured but neither were approved for the positions due to their gender so they were not permitted to do the jobs operationally.I can tell you the male injury rate for rucks over 85 lbs is pretty high.
I know both of those women were better at their jobs and would have been greater assets to the teams then many of the male soldiers who actually were on teams.
Lars,
Start. Taking. Your. Meds. AGAIN!
How far for how long? I’m curious, because there’s a big difference in patrolling with it for days and carrying it out to throw it in a vehicle.
How long did I carry it? I was LLVI in light infantry division, and SOT-A. So quite frequently.
As for the women? Not far, 6 kilometers over broken terrain. But they could have gone further. One withdrew her desire to serve on the teams due to the negative attention the attempt drew. The other went and became an air assault instructor instead.
And making the changes necessary for the integration that is possible.
Translation: Lower the standards until enough women are in the Combat Arms fields.
gotta say. from what I’m seeing realtime, it’s inevitable.
..unless the next administration does something to stop it.
That is not the path I am advocating.
And framing it that way is kinda bullshit. It also is similar to the language that was originally used to claim blacks should not be integrated.
I thought that the purpose of the military was to kill people and break things. Not to worry about “career outcomes”. But, that’s just the common sense definition, I guess.
Not mutually exclusive.
And the role of the military is not only to kill people and break things. Most of the stuff going on during a war, and on the battlefield is not killing things or breaking stuff. Killing people and breaking things is not even close to the majority of how warfare is conducted.
We over focus on that role and it limits the effectiveness of our military in the contemporary operating environment.
So I’ve heard. Mandatory classes, safety briefings, and waiting….
Oh, and of course, that fancy thing called “Mission Creep”.
The primary purpose is to fight and win our nation’s wars. There is plenty to achieve that objective, but at the end of the day, breaking shit and hurting people is #1. Until they don’t want to break our shit and hurt our people.
Wars are usually not won on the ground anymore.
Would a ground campaign ever ended the fight in Afghanistan? Iraq?
Once there is state collapse there is no army to defeat. It is the population that must be won and a new state must be created to replace the one that collapsed.
That cannot be done by breaking things and killing people.
And, nation-building isn’t really the military’s job. It’s been tried, and it usually doesn’t work.
It worked after WWII, because the adversaries were totally, overwhelmingly defeated. That population wasn’t “won”, they were told how things were going to be.
What I mean when I say “not mutually exclusive” is that we can have a military fully capable of killing people and breaking things while still ensuring female service members are fairly evaluated and promoted for their performance.
You don’t know me, Commissar.
“…we can have a military fully capable of killing people and breaking things while still ensuring female service members are fairly evaluated and promoted for their performance.”
You’re right LT, but there’s a heeyoooge difference between possibility and probability. This will be done not to show any sort of reality exists, but rather in spite of reality.
Haring doesn’t even appear to understand the definition of valor, Taylor. From her article about Stolen Valor (emphasis added):
The Army officially defines valor very differently in AR 600-8-22.
I find it hard to take someone seriously who literally doesn’t know the definition of the subject they are writing about – e.g., who confuses the public recognition for heroic conduct with heroism itself. I am forced to conclude she is either abysmally ignorant, or is deliberately obfuscating to further an agenda. YMMV.
I do not agree with the Army definition either.
However, her definition is absurd. According to her definition if someone committed an act of valor and there was nobody around to see it happen then it was not an act of valor.
And her focus on the recognition of other for acts to have value indicates a flawed perspective on why people perform their duties in service of their country.
Can’t argue with your assessment of Haring’s inane definition. Or your assessment of her perspective, for that matter.
FWIW: the Army definition of valor is consistent with the historical English definition of valor in a military context. A broader definition including non-military heroism is of course possible, but the Army’s definition logically focuses on the military context.
Yeah, my issue was the framing of valor as only existing in combat. That definition is more of a construct reflecting the army award system for recognizing valor.
Valor is definitely strongly associated with acts of courage in the face of danger in combat but I think valor is certainly possible outside of combat.
Overall, I do not think we disagree on this.
Here, we do agree. I also agree that valor outside of combat is possible.
My whole reason for revisiting the Army’s definition was to point out that the Army’s definition in the Award Reg should be expected to be exactly that: to define valor in a military context.
I knew of a FET leader in Afghanistan. “She” was a Major. She went into our districts to “poll” women. But, what she was really doing and expected women to do, was march through the streets burning their bras and crying out for full equality.
I was able to establish a meeting with women from one district, but it would have to be in another neighboring district. She was offended that they couldn’t meet in their district. She then called a PL who was escorting her team a “Liar” in her report. Other OGAs were also complaining about her bullshit.
Within about 2 weeks, she was back home. She was fired for the crap she was spewing and trying to do, establishing a women’s rights movement instead of doing her real job as a FET leader. Her team hated her too because of her attitude. It was a good thing that she was sent home, persona non grata.
I could list ten other examples of “female” Soldiers who got over merely because they were female. (a former Bn Cdr was violating every Army value, but the CG was afraid he wouldn’t get a second star if he fired a female Cdr and let her get away with it all.)
I have a response that illustrates how some military leaders do things like this even without gender being the driver but it would just cause this board to explode in name calling so I am going to keep it to myself for now.
If there is a dramatic change in climate toward my posts someday maybe we can discuss this again.
Your mom should’ve taken you up her ass, Lars.
Given the likely repercussions to the careers of the command of a unit where a female was “mistreated”, and here I am not making any assessment of the command, the female or anyone else invoiced in the incident-but I will say that bringing males and females into close contact (especially if the character of one of the parties is unknown) is dangerous to anyone who might have been expected to have “prevented” any “incident”. There has been an epidemic of such “incidents” on campuses across the country-many have been shown to be falsely reported. Even in spite of that proof, careers were ruined, so I can’t blame a commander for an abundance of caution.
My first Enlistment was as an Army Combat Engineer and I served under a few of the first Female Officers. One was outstanding (Former Enlisted) one was decent, and the other was just another politician/ticket puncher that had less leadership than a moldy roach turd. I see Haring as an example of the third, deep down she knows she’s mediocre/sub-par and instead of working honestly to bring herself up to snuff she’s playing politics.
And she’s making a crap ton of money off it too I’m sure.
Attention-whoring for money? Like politicians and SJW’s? Yeah, I see that too!
I might’ve missed it, but SJW?
Straight-Jacket Whiner?
Solo Juvenile Wackaloon?
Seriously Jilted Widget?
Stupid Jerk Weirdo?
Silly Jehovah Witness?
“Social Justice Warrior”, it’s what the current iteration of Red Guards have chosen to call themselves.
This woman is an idiot.
She is singular-mined and struggling to stay relevant.
I always laugh at Haring’s Audie Murphy references.
Yes, Murphy was not a large-statured man. He did, however, win multiple fistfights outside of combat. He also physically overpowered and killed multiple Germans in hand-to-hand combat. And in one famous incident, after his friend CPL Lattie Tipton (given the pseudonym Brandon in Murphy’s book) was killed by a kraut machine gun crew, Murphy charged the gun on his own, killing the crew with grenades and rifle fire. He then picked up their MG-42 and all of its ammo and continued his charge. He proceeded to Rambo that heavy motherfucker and enough belted 7.92 to load three men for several minutes, single-handedly wiping out one entrenched German platoon and routing several others.
I don’t think he had a problem with upper body strength.
There’s also, of course, the matter of the attempted murder charge against him by a guy who had groped and threatened a female friend of Murphy’s. After he was acquitted, he had a very eloquent way of saying, “If I wanted to kill you, you’d be too dead to complain.”
Murphy was not a woman, and thus should not be compared to a woman. That idiot Haring isn’t fit to use his name in a sentence.
Also, Lars can suck a cock in hell.
Hell is your belief.
The cock you can suck is very real and tangible to everybody, fucker.
Oral fixation much?
No, Lars, I just can’t stand you, you piece of shit. I’ve explained why repeatedly. I really tried to tolerate you, but you’re a dickhead extraordinaire. Fuck off and die.
Man, i burned latrines in Central America. I’ll never forget the smell of burning diesel and shit. Haring reminds me of that smell.
It suddenly quieted down, did Lars get his TAH posting privileges temporarily revoked, or did he HAVE to stop because his local public library was closing for the weekend? Either way I’m gonna enjoy the peace and quiet.
He stopped on his own.
Fine by me!!
So, “Red” Herring is a senior fellow at Women in International Security . . . ..
Let her put her money where her mouth is, and assemble an all-female security team, and take them overseas to a hot spot, and see how well they fare. . . . should be interesting for the first week.
There are hundreds of women performing vital roles in international security. Many doing very sensitive and clandestine work.
A personal security detail is low on the significance list with respect to the kind of work that is being done in the field.
You DON’T know me, Commissar.
Hi, Jack. How’s shits?
Larsie-poo, the discussion was infantry humping, not about three piece suits, shoulder holsters and driving armored limos.
Aren’t you overdue for a broken glass suppository?
Women have performed fine in combat roles for centuries. Is the average female equal to the average male?
No. But it will not be average females that successfully completes the training for most combat arms jobs.
I find is ridiculous that the ruck size is how you are determining competency. The overwhelming majority of infantry to not carry rucks as far and as often as they claim. And women who can’t handle it will be weeded out just like the men who can’t.
It will likely take a different kind of unit structure to accommodate female infantry units. However, the army needs to relook at the structures we are using to field forces anyway. The current brigade structure is working poorly.
Lars, at this point your credibility is so far gone that any position you support looks worse for your endorsement. Honestly, the very best thing you can do to support anything at all is to shut the fuck up and disappear.
It does not really matter whether I support it or not does it? It has already happened.
Combat jobs have been opened to women and women have already begun to graduate from combat specialty schools.
You are clinging to dead, discarded social theories about the role of women in society. Fighting this change just makes you look like a misogynistic jerk.
And I am exceedingly credible where it matters. It does not matter here. This board has zero effect on public policy. The opinions of some members of this board generally reflect outdated and inevitably extinct worldviews and assumptions.
There are some intelligent, reasonable people on this board. You are absolutely not among their numbers. Most of your ideological preferences have no future in our world. Best of luck to your remaining years as a spectator to you own increasing irrelevance.
Take a hint, asswipe: nobody gives a fuck what you have to say, because you’re an obnoxious assdouche with zero credibility. That’s YOUR fault and no one else’s (400% ring any bells? That’s just one example). If you tried not being a condescending asshole for a change, you might not get treated like one. But you continue to do so, so we continue to treat you accordingly. If you tried doing some actual research and backing your shit with actual facts, we might be willing to listen. But you don’t, so we don’t. There’s a reason why nobody likes you–its YOU.
Fuck off and die. Your mom should have swallowed.
No, the 400% does not ring any bells.
The rest of you posts is the same nonsense you always post after I post.
I searched my posts and I think you are referencing my September post where I said death threats against Obama are 400% higher than the previous administration.
That 400% figure was a widely reported figure with several news agencies reporting it.
I did not “lie” I provided a statistic that had been widely reported that turned out to not have validity. I believed it was a true statistic when I quoted it.
It was an honest mistake and a simple google of the phrase “400% increase in death threats” will result in several news agencies reporting the statistic. I think I got mine from the Telegraph.
The fact that you are still upset about that legitimate mistake 5 months later indicates you may have mental health issues.
No bells ringing, eh? How convenient that you forget your own bullshit. I bet a lot of other people here know exactly what I’m talking about.
You are a walking, talking caricature of the very worst liberal stereotypes, Lars. Seth McFarlane and Rush Limbaugh couldn’t concoct a better example of a strawman than you. By the way, I got a real kick out of your “spectator to your own irrelevance” line. Project much? Unlike you, I don’t have a comically-exaggerated notion of my own importance. I’m aware that I am easily replaced, whereas you seem convinced that you’re the Essential Man wherever you go (do you even have a job?). So that one pretty much bounced right off. As for my ideology, I doubt you actually know what it is, since you demonstrably suck at paying attention. And I have never claimed to be especially smart. I’m just smarter than you. That’s hardly a source of bragging rights, though, since you’re a fucking idiot.
As always, go fuck yourself.
I’m right, no matter how wrong I am. And who is this Jack Shit fellow? I have no clue who he is.
I’m also a Major in Civil Affairs fuck those PSYOP guys. Some PLEASE tell me who this Jack Shit fellow is.
Son of a bitch. He just couldn’t help himself, he had to come back and try to get in the last word.
All I hear is yap,yap,yap from that Lard guy. If he can’t even bring beer to dull the noise down, what good is he? He is a guy, right?
So, what do we do with the 240 women who have already successfully completed USMC 0300 (Infantry) training? Should they get to serve? Did they meet standards? The Marines think they did:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/13/marine-corps-announces-formal-opening-of-infantry-jobs-to-women.html
The Commandant says that they earned this, that they have earned the MOS. I suppose that he could be another SJW, but from what I’ve read he’s just a warrior.
I’m sure that many of you will say that standards were lowered for these women, but keep in mind that many of these women participated in the experiment at 29 Palms. If standards were dropped for them in recruit training or AIT, then it does call the study results into question. If standards were maintained, it proves that some women can meet the Marine infantry standard, which is (I hate to admit it) higher than the Army standard.
While Army 11Bs do 13 weeks of OSUT (10 weeks of which are the basic training POI), these Marines did 13 weeks of Recruit Training followed by 59 days of Infantry training. Of course, Marine cooks get 4 weeks of infantry training for a total of 17 weeks.
The IOC, by the way, is kind of like Army IBOLC and Ranger School combined.
Task: Load the main gun
Conditions: in field duty uniform:
a. open ammo compartment door and select proper round per fire command
b.remove round from stowage rack turn round 180 deg.
c. place round on to breach loading tray
d. chamber round, insuring that breach is fully closed
e.ensure path of recoil is clear
f. arm gun
g. announce UP
time to complete for a go at this task: 6 seconds.
note: this task my be performed from a stationary or moving tank.
Note: 120mm ammunition is over 1 meter long and weights 50 to 65 pounds. ammunition is also somewhat fragile as the case walls are combustible.(breaking one open would not be a good thing)
(from memory; it’s been a wile since the last time I did a SQT test or gunnery qual.