Cost of Lower Standards for Women in Marine Recruitment

The recent success of two female officers, both West Point graduates, in passing the Army’s grueling Ranger School has bolstered arguments for the full integration of women into the military’s front-line combat units. In becoming the first women to receive the coveted Ranger tab, the two officers proved that women can handle not just the physical challenges but also the psychological and leadership tests posed by the nine-week course.

As that deadline looms, the Marine Corps is dealing with its own gender-related controversy. In June, Lt. Col. Kate Germano was removed from her position as commander of the Fourth Battalion at Parris Island, the Marines’ all-female boot camp. During her time as commander, Colonel Germano asserted that the Marines’ setting lower standards for women than men led to an underlying sexism in the ranks, one that systematically kept women from reaching their full potential.

Interesting she doesn't mention her pull up performance or swim or range. I am also entertained by the "hyper-masculinity" complaint with regard to the Corps. Clearly the admission of homosexuals, the eventual trans whatever allowances, etc., will feminize the ranks to her liking. Sorry, but the Corps did not make warfare a "hyper-masculine" endeavor. Also, I do not buy for a second the complaints she voices. I know of Marines who were removed from service for far less discriminatory issues than she states.

sounds like some bs to me,

I think it is more likely she was doing a formation run and she wasn’t staying in position with the group.

Military Runs aren’t a race, you are supposed to stay in formation. She keeps talking about beating them in runs, being at the front, she should have been washed out of OCS

We don’t need dumb officers like this.

The first commenter at the NYT site nails what is wrong with the article. What’s keeping women from being their best is pandering politicians who insist on lowering standards to show progress in “equality” quotas, not “hyper-masculine” traditions in the military.

<%>the two officers proved that women can handle not just the physical challenges but also the psychological and leadership tests posed by the nine-week course.

This is the common refrain of all of the feminists, but these two women proved nothing of the sort. What they proved is that 2% of women (100 women started the regime that led to graduation from Ranger School, 2 graduated) have a reasonable chance of graduating from Ranger School. Male average over many years is 40%. This is what could be expected given the physical difference between men and women. These two women proved that there is a physical difference between men and women.

This author demands that these plain differences be wished away through administrative fiat. If further experiments confirm that 2% or thereabouts female soldiers can attain the current standards, feminists and politicians will not accept that fact. They will and certainly are right now demanding that standards be adjusted so that women can succeed at the same rate as men. Interesting that all of these accounts follow a similar pattern. Running has always been the coin of the realm to see if soldiers are fit and if they can tough it out. It's the daily routine. But, upper body strength is where the real difference occurs and these accounts are always silent on this issue. That is an inconvenient fact.

Just like for years and years we were told Lance Armstrong passed all of his drug tests we will find out that there was systematic cheating going on with these two female Rangers. Either by them or much,much more likely overseeing officers bending to a political demand.

Just on the basics of pure statistics what are the odds that not one but two passed the course together. It boggles the statisticians mind.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.