The Marine Corps Times recently published a handful of articles in regard to opening Infantry Officer Course (IOC) to females and the possibility of integrating women into the infantry community. In mid-April the Commandant directed the “integration” of the first wave of female officers into IOC this summer following completion of The Basic School (TBS). This action may or may not pave the way for female Marines to serve in the infantry as the results remain to be seen. However, before the Marine Corps moves forward with this concept, should we not ask the hard questions and gain opinions of combat-experienced Marines (male and female alike) as to the purpose, the impact, and the gains from such a move? As a combat-experienced Marine officer, and a female, I am here to tell you that we are not all created equal, and attempting to place females in the infantry will not improve the Marine Corps as the Nation’s force-in-readiness or improve our national security.
As a company grade 1302 combat engineer officer with 5 years of active service and two combat deployments, one to Iraq and the other to Afghanistan, I was able to participate in and lead numerous combat operations. In Iraq as the II MEF Director, Lioness Program, I served as a subject matter expert for II MEF, assisting regimental and battalion commanders on ways to integrate female Marines into combat operations. I primarily focused on expanding the mission of the Lioness Program from searching females to engaging local nationals and information gathering, broadening the ways females were being used in a wide variety of combat operations from census patrols to raids. In Afghanistan I deployed as a 1302 and led a combat engineer platoon in direct support of Regimental Combat Team 8, specifically operating out of the Upper Sangin Valley. My platoon operated for months at a time, constructing patrol bases (PBs) in support of 3d Battalion, 5th Marines; 1st Battalion, 5th Marines; 2d Reconnaissance Battalion; and 3d Battalion, 4th Marines. This combat experience, in particular, compelled me to raise concern over the direction and overall reasoning behind opening the 03XX field.
Who is driving this agenda? I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming that their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality. Shockingly, this isn’t even a congressional agenda. This issue is being pushed by several groups, one of which is a small committee of civilians appointed by the Secretary of Defense called the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service (DACOWITS). Their mission is to advise the Department of Defense (DoD) on recommendations, as well as matters of policy, pertaining to the well-being of women in the Armed Services from recruiting to employment. Members are selected based on their prior military experience or experience with women’s workforce issues. I certainly applaud and appreciate DACOWITS’ mission; however, as it pertains to the issue of women in the infantry, it’s very surprising to see that none of the committee members are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change. I say this because, at the end of the day, it’s the active duty servicemember who will ultimately deal with the results of their initiatives, not those on the outside looking in. As of now, the Marine Corps hasn’t been directed to integrate, but perhaps the Corps is anticipating the inevitable—DoD pressuring the Corps to comply with DACOWITS’ agenda as the Army has already “rogered up” to full integration. Regardless of what the Army decides to do, it’s critical to emphasize that we are not the Army; our operational speed and tempo, along with our overall mission as the Nation’s amphibious force-in-readiness, are fundamentally different than that of our sister Service. By no means is this distinction intended as disrespectful to our incredible Army. My main point is simply to state that the Marine Corps and the Army are different; even if the Army ultimately does fully integrate all military occupational fields, that doesn’t mean the Corps should follow suit.
I understand that there are female servicemembers who have proven themselves to be physically, mentally, and morally capable of leading and executing combat-type operations; as a result, some of these Marines may feel qualified for the chance of taking on the role of 0302. In the end, my main concern is not whether women are capable of conducting combat operations, as we have already proven that we can hold our own in some very difficult combat situations; instead, my main concern is a question of longevity. Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations, and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?
As a young lieutenant, I fit the mold of a female who would have had a shot at completing IOC, and I am sure there was a time in my life where I would have volunteered to be an infantryman. I was a star ice hockey player at Bowdoin College, a small elite college in Maine, with a major in government and law. At 5 feet 3 inches I was squatting 200 pounds and benching 145 pounds when I graduated in 2007. I completed Officer Candidates School (OCS) ranked 4 of 52 candidates, graduated 48 of 261 from TBS, and finished second at MOS school. I also repeatedly scored far above average in all female-based physical fitness tests (for example, earning a 292 out of 300 on the Marine physical fitness test). Five years later, I am physically not the woman I once was and my views have greatly changed on the possibility of women having successful long careers while serving in the infantry. I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.
I was a motivated, resilient second lieutenant when I deployed to Iraq for 10 months, traveling across the Marine area of operations (AO) and participating in numerous combat operations. Yet, due to the excessive amount of time I spent in full combat load, I was diagnosed with a severe case of restless leg syndrome. My spine had compressed on nerves in my lower back causing neuropathy which compounded the symptoms of restless leg syndrome. While this injury has certainly not been enjoyable, Iraq was a pleasant experience compared to the experiences I endured during my deployment to Afghanistan. At the beginning of my tour in Helmand Province, I was physically capable of conducting combat operations for weeks at a time, remaining in my gear for days if necessary and averaging 16-hour days of engineering operations in the heart of Sangin, one of the most kinetic and challenging AOs in the country. There were numerous occasions where I was sent to a grid coordinate and told to build a PB from the ground up, serving not only as the mission commander but also the base commander until the occupants (infantry units) arrived 5 days later. In most of these situations, I had a sergeant as my assistant commander, and the remainder of my platoon consisted of young, motivated NCOs. I was the senior Marine making the final decisions on construction concerns, along with 24-hour base defense and leading 30 Marines at any given time. The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn’t have foreseen.
By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported. Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.
There is a drastic shortage of historical data on female attrition or medical ailments of women who have executed sustained combat operations. This said, we need only to review the statistics from our entry-level schools to realize that there is a significant difference in the physical longevity between male and female Marines. At OCS the attrition rate for female candidates in 2011 was historically low at 40 percent, while the male candidates attrite at a much lower rate of 16 percent. Of candidates who were dropped from training because they were injured or not physically qualified, females were breaking at a much higher rate than males, 14 percent versus 4 percent. The same trends were seen at TBS in 2011; the attrition rate for females was 13 percent versus 5 percent for males, and 5 percent of females were found not physically qualified compared with 1 percent of males. Further, both of these training venues have physical fitness standards that are easier for females; at IOC there is one standard regardless of gender. The attrition rate for males attending IOC in 2011 was 17 percent. Should female Marines ultimately attend IOC, we can expect significantly higher attrition rates and long-term injuries for women.
There have been many working groups and formal discussions recently addressing what changes would be necessary to the current IOC period of instruction in order to accommodate both genders without producing an underdeveloped or incapable infantry officer. Not once was the word “lower” used, but let’s be honest, “modifying” a standard so that less physically or mentally capable individuals (male or female) can complete a task is called “lowering the standard”! The bottom line is that the enemy doesn’t discriminate, rounds will not slow down, and combat loads don’t get any lighter, regardless of gender or capability. Even more so, the burden of command does not diminish for a male or female; a leader must gain the respect and trust of his/her Marines in combat. Not being able to physically execute to the standards already established at IOC, which have been battle tested and proven, will produce a slower operational speed and tempo resulting in increased time of exposure to enemy forces and a higher risk of combat injury or death. For this reason alone, I would ask everyone to step back and ask themselves, does this integration solely benefit the individual or the Marine Corps as a whole, as every leader’s focus should be on the needs of the institution and the Nation, not the individual?
Which leads one to really wonder, what is the benefit of this potential change? The Marine Corps is not in a shortage of willing and capable young male second lieutenants who would gladly take on the role of infantry officers. In fact we have men fighting to be assigned to the coveted position of 0302. In 2011, 30 percent of graduating TBS lieutenants listed infantry in their top three requested MOSs. Of those 30 percent, only 47 percent were given the MOS. On the other hand, perhaps this integration is an effort to remove the glass ceiling that some observers feel exists for women when it comes to promotions to general officer ranks. Opening combat arms MOSs, particularly the infantry, such observers argue, allows women to gain the necessary exposure of leading Marines in combat, which will then arguably increase the chances for female Marines serving in strategic leadership assignments. As stated above, I have full faith that female Marines can successfully serve in just about every MOS aside from the infantry. Even if a female can meet the short-term physical, mental, and moral leadership requirements of an infantry officer, by the time that she is eligible to serve in a strategic leadership position, at the 20-year mark or beyond, there is a miniscule probability that she’ll be physically capable of serving at all. Again, it becomes a question of longevity.
Despite my personal opinion regarding the incorporation of females into the infantry community, I am not blind to the fact that females play a key role in countering the gender and cultural barriers we are facing at war, and we do have a place in combat operations. As such, a potential change that I do recommend considering strongly for female Marine officers is to designate a new secondary MOS (0305) for a Marine serving as female engagement team (FET) officer in charge (OIC). 0305s would be employed in the same way we employ drill instructors, as we do not need an enduring FET entity but an existing capability able to stand up based on operational requirements. Legitimizing a program that is already operational in the Corps would greatly benefit both the units utilizing FETs and the women who serve as FET OICs. Unfortunately, FET OICs today are not properly screened and trained for this mission. I propose that those being considered for FET OIC be prescreened and trained through a modified IOC with an appropriately adjusted physical expectation. FET OICs need to better understand the infantry culture and mindset and work with their 0302 brethren to incorporate FET assistance during specific phases of operations to properly prepare them to serve as the subject matter experts to a regimental- or battalion-level infantry commander. Through joint OIC training, both 0302s and FET OICs can start to learn how to integrate capabilities and accomplish their mission individually and collectively. This, in my mind, is a much more viable, cost-effective solution, with high reward for the Marine Corps and the Nation, and it will also directly improve the capabilities of FET OICs.
Finally, what are the Marine Corps standards, particularly physical fitness standards, based on—performance and capability or equality? We abide by numerous discriminators, such as height and weight standards. As multiple Marine Corps Gazette articles have highlighted, Marines who can run first-class physical fitness tests and who have superior MOS proficiency are separated from the Service if they do not meet the Marine Corps’ height and weight standards. Further, tall Marines are restricted from flying specific platforms, and color blind Marines are faced with similar restrictions. We recognize differences in mental capabilities of Marines when we administer the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and use the results to eliminate/open specific fields. These standards are designed to ensure safety, quality, and the opportunity to be placed in a field in which one can sustain and succeed.
Which once again leads me, as a ground combat-experienced female Marine Corps officer, to ask, what are we trying to accomplish by attempting to fully integrate women into the infantry? For those who dictate policy, changing the current restrictions associated with women in the infantry may not seem significant to the way the Marine Corps operates. I vehemently disagree; this potential change will rock the foundation of our Corps for the worse and will weaken what has been since 1775 the world’s most lethal fighting force. In the end, for DACOWITS and any other individual or organization looking to increase opportunities for female Marines, I applaud your efforts and say thank you. However, for the long-term health of our female Marines, the Marine Corps, and U.S. national security, steer clear of the Marine infantry community when calling for more opportunities for females. Let’s embrace our differences to further hone in on the Corps’ success instead of dismantling who we are to achieve a political agenda. Regardless of the outcome, we will be “Semper Fidelis” and remain focused on our mission to protect and defend the United States of America.
The Marine Corps Association & Foundation remembers the past and honors the present. Review the first one hundred years of MCA via historical photos and film clips of the organization that serves the men and women of the Marine Corps. Click 
www.mca-marines.org/gazette/" width="28" height="28" align="left" />
I first met Gen Clifton Bledsoe Cates, our 19th Commandant, at a reception marking his promotion to brigadier general held in the ballroom of Harry Lee Hall at Quantico in the spring of 1943. After the receiving line broke up, Been Cates stood by the fireplace mantel, uniformed in summer service with the red and green fouragerre of the Gth Marines on his shoulder and a long cigarette holder in his hand. 
Comments
cpt Peronio's article
Well written article. Thoughtful, objective, provides the pro's and con's and offers a solution of creating a new MOS.
Cpt Petronio's article is a demonstration of the Marines' high standard for intellectual discourse.
Thank You
As a currently deployed Special Forces Soldier, I agree with the Marine Captains comments. First and foremost we must remember tat there is a difference between men and women. She made a good point to understand we do not sacrifice safety while flying so why should we do it on the ground. I have no problem with opening up any all jobs however studies should be conducted to ensure equality and safety. The responses that elude to the fact that technology is making this job safer and easier has never been deployed. Technology is giving us an advantage yes but it is not easier. The equipment is heavier and you are expected to carry more to be more combat effective. The military always makes decisions in black and white yet it is probally the one job in life that all decisions are made in a gray area. In a gray area of life all research and options must be taken into effect. If anything should be done research and studies should be done before we fly in blindly into a decision that can effect the people and more importantly the entire force that defends this nation. I strongly advice this article to be passed around and ingested as what it is, a well written and research document of one persons point of view.
Retired Marine Colonel (female) agrees with the Captain
Women have performed well in Iraq and Afghanistan. The POG women who ended up standing at checkpoints to pat down the Iraqi women were not afraid to step back and use a weapon. They saved lives when they discovered weapons under robes. They earned respect from their male counterparts. Combat patrols? Carrying one's weight on one's back? Men and women alike suffer later in life from this. Men have bad backs, necks, and arm issues as do women. Ask any neurologist or orthopedic who treats former military. Ask the VA who sees these maladies all the time. I am 5'4" and carrying a pack that weighed more than I did was not easy, but I did it. I earned the title Marine. I was not a combat Marine although, like the good Captain, I was pretty sure I could handle it when I was a lieutenant. But there are a number of physiological differences between the sexes. I did my job to the best of my ability and supported the combat troops at every turn. I am a MARINE!
This article was well written and appears to have been well researched and though out. It took courage to put pen to paper on a controversial subject of this caliber. This ols Colonel has read every comment. The guys always want to state that the women can't handle it, the women always wnat to argue that, and then there are the people who say men and women can't fight together because sex gets in the way. All three groups have legitimate points. I just hope DACOWITS calls me. Semper Fidelis to all Marines and all service members, past and present!
Bring the women in!!
Former 0311, and I say let's bring the women in. Would help with the "down-time!" The infantry is a completely different world. Ethics have no place in the infantry platoon! Morals have no place in the infantry platoon, and there is no room for women's rights. Let's just be honest; women would be raped, beat, killed, and fragged. Yes, they would have hits put out on them. I'm not supporting these actions, but that's exactly what would happen. Use some common sense, and set aside this women's rights BS. The 03' world is not for you. There is a mentality in combat that cannot be replicated by women, generally. I would NEVER want my daughter anywhere near an infantry platoon! I have seen sisters, or cousins harrassed. I have seen women become objects in an infantry barracks. The infantry world is primitive, and IT WORKS! Don't place women in a potential hazard.
Women in infantry
If you are not an infantryman or been in combat with them, then you don't have the first hand experience to give an educated opinion period. I just got back from Afghanistan as a bomb dog handler, on the front lines the whole time. And I can say with the backing of about 99% of all combat marines, that the infantry in not the place for woman.
Female Warriors
Thank you Capt. Petonio for your service to the US.
I see there are many opinions about the matter of females in combat. I believe that there was only one femaile who had "been there." Capt. Petonio's experience trumps, in my opinion, all of the opinions.
DACOWITS
DACOWITS needs to be examined. The author makes a cogent point that here is a committee charged with advising about something they have not personally experienced. Put this brave and forthright 03 female Officer and others like her who have been there on DACOWITS, and we might get better recommendations that come from wise counsel borne from hard reality, not based on a politically correct interpretation of what the liberal mindset towards equality may be.
The mission of the infantry has always been to locate, close with and destroy the enemy, NOT to ensure females get their chance at gender equality in a brutal environment.
Canadian Women are proving it can work
The Canadian Army has lifted gender barriers in all combat arms since 1992. Although it took a few years to have women who A) wanted to do it and B) succeed; the bottom line is that we in Canada have had women command Engineer Squadrons, Artillery Batteries and Infantry Companies. ALL of these women have also had children, been mothers, and still managed to make it this far. Our highest ranking combat arms officer is a colonel, mother of four children, a graduate of Fort Levenworth SAMS and yes, a veteran of Afghanistan, Bosnia and many other missions and wars. Canada has not lowered any standard, physical or otherwise. We simply started to allow our women to apply. We have had women killed in combat by the enemy, and our country is VERY proud of all of our soldiers, regardless of gender. In order to preach gender equality in countries such as Afghanistan, it is important to have gender equality in your own country! Yes there were growing pains at first... but now that Canada has 20 years of women in the combat arms, we can honestly say that it works. Women are just as capable, and in many cases have shined more than their male counterparts.. But let us be realistic not ALL women can do it, just like not all MEN can....
have u even been in the
have u even been in the military, you dont sound like you did, any woman who has been in one would put u in ur place. The military is demanding, do u know that we in the army have to spend days and even weeks without having to take a shower or brushing our teeth or any other type of hygiene. Here i thought if a woman didnt perform regular hygiene she could develop symptoms that could lead to infertility. Have you ever had to carry a 200 pound man in full combat gear its hard as it is for a man, not even that SF soldier would admit its a btich especially while having to fire back at the enemy. So u tell me that u could carry or drag a 200 pound man in full battle gear while firing at the enemy, okay rambo. Thats why they dont allow females in special forces because they know it would degrade the mission and combat situation.
lol on some of these comments
im a very knowledged man, and to say the least the military has become extremely feminine as it is. Before i gave four years of my life away, i was told stories of how men had to go through hell just to be considered soldiers. Yet when i arrived at BCT i was baffled by how soft they were treating me. Drill sgt were not allowed to hit, or even punished as they use to, that i didnt mind. They basically had to ask us to do something that we had to do anyways. Females got away with so much, they only had to do about 25 push-ups to max, unlike males who had to do about 78 push-ups. The list goes on, but a main one that really gets to the male soldiers is the fact that a female who arrived at the same time as a male gets rank much quicker. Yeah males have a tendancy to get in trouble more often and i admit females have to work a little harder still most of them arent in the same level as men. Ive seen strong women sure but in low percentage, have any of you people ever seen a female in a tragic situation, i tell you they lose it, they dont have the emotional stabillity of men or do i say the lack of it. I consider myself an emotional male sure, but since joining the army i noticed how most males i know are prone to violence, the things you hear and see them say or do are unspeakable. Ive seen dead people and people get hurt and i get upset or sad, but some males just dont feel a thing. You know ive seen a man laugh right after a man died in front of him, he thought it was hilarious, what woman would do that. Im not saying that woman are less or incapable of doing much, there are men or i should say dirtbags that cant even do one pushup and who would faint at the sight of any horrific event. In my opinion the U.S. should look at Australia's military, theres a female and theres a male. Segregation by gender will not be liked by many, especially by feminist but it will allow men and women to go beyond thier potential in thier own capacity, because we all know that women and men are not and will never be made equal no matter how much you believe or want it to be true.
Historical examples
Just wanted to add 2 cents on the historical topic of female soldiers in the Soviet Army. I don't know if its totally accurate but supposedly 98% of the Soviet males that were 18 in 1941 were dead by the end of the war. Obviously, desperate times require desparate measures and in such times you take what you can get. Just because the Soviets ended up using women in those roles doesn't mean it was their first choice. They were forced to. If you are going to use that example as a historical justification then in the same manner you can justify 13 and 14 year olds being used in combat units because the Nazi's used Hitler Youth formations to defend Berlin at the end.
Now the Russians in 1917 formed some female units in order to shame the male military units to continue fighting under the Kerensky Government. They were not a successful experiment as they had no lasting effect on deteriorating morale in the army. Only the 1st Russian Women's Battalion of Death went into the trenches and actually participated in combat on one day. They apparently did OK, actually taking three lines of German trenches before being counterattacked and repulsed. However, this was only a 1 day battle so it doesn't help to answer any question about the longevity of female combat ability. Details about the intensity of the battle are also sparse.
Women and Men on the Battlelines
Have there been any studies on how male marines react along side female marine infantrymen under fire/in combat?? Let's not fool ourselves, this is the real question that needs answering. We already know the strength differential exist. Anyone can see that with their own eyes. It's the stuff you can't see under noncombat conditions that would interest me if I were studying women in infantry.
Wars Should Not be Fought By Women
Throughout history, wars were fought by males facing other males. In most of our wars pre WW1, almost all of those who died in wars were male. I would love to see us return to those days and not have massive bombings of cities where women and children will be harmed. If we have to have wars, let it be males fighting males so that anyone killed will all be male.
One of my reasons for this is that the view that male are the superior gender has been a con game since the start of history. In reality, women are far superior to us males and we can see this because women have been surpassing males and leaving us males in the dust since women have been having an equal chance as the males. I have no doubt that they will leave us further in the dust in the next 10 or 20 years. I do think however that if women and we males had to fight each other, the women would win hands down. Most of the males would be dead before a quarter of the women were.
Since women are far superior to males, why risk them in war? Let war only be fought by males so that only males will have to die in them.
Other issues related to female infantry
This is an excellent article, well researched and supported. As a former Marine, I completely agree with Capt. Petronio. Approximately 80% of all men have 20% more muscle mass and have about 1/2 to 3/4 liter of blood more than the average woman. So based on how the majority of women and men are biologically differnt based solely on muscle mass and the ability of the body to transfer oxygen to the blood stream men are better equiped for combat than women.
I have never been in combat. And I am going to speak quite openly so if you are easily offended, stop reading. I think dealing with menstruation has got to be a serious issue for women in combat. And if we are going to talk about women in combat then we have to talk about all aspects, not just the politically correct ones. Honestly, my body odor changes, becomes stronger. Not to mention the problems with running out of feminine supplies and added health issues of cleanliness which is challenge enough in the field. And women who don't take care of these health issues are much more likely to get infections. Often these infections are "low grade" and not easy to detect. And if such an infection is not treated, they lead to infertility and other life long health issues. And as women get older, and have had children, menstruation is more likely to change, sometimes becoming unexpectedly very painful.
If a woman can meet all the standards that men are required to meet for combat, and doesn't menstruate, then maybe she is a candidate for combat. However, my being human and deserving of equality does not mean I am physically qualified for every job that I want to apply for. Equality is not a synonyme for qualified, but it sure does get treated that way a lot.
Women in ground comment
I have great respect for women who become Marines. Their contribution to the Nation and Marine Corps is invaluable, and they are equally worthy of recognition/honor as any male Marine. Female Marines are too often degraded by other Marines. To say, though, that the average female Marine is the physical equal of the average male Marine goes against science and common sense.
Having spent time in an infantry battalion, I can say that physical ability and an aggressive attitude are huge players in the daily life of a grunt. Those qualities are necessary for a Bn's success. Even in garrison, there's always that competition/one upsmanship which takes place daily.
Anyone from the outside might not understand it, but it's all part of the mindset/culture. That culture should not be done away with to satisfy the politically correct folks, in and out of the Marine Corps. The real question should be can a female Marine carry the load of the average 03 in a Wpns Company? To ask that question is to answer it.
The below link, a timeless article by MajGen Lynch USMC (Ret) explains a lot:
http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1997-09/all-volunteer-force-crisis
so basically
because the author couldn't handle the physical rigors of combat, that means all other women who want the opportunity shouldn't have it?
that's narcissism at its finest.
Awesome!
Awesome!
"So basically" since
Females, to include yourself, have never been held to the same standards but you will take advantage of the now, not fight against the gross double standards currently in existence in slots and physical fitness as well as even living quarters but now you will cry "Give me a chance!".
Really, what it is though with people like you "so basically" is that you will cry "treat me like and equal" till you can't do the job, then it is "treat me like a girl", AKA-lower the standards and give me special consideration because I am a girl.
Has it occured to anyone?
Has it occured to anyone that the reason that women are physiologically and mentally different is because we are conditioned at a very young age to be? Boys are taught to be fighters, to protect their sisters, and stand their ground. Girls are taught to play nice, communicate effectively, and raised to be nuturing to others. Now, my point to conditioning at a young age is that it teaches us what our roles are in society when we become adults. As adults, it hard for us to understand how a woman could keep up physically and mentally with the men on the battlefield. But when you bring in conditionng, it all starts to make more sense because we learned at a young age that women are care takers,motherly, and nuturing whereas a man shows no emotion and if he does, he is weak. We are programmed like this BUT the great thing about conditioning and programming our brains is that we can reverse what we have been taught.
This is a new generation with many great opportunities ahead of us. It would be a crying shame that we let stereotypes get in the way of progress in any area of our lives.
Has it occured to anyone?
Has it occured to anyone that the reason that women are physiologically and mentally different is because we are conditioned at a very young age to be? Boys are taught to be fighters, to protect their sisters, and stand their ground. Girls are taught to play nice, communicate effectively, and raised to be nuturing to others. Now, my point to conditioning at a young age is that it teaches us what our roles are in society when we become adults. As adults, it hard for us to understand how a woman could keep up physically and mentally with the men on the battlefield. But when you bring in conditionng, it all starts to make more sense because we learned at a young age that women are care takers,motherly, and nuturing whereas a man shows no emotion and if he does, he is weak. We are programmed like this BUT the great thing about conditioning and programming our brains is that we can reverse what we have been taught.
This is a new generation with many great opportunities ahead of us. It would be a crying shame that we let stereotypes get in the way of progress in any area of our lives.
To "has it occurred to anyone?" Are you serious?
How obtuse is that? You think males and female are the way they are due to society? Did you get your degree in "Women's Studies"? Men and women are not social constructs and that you would present that as a reasonable argument is beyond me. With that type of logic, do you discount the differences in hormones in men and women that effect ability? The mapping of male and female brains that shows gentic differences due to homonal influences? Do you also think that perhaps since those things you mention are possibly social constructs, ya think maybe if society embraces things gender neutrality enough that men will have babies soon too?
Pissed off ranger
I am a Ranger who fought for equality and this trash pisses me off. Everyone of the officers and NCOs that praised this trash need to take good look at the Constitution and decide whether fight for their country or Victorian era gender roles.
This is a disgrace!
I have to wonder why we have
I have to wonder why we have not won a war outright since WW II. I have been a marine and a soldier for thirty three years. I have been an infantry officer for over twenty two years. I believe it is due to the fact that for some bizarre reason, we have let the “social engineers” redesign our military.
This “experiment” is the latest form of insanity from those same “scientists”. The fact that women are harrassed in the USMC is irrelevant. The experiment is a waste of time and money. The per capita percentage of infantry officers in the general population is so infinitesimally small it quite simply demands a high degree of discrimination.
This weird idea that all jobs in the military should be open to women is obtuse.
financail help
Hello,
Are you looking for a business loan, personal loans
mortgage, car
loan, student loan, debt consolidation loans, credit
uncertainty, risk
, Capital, etc. Or you need a loan from a bank or institution
financial
one or more reasons.You are in place for loan solutions! I
I am a
private lender, I grant loans to companies and individuals at a low
affordable interest rate of 3%. Interested? Contact us for
monitor credit
processing and transfer within 48 hours to contact us via
Email: owenfinane06@gmail.com
Full Name:
Date of birth:
Gender:
status:
Address:
City:
State / province:
Postal code:
Location:
phone:
E-mail:
State purpose of the loan:
Amount of loan:
Loan Duration:
Net monthly income.
You can email by: owenfinane06@gmail.com
hmm.....
When I was training myself to join the military, I tried to achieve and surpass male Marine PT standards, mostly because I wanted to join Special Ops for the Air Force Officer and I was denied because I was a female. I agree that lowering the standards to allow female infantry would be a stupid and fail to produce any sort of advancement in gender relations. However, I do not agree with certain parts of this article such as the polycystic ovarian syndrome. I have had this syndrome since I was 12 (when it was identified) and it was not genetic to the females in my family. Puberty hit me at age 10 and combine that with significant weight gain (I was never an active child), I developed this syndrome. However due to financial issues, the syndrome was left untreated until I was 22, when I could afford the treatments and around the same time I had decided to join the military which my number one way to achieve this goal was to change my weight, diet and excercise regiment. This actually helped in not having to endure the more extreme treatments for my syndrome. When I first told my brother and his friends (men in their 40s) that I wished to join the military, they laughed at my attempts to train myself to male PT standards and my wish to join special ops. You could say I was very pissed. I told them that if I fall short of those standards for special ops or infantry than I do not deserve to serve in those units. Very simple reasoning. We are not equal but some females can and will achieve male standards so why not?
Achieving Male Standards is irrelevant - "JC"
"We are not equal but some females can and will achieve male standards so why not?"
The whole point is not about whether or not a female qualifies the same as a males in PT standards, its all about females "keeping to the standards" that really count.
All that time, training and most importantly, "MONEY" That is invested into a female infantryman goes straight down the shitter when they breakdown, physically and mentally long before their male counterparts.
Your brother and his friends were wrong to disrespect you by laughing in your face, since history tells us of the many honorable woman who have servered in the military, Yet the facts are out and quite clearly proves that woman are not capable of serving in the "Infantry MOS" for the long periods of time required.
Bottom Line
The military doesn't like to gamble on a pony thats looks pretty and is quick at the start, yet lacts the endurance to make it to the finish line.
I just cannot understand the push for grunt roles for women
The CSTs and FETs are constantly rolled out as some sort of proof that women do indeed have "Combat Roles" and are engaging the enemey. FETs and CSTs are a completer and udder waste of time. The women on FETs/CSTs have no added value. They do not have language skills, most do not have medical skills, so what do they bring to the table? The claim that they can search females is a crock, the Afghans can and have been doing it for almost a decade. The claim that they get access and intel from local females is also a crock. In Afghanistan women have ZERO value in the culture, they are treated little better than livestock. The only time FETs and CSTs are remotely useful is if there are MEDCAPs, that is it and that is IF they have medical and language skills. Otherwise the FETs and CSTs are a drain on rescouces, they have to be guarded by male troops, cannot keep up with the majority of the troops they support and the social problems they bring with them are out of hand.
When has the US Military EVER held females to equal standards? Women are in the service now due to "goals", nothing to do with "need". So, they are in due to quotas basically, are not held to the same standard, are advanced at a higher speed due to being female, are given hard slots in MOS/NECs due to being female, etc...etc...but somehow now this is all about "equal" opportunity?
From lower VO2 Max, lower phsyical strength, being slower, lower load carrying ability, far higher rate of ortho injuries, smaller overall size, etc...what the heck is value added here?
Hey, all the folks pushing for this "combat intergration", where were you when the standards were lowered? Did you push for higher standards or at least equal to men? Did you same people who speak of "let them try and meet the stnadard" also notice that they never have met the same standard and yet are still allowed to pass and be considered doing the same job as their male counterparts? Did any of you folks who are behind this actually ID how this makes us more combat effective?
What is it that makes people think it is ok to risk male troops lives for female troops "opportunity" and "career advancement"? What is it? Do you folks not have son's, brother's or fathers?
PT Test, a real one for a grunt?
How about a the following done over the course of a day
Pull Ups, minimum of 10 with 25lbs. (Simulate PPE weight)
Push Ups-Male Standard (USMC)
Sit Ups/Crunches-Male Standard (USMC)
Run-3 Miles Male Standard (USMC)
Buddy Drag (Minimum of 190lbs man/dummy) for 100yards
An O Course with multiple 6' foot walls (better than a lot of the walls in Iraq or Afghanistan, those were a wee bit higher) on thier own, none of this "team" obstacle crap. I have seen several "small" O Courses on Naval and Marine bases that would be a good standard.
20k ruck over uneven ground with 45lbs and PPE to include helmet and weapon.-Timed
Guys fail it, they are dinged too. Make the Infantry what it is supposed to be.
bullshit
hah 292 of 300 pft...... if woman "marines" trained to the same standard and actually did pullups.. this might have some merit
In reply to the Woman who wrote "Excuses"
This is a statement made by a person who is incapable of thinking critically or honestly. Saying that that -"The truth is simple. Men and women have the same abilities, and capabilities to maintain their physical stamina over the years. Our bodies are only different in their gender, not their physical abilities."
Really? So, "phsyical abilities" are not different? You mean men and women can do the same things? Like having children? Can men have menstrual cycles? Hey, curious, do men and women have the same genetic make up? I mean, if they do, then a woman should hold an equal amount of Olympic Records that are just as fast, strong, etc...as the men's right?
So, when you are on this planet you are on, we will call it "Femdreamland", do men and women just kind of morph together? Have you finally "broken the bonds" of gender constructs? Hey, when you were in the Marines, did you say the heck with the gender norming test and take the male pt and score the max? I mean, no difference right?
Oh, let's continue on with some of your other words of wisdom-
"No matter how well written an excuse is, it is still an excuse. What I see in this article is a full resume, and a lot of, "I," statements that tell me you are scared of change. The only reason articles like this even exist is because women have been trained through statemenst of 'design' in our society from birth to live in the shaddow of men."
Umm...no, she is citing her experience and the research done in the United Kingdom and the US on orthopedic injuries, it's not in your heads. You really are different, I hate to break that to you, but guess what? You and a man are not interchangeable. Sorry, you can google it if you like, it is called science, read some stuff on Anatomy and Physiology while you are at it, might help you on your "journey" back to earth as you leave "femdreamland" orbit. My favorite part is the "to live in teh shaddow of men". Ha! Yeah, that is it, you have no advantages, Title IX being used to ensure quotas in sports and STEMI educational programs, the quotas in the military itself, the special treatment you get while you are in the military in regard to quarters, physical fitness testing, billets, etc....oh, yeah, you poor oppressed thing you. It is a good thing all the evil men got together to keep you in the "Shaddow's". How you can even write that kind of silliness is beyond me.
"Yes, it is scary to come out from behind that shadow and announce to all the world that we are equals. Yes, this will cause some discomfort as all changes tend to do. What sounds like really happend to me is that you were offered a prestigious opportunity, and turned it down because you still want to live in the shadow of men."-
Yeah, so, what did you do? She actually went out and tried it, was in the field, if you are so brave that you stepped outside the "shaddow" fill us in your great deeds! She wanted to stay in the shadow
"If you don't want to be in the 03XX fields, simply say so for yourself. Do not pretend to speak for other women of active duty whom you do not know, and do not have any communication with. Your opinion is your own, as is mine, but I will say as a former Marine that I would have LOVED the opportunity and the challenge that that field had to offer."
Yeah, that is what happened, tell me about the times you refused to take the female standards on the pt test? Tell me about the time you refused any advantage that being a woman offered you in the service? Please, tell me about your brave stand for equality! I mean, after all, it's not like you couldn't have met the same standards rights? I mean you did go out and hump 50lbs in full kit over uneven terrain on your own all the time while doing 20 dead hang pulls up before and after then performing buddy drags of 190lb men on your own just to prove a point I bet! Right? Am I right!? I know you did, ya little tiger you!
Hey, one last thing, when you discover how "society" managed to change your DNA, cause you to have what is called the "Q" angle (look it up, you will like it, those bastard men did that too), maybe look up the muscle density and VO2 max differences, etc....then once you do all that, tell me how those cabals of bastard, sexist man-pigs continue to change and manipulate your genetics and hence force you into a "shaddow". I cannot wait to hear all about it!! Should be a fantastic story.
ESIII
Education
Sir, Thanks for your brilliant and poignant response. My real concern is the education system that created "excuses" and how i can avoid exposing my children to such an institution.. Well that, and i'd like to see what study, publication, evidence supports this assertion "Our bodies are only different in their gender, not their physical abilities."
I thought X and Y chromosomes were physically different, and their presence together denotes a physically different DNA sequence from the XX sequence. Leading to a different foundation for life in that organism. Crap, where are my biology books...
I guess different science classes are taught in the ivy league schools she attended, which i'm sure Title IX had nothing to do with her gaining access too.
Thank You Capt. Katie Petronio
Wow, I'm a little late to be commenting on this article,but as an eager sophomore who is considering to enlist in the armed forces Capt. Katie Petronio you have giving me valid input that I will hold in my mind while finishing my high school education. I wandered onto this article because I am writing an argument for why I am considering to join the armed forces and to be honest this has opened my viewpoint of women in the military in which I an inspired by the initiative you possessed and by the strength of every female soldier either in training, in active service, on reserve, and those retired. I am so much to learn, Thank you.
What about women in supporting combat arms?
In the British Army women are not allowed to join the Infantry, but are allowed to be attached to Infantry units as combat medics and military police etc on the frontline, not only that but they are allowed in most supporting combat arms such as combat engineers, one Reserves armoured regiment which specialises in CRBN warfare and Field Artillery. We have female light-gunners and artillery observers (known as 13F Fire Support Specialists in the US Army), I happen to used to know a female FOO who has served numerous tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, as far as I can tell, she had no problems doing her job and no trouble earning respect from her male colleagues or subordinates.
I know the Infantry is another ball game altogether and I agree that it should remain a male preserve, but the current U.S. military policy on women is archaic. They should at least open up some of the supporting combat arms to female soldiers - combat engineering, field artillery and possibly armor.
It's True: Men & Women Are Different
Which evidently comes as quite a surprise to some in academia:
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/health/story/2012/01/05/men-women-differences-...
carrying their load!
While in Vietnam we observed the Vietnamese women that had to hump
rice everyday. They carried the rice across their shoulders on a long pole
that supported two weaved baskets filled with rice,which I know had to weigh
at least forty pounds each. Thesewomen were in their twentys and thirtys but
looked at least sixty or seventy due to physical endurence. L. Carter,Semper Fi
To Capt Katie Petronio
I do believe we met in PB Usman, Sangin...
much love from a fellow Engineer, 3/5 Lima. You were on my post when you wanted to build me a better one.
Even though you made it slightly more difficult to get up there, and the minimal view was significantly extended to where I couldn't see in front of the PB... I still love you. Platonic or not, I don't if you even remember the ONLY ORIENTAL engineer in Sangin.
Women in combat arms
I almost said that I hate to sound sexist, but I really don't care; the reason why women should not be in combat arms is because we men don't want them there. Do something else. Go away. Life is pretty simple in the infantry, so don't come along with your complicated gender issues and need for recognition and whining and on and on and on. The combination of radical feminists on the left and religious moralists on the right have turned the army into a dreary place from the hard drinking, whoring and all-round fun place it used to be when I first joined with R&R spent at Pat Pong Road and chasing tail and being naughty with naughty women. Now, the high point of R&R is a barbeque and a tour of the cheese factory. The object of being a soldier is being lost in a fog of political correctness. Also, to all you cops out there; buzz off.
They're worried about
They're worried about promotions? Lives are at stake. YUT YUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
Fantastic
Fantastic analysis and excellent writing. This lady is a spectacular example for a great officer and I could not agree more with every single statement she made. I hope officials will listen to and utilize this ladies' experience.
We ARE Different!
Not that I agree with everything she is saying, but I agree we are different! You know what? There some things that men can do better than women and vice versa! If women want to be in combat they need to prove that they can meet the standards that are in place. There is a large percent of men that are dropped from combat training and Special Forces training because they can't cut it. Should the standards be lowered for them? Women can do things and are capable but based on studies and trials, they are not suited for infantry or direct combat. Sending women or any soldier out to war that can't cut it will get other people killed. Its war not politics! It comes down to how well we defeat the enemy and protect our nation.
Females in the infantry
My ruck sack and gear weighed over 150 lbs. I'm 6-3, 215 lbs. And the load would damn near break me sometimes. Political correctness cannot trump physics. Sorry. Only an idiot or an exceptionally unaware REMF would suggest such a thing.
Absurd.
I'm 6-3, 215 lbs., athletic. My ruck and gear weighed upwards of 150 lbs. It damn near broke me sometimes. That said, light and mechanized infantry are two different animals. Night and day. Political correctness cannot trumph physics. Women just can't carry a full load. Period. And they lack the predisposition to violence that is required to survive and thrive in the Infantry. The military never should've mixed combat ranks with technical ranks, it started muddying the waters about the real purpose of the military and rank and so forth. And that led to this bullshit. Rank should reflect personal combat prowess, instant discipline, physical fitness, hardness, combat leadership ability, etc. But, in 90% of cases now it represents some clerical or technical skill, management, administration, bleh, bleh, bleh. Why the fuck does a typist need to respond instantly to a command? A: they don't, never have, never will. Don't get me started on equal pay for pogues and grunts. Ai, ai, ai.
That said, I think it's a
That said, I think it's a brilliant ploy by USMC brass and it is designed to call radical feminists on their bullshit, bring them back to reality...when the call goes out for female grunts...and in response...only crickets.
Thoughtful commentary
This was an insightful article. Reasonable physical standards are necessary to keep yourself safe in combat. My question is what sort of positions does one recommend for physically weak but mentally tough individuals. There are many bright, talented women who would appreciate a chance to be part of the Marines as more than somebody's wife.
Pft
I find it interesting that many of the women pushing for this are the same ones bellyaching about having to do pull-ups now. So which is it? Equality or not? Can't have it both ways, "ladies"... And I use that term loosely since most female marines are whores!
As a female veteran, I say please no!
27 year old female. I served 8 years in the Army as an engineer, bridger to be exact. When I first enlisted, I was prideful and had the cliche attitude that I could go toe to toe with the men. If given the opportunity to go infantry, I would have jumped on it... And you know what? I would be regretting it by now. A little background on myself: short and athletic, used to compete in powerlifting, most commonly squat competitions. At 117 pounds I won the last comp. I ever did, squatting 295 pounds while deployed to Iraq. Moral of story... I was strong, I was fit, I could carry my weight - for a time. Fast forward a few years. My shoulders grind and hurt, my knees grind and lock up, my right hip pops when I walk, spasms painfully at times and is frequently sore. Simply wearing the iba for 12 hours a day over the course of a year triggered my initial shoulder problems, though I'm sure my heavy lifting contributed greatly to it. In addition to the above my best pt test consisted of 112 sit-ups in 2 min, 73 push ups, and a 15:04 2 mile run. Point... Not to brag, but to prove a point. I'm still young, and though for a short time I could at best compare to the physical capabilities of a man, obviously not all, my body couldn't handle it long term. I have torn my body down, and though it took some time to begin feeling the aftermath, at 27 my problems compare to those of my nearly 60 year old father, and all because I wanted to prove to myself that I was capable of going toe to toe with my male comrades. On a physical basis alone, without even considering the many other factors, women do not belong in infantry. The line needs to be drawn somewhere.
Women in combat?
When we're trying to get MEN out of combat, replaced by remotely-directed robots to the extent allowed by advances in technology, why be trying to put women into combat??
The next generation of combat aircraft will likely be remotely directed. The operator will be in a safe location. The aircraft will not be weighted down by human life support and accommodations, and will be able to pull whatever Gs that the designers determine worthwhile.
Similar for tank-like vehicles.
By "directed" rather than "controlled" I mean that the immediate control is by the on-board computers' software. Only the objectives will be communicated to the machine by a human operator; the machine will run itself.
We're farther from robots to supplant infantry troops but it's coming.
Misleading Information on PCOS
Petronio states, "At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment." There is no way of knowing the cause of PCOS- environmental, physical or chemical. It's quite possible that her symptons disappeared after returning home (and regaining those 17 pounds) or that she's always had PCOS and the deployment had nothing to do with it. Generally people with PCOS are able to have children. Throwing that into the list of ailments is like saying the deployment gave you blue eyes.
Hey Captain...
Thanks for giving so doggone much of yourself for our freedom. Very sad for you that your service has robbed you of something so personal so yeah...
Seriously THANK YOU. You guys and gals give so much and yet get so little thanks. That's gotta change.
Signed;
Joe A. Kunzler
Oak Harbor Navy Leaguer
Get Over It!
Great article that hits home for anyone who is rational and a logical-thinking perseon. First, one must bother to read and understand the article completely.
Women in combat, yes; they have been there for years in varous roles for various reasons, and many have died in combat theatres (over 150 in Iraq and Afghanistan to date).
However, to put them in direct combat like the infantry is a loaded question for so many reasons -- most of which will sound like sexism, but is not intended to be sexism of any sort.
As a retired Marine combat infantry officer (and former NCO -- VN era) I can say without question that women can serve in almost any combat role or position, but in all honesty, not the infantry.
We need very serious debate and testing on this ... along the way, no exceptions can or should be made for anyone trying for an infantry job ... they either earn it according to standards, or they do not -- no favors, not deals, no special treatment ... war is not that way and neither should the standards.
Dan Francis (1st Lt., USMC (Ret.) Watertown, NY
Everybody has a breaking point.
I went through BCT at Ft. Benning in the late 90's, all male at the time, not sure now. After all the scum was weeded out in the first week I witnessed some of the remaining men reduced to tears. These tears were not from fear nor cowardice. It was them realizing and understanding that their bodies simply could not accomplish the standard given them. Their bodies would fail visibly, broken ankle on long rucks, fainting from extreme exhaustion, some was the result of stupidity , not staying hydrated etc... Standards... you have to meet the standards. I would imagine some people here recall what I am talking about. I didn’t think anything less of them, it was their body failing not their mind nor fortitude. I fortunately was born with decent genetics and did mainly blue collar labor prior to enlistment consequently, I was adapted to hard work. The point I am attempting to make here for any women reading is, don’t feel bad about it, many men cannot meet the standard. I for one, would like to congratulate this officers OCS instructor for creating a quality Marine. “Rock of the Marne”
Post new comment