Marines: Male units perform better. Sec Navy: What’s a few dead Marines?

[Anonymous]

If it is deemed that women can do every job on the military then every girl in America should sign up with selective service to serve our country in her time of need. If called up, the military can determine to which of every combat or non combat job they go based on demonstrated physical.and academic or leadership capability. It only follows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"On average, more than 37 percent of Ranger School graduates recycle at least one phase of the school. The Darby recycle rate is about 15 percent."

I understand what you are saying. My point is that for the women, the recycle rate for this phase was 100%. All8 who started recycled. Statistically different than from the men. Sounds like 2 made it, one is still trying and eight dropped out.

If your logic skills approach your math skills, all my questions about your non-argument are answered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All-male ground combat units in the Marines were faster, more lethal and less injured than units with mixed genders, according to a Marine Corps study that looked at integrating women into all service jobs.

“All male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews,” according a summary of the report released Thursday.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable

In a related thread in Off-Topic, someone pointed out that the men here were well practiced at this, whereas the women doing this were new. I wouldn't discount the value of practicing a skill. But please, let me not stand in the way of you enjoying a little casual misogyny.

[Anonymous]

I'd like a weaker army - it will be safer for all of us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All-male ground combat units in the Marines were faster, more lethal and less injured than units with mixed genders, according to a Marine Corps study that looked at integrating women into all service jobs.

“All male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews,” according a summary of the report released Thursday.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable

In a related thread in Off-Topic, someone pointed out that the men here were well practiced at this, whereas the women doing this were new. I wouldn't discount the value of practicing a skill. But please, let me not stand in the way of you enjoying a little casual misogyny.

This is from an article. I have no issue with repeating the test with women who are more practiced at dragging bodies from the field or making large marches without sustaining stress fractures. Is it misogyny to say that if my boy signed up for selective service so should your - in your opinion equally able- girl? To be assigned any role the military sees fit according to her ability to 'meet the standards'?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like a weaker army - it will be safer for all of us.

Has our military (the army is a branch) threatened you in some way?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like a weaker army - it will be safer for all of us.

Thankfully, Americans in the 1940’s did not have your mindset.
You have learned in HS what happened in the 1940’s, didn’t you?
Or, perhaps you have not taken that course yet.

[Anonymous]

Please stop the nonsensical argument Mr. SecNav and all who peddle your battlefield gender equality snake-oil. Women as individual's preform below that of an average male. Coed units preform on average below that of all male units. The goal of our Armed Forces is to 1st accomplish the mission with the minimum cost of American lives then that of others.

The numbers and biology simply do NOT support your argument. Ground warfare is largely based upon "brute strength and physical stamina" in which the male gender is superior. Until technology reduces the weight of machine-guns, mortars, ammunition, water, rations....ect and the need to patrol countless kilometers day after day and week after week then engage in combat the Infantry and Combat Arms ought to belong to the male gender.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please stop the nonsensical argument Mr. SecNav and all who peddle your battlefield gender equality snake-oil. Women as individual's preform below that of an average male. Coed units preform on average below that of all male units. The goal of our Armed Forces is to 1st accomplish the mission with the minimum cost of American lives then that of others.

The numbers and biology simply do NOT support your argument. Ground warfare is largely based upon "brute strength and physical stamina" in which the male gender is superior. Until technology reduces the weight of machine-guns, mortars, ammunition, water, rations....ect and the need to patrol countless kilometers day after day and week after week then engage in combat the Infantry and Combat Arms ought to belong to the male gender.

+1 I'm a woman, who otherwise believes in equality. But, simply put, most women are not strong enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All-male ground combat units in the Marines were faster, more lethal and less injured than units with mixed genders, according to a Marine Corps study that looked at integrating women into all service jobs.

“All male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews,” according a summary of the report released Thursday.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable

Of course!! Feminist bullshit will get our men killed.

And the biggest health threat to women is men. Macho male bullshit has resulted in the murder and rape of women for centuries. If a woman can meet the threshold for performance in combat there's no reason to keep them out of combat. Men who can't meet the threshold for performance should likewise be barred.

http://healthcare.utah.edu/the-scope/shows.php?shows=0_vfhu9ewv

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please stop the nonsensical argument Mr. SecNav and all who peddle your battlefield gender equality snake-oil. Women as individual's preform below that of an average male. Coed units preform on average below that of all male units. The goal of our Armed Forces is to 1st accomplish the mission with the minimum cost of American lives then that of others.

The numbers and biology simply do NOT support your argument. Ground warfare is largely based upon "brute strength and physical stamina" in which the male gender is superior. Until technology reduces the weight of machine-guns, mortars, ammunition, water, rations....ect and the need to patrol countless kilometers day after day and week after week then engage in combat the Infantry and Combat Arms ought to belong to the male gender.

+1 I'm a woman, who otherwise believes in equality. But, simply put, most women are not strong enough.

+2 I'm the ex S.F. that posted earlier. Came back to brouse. This is a good point. I can tell you that the average weight we carried on missions was in the neighborhood of 110 lbs each.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We have affirmative action in elite schools. Why not on the battlefield?

Because men feel protective of women and don't focus on the job at hand as they should.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, war is bullshit and only enriches the wealthy and grinds up and spits out our youth and leaves them literally crippled and mentally broken. Plus it fucks over whole countries' populations for generations. All so rich people can get richer.

So I don't fucking care if it's men or women fighting. I think it's all bullshit and you're an asshole if you use it as part of your pathetic MRA argument against feminism. Fuck you.

Thank God the founders of this country didn't agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All-male ground combat units in the Marines were faster, more lethal and less injured than units with mixed genders, according to a Marine Corps study that looked at integrating women into all service jobs.

“All male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews,” according a summary of the report released Thursday.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable

Of course!! Feminist bullshit will get our men killed.

And the biggest health threat to women is men. Macho male bullshit has resulted in the murder and rape of women for centuries. If a woman can meet the threshold for performance in combat there's no reason to keep them out of combat. Men who can't meet the threshold for performance should likewise be barred.

http://healthcare.utah.edu/the-scope/shows.php?shows=0_vfhu9ewv

You sound a bit angry at men? anywho, I hope you get drafted first and put to work in combat . I'll sure they can find some job for which you are able.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All-male ground combat units in the Marines were faster, more lethal and less injured than units with mixed genders, according to a Marine Corps study that looked at integrating women into all service jobs.

“All male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated (93 of 134) as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews,” according a summary of the report released Thursday.

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable

Of course!! Feminist bullshit will get our men killed.

And the biggest health threat to women is men. Macho male bullshit has resulted in the murder and rape of women for centuries. If a woman can meet the threshold for performance in combat there's no reason to keep them out of combat. Men who can't meet the threshold for performance should likewise be barred.

http://healthcare.utah.edu/the-scope/shows.php?shows=0_vfhu9ewv

You sound a bit angry at men? anywho, I hope you get drafted first and put to work in combat . I'll sure they can find some job for which you are able.

Pot meet kettle - sounds like you have some anger issues yourself. And stop being silly. The last time people were called up for the draft was in 1975. We have an all-volunteer army.