[usmcobra]

If anything the marines have tighten The PFT standard women are held to.

http://www.ocs.usmc.mil/FPFT.htm

http://www.ocs.usmc.mil/MPFT.htm

Back when I was in, Women didn't have to run but a mile and a half or do as many sit ups.

Any one that thinks the flexed arm hang is a piece of cake should try it, it ain't as easy as you think, and you aren't allowed to rest your chin on the bar.

(just a note the graphes linked are from OCS website however all Marines are required to meet the same standards)

[elfman2]

"it doesn't matter one lick that any women were with them, the results would have been the same or worse, because they were basically unprotected except for their personal weapons. "

I wasn't claiming that men could fight their way out. I was claiming that this was an instance of women being assigned to units that prepare to support troops in an active combat zone. Infowarrior says that Jessica's Direct Support Maintenance Battalion functions only at the corps level, but I'm not clear if he knows if its assets exclusively operate there or if they are expected to support battalion or brigade HQs.

Re the PT tests. Why should women have lower PT targets than men if they are expected to do the same job? I don't want to come across as some kind of right wing ideologue freak, but it seems that the two are incompatible. There are of course greater inconsistencies that Marines (and civilians) put up with, but unless someone has a better explanation than I can come up with, that's always going to be a thorn in the side.

I'm not even against women in the military. I dated a good one for several month (just after she got out on a hardship discharge for being a single mom). I'm just against pretending they're something that they're not (equal to men in combat support performance) and then treating them with all the special care that ladies should have. I say pick one, any one.

I think that if we're going to let little teenage cuties drive into combat zones among barbarians, we need to make it very clear to them the horrors that they risk, that they're going to be judged by male standards, that their privacy and dignity as a ladies will not be guaranteed. And to some degree, they need to train under those conditions, not just pull out of support roles when most needed. I'm sure there are some women who'd thrive in those conditions. And I suspect Jessica would choose another path.

So for women like Jessica, if we want to take advantage of the benefits they can bring to our military, there are needs in division and higher level units that could very much use their skills and service. I believe that those positions should be specialist positions, being an exception to the Marine's policy that everyone is a rifleman first, so that standards can be adjusted to their nature.

Having a two option service path should satisfy the radicals who truly just want equal opportunity as people who recognize our differences. And having different standards for each should eliminate the contradictions currently in our integration.