General: Marine Corps infantry skeptical of women in combat
SAN DIEGO (AP) - The commandant of the Marine Corps said the infantry side of the most male of all military branches is skeptical about how women will perform in their units, and some positions may end up closed again if too few females meet the physically demanding standards of combat.
Gen. James Amos made the remarks to reporters Thursday at a defense conference in San Diego hosted by the U.S. Naval Institute and the defense trade group AFCEA.
Amos says most Marines support the Defense Department's lifting of the ban last week, which opened thousands of positions to women.
He pointed out that over the past decade, many male service members already have been fighting alongside women in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Women who serve in supply troops, as clerks and with military police have ended up on the unmarked front lines of modern warfare, blurring the distinction between combat and noncombat jobs. More than 150 women have been killed in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while serving in support roles.
Many of the positions opened by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's announcement are in Army and Marine infantry units and in potentially elite commando jobs. It will be up to the military service chiefs to recommend and defend whether women should be excluded from any of those more demanding and deadly positions, such as Navy commandos or the Army's Delta Force.
The infantry units are smaller and spend more grueling time in battle.
"I think from the infantry side of the house, you know they're more skeptical," Amos said. "It's been an all-male organization throughout the history of the U.S. Marine Corps so I don't think that should be any surprise."
Military officials say they will not lower standards, but they are reviewing them to ensure they are necessary in making a warfighter and not just difficult to be difficult.
When asked by The Associated Press about whether women will be allowed to someday serve as SEALs, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert said it will be up to special operations commands to determine how they will transition the standards to females.
"It is a matter of what are the expectations, and is it feasible to change the standards they have right now, physical standards," Greenert said. "They would say early on 'No, we can't do that,' but I think that's really to be determined."
Amos said his branch also wants to gauge how much interest there is among women to join the infantry units and whether enough can qualify for those units. If there is little interest or few can pass the infantry officers school, then certain positions may be closed to women.
Still, he emphasized, that doesn't mean he is expecting that to happen. He said military leaders want to ensure the military continues to be an effective war-fighting force. And if the data and analysis support closing some positions, he believes the defense secretary will support that.
"I have every expectation that the secretary of defense will honor that," Amos said. "It's a commonsense approach to this thing."
The Marine Corps opened its tough infantry course at Quantico, Va., to female volunteers last fall. Two tried unsuccessfully in the first session. In the second session, none signed up. Amos said two female lieutenants have signed up for the third session that will start in March.
Amos said he met with them Monday.
"They're stalwart," he said. "It looks like they're in great shape and they're excited about it."
Amos said he also met with one of the female officers who almost made it to the second-week mark of the course last fall. He said she was forced to drop out because of a stress fracture that was so severe it could have left her permanently injured.
"She did anything but quit," Amos said, adding that the woman was cheered on by her male counterparts. "She's a phenomenal officer."
The woman is now in flight training school in Pensacola, Fla. Amos said she was part of the team so he is optimistic that "we're going about it the right way."
"It's just a very, very difficult course, and it's a very small community," he added.
Women make up about 7 percent of the Marine Corps, compared with about 14 percent overall among the military's 1.4 million active military personnel.
Gen. James Amos made the remarks to reporters Thursday at a defense conference in San Diego hosted by the U.S. Naval Institute and the defense trade group AFCEA.
Amos says most Marines support the Defense Department's lifting of the ban last week, which opened thousands of positions to women.
He pointed out that over the past decade, many male service members already have been fighting alongside women in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Women who serve in supply troops, as clerks and with military police have ended up on the unmarked front lines of modern warfare, blurring the distinction between combat and noncombat jobs. More than 150 women have been killed in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while serving in support roles.
Many of the positions opened by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's announcement are in Army and Marine infantry units and in potentially elite commando jobs. It will be up to the military service chiefs to recommend and defend whether women should be excluded from any of those more demanding and deadly positions, such as Navy commandos or the Army's Delta Force.
The infantry units are smaller and spend more grueling time in battle.
"I think from the infantry side of the house, you know they're more skeptical," Amos said. "It's been an all-male organization throughout the history of the U.S. Marine Corps so I don't think that should be any surprise."
Military officials say they will not lower standards, but they are reviewing them to ensure they are necessary in making a warfighter and not just difficult to be difficult.
When asked by The Associated Press about whether women will be allowed to someday serve as SEALs, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert said it will be up to special operations commands to determine how they will transition the standards to females.
"It is a matter of what are the expectations, and is it feasible to change the standards they have right now, physical standards," Greenert said. "They would say early on 'No, we can't do that,' but I think that's really to be determined."
Amos said his branch also wants to gauge how much interest there is among women to join the infantry units and whether enough can qualify for those units. If there is little interest or few can pass the infantry officers school, then certain positions may be closed to women.
Still, he emphasized, that doesn't mean he is expecting that to happen. He said military leaders want to ensure the military continues to be an effective war-fighting force. And if the data and analysis support closing some positions, he believes the defense secretary will support that.
"I have every expectation that the secretary of defense will honor that," Amos said. "It's a commonsense approach to this thing."
The Marine Corps opened its tough infantry course at Quantico, Va., to female volunteers last fall. Two tried unsuccessfully in the first session. In the second session, none signed up. Amos said two female lieutenants have signed up for the third session that will start in March.
Amos said he met with them Monday.
"They're stalwart," he said. "It looks like they're in great shape and they're excited about it."
Amos said he also met with one of the female officers who almost made it to the second-week mark of the course last fall. He said she was forced to drop out because of a stress fracture that was so severe it could have left her permanently injured.
"She did anything but quit," Amos said, adding that the woman was cheered on by her male counterparts. "She's a phenomenal officer."
The woman is now in flight training school in Pensacola, Fla. Amos said she was part of the team so he is optimistic that "we're going about it the right way."
"It's just a very, very difficult course, and it's a very small community," he added.
Women make up about 7 percent of the Marine Corps, compared with about 14 percent overall among the military's 1.4 million active military personnel.
Good article to consider. I am sure there are females who can do the job. But, they really need to meet the current standards and understand what combat and infantry entails.
Â
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578260132111473150.html
Yes, women can't kill anyone, just like gays can't.
Â
I think I've heard this sob story before...
Â
*rolls eyes*
Â
Go get em, women!!!
 @Improprietous Pretty sure it takes more than just being able to kill to be in Special Operations and the Infantry.Â
 @TreeWizard Exactly. That just highlights that a penis isn't everything.
 @Improprietous  @TreeWizard I think a simple test to prove that women are ready for mortal physical combat with men is this:
Â
Desegregate the Olympics. There's no reason for men and women to run different races. Why not combine them?Next, allow women into superheavyweight boxing, because my PT instructor was something out of Alien. There are no rules in hand-to-hand combat but at least the women could train against guys like Mike Tyson. We should also put them in the NFL because at least in professional football there are rules. I'm not sure why there aren't any female quarterbacks, wide receivers or line guards, but, maybe it's time to throw a 150-lb woman onto the field with against the Saints or the Steelers and if she can hack that, she'll be ready for the jocks and thugs she's going to encounter in infantry training and combat. Not saying they can't do it. Just saying, they keep having to lower the standards so that women can get through the training programs. Football is just a matter of catching a ball and running downfield.It ought to be open to women. Not much different than infantry combat except the part about no rules and everybody trying to kill the other team.
 @Improprietous Never said it was, and there are several other factors that aren't mentioned. That obviously neither Panetta or Dempsey have thought about.
It will only work if standards for the infantry are not lowered for females and that the meet the same standards as the males.
 @Saltire "Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday that with women now eligible to fill combat roles in the military, commanders must justify why any woman might be excluded â and, if women canât meet any unitâs standard, the Pentagon will ask: âDoes it really have to be that high?âÂ
 @TreeWizard That's true. The question will be asked by the civilian Pentagon people, not former combat and infantry members. Lower standards could be forced on the services. Carter years....hollow force.....take two.
 @TreeWizard Sorry, but I can't imagine it.  And, I hope we don't see it.
Â
 @Saltire Image groups like SF, SEALs, MARSOC, and Tier Ones lowering standards.Â
Let me present my credentials: 26 year veteran (Col., US Army, Ret.) with a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, two Purple Hearts. I served as an infantry commander in Vietnam and in Gulf I.
Â
Women can do the job. Period. They're doing it right now and have been in Iraq and Afghanistan for years.
Â
Men who are threatened by women in the military Really need to grow a real pair.
 @ShallowEnder You have my respect and admiration, not only for your military service but also for who you are.
 @ShallowEnder Those are some impressive credentials and thank you for your service. I disagree with this being men threatened by women. to me at least, this idea doesn't seem to have been fully thought out by the higher ups. I get that impression from comments made by Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey. Lt. General William Boykin wrote an interesting article about this topic and his views.
 @TreeWizard  @ShallowEnderÂ
Â
Well unfortunately (and for good reason too) the military in the US is subject to the often flighty whim of politicians.
Â
So we have politicians who want women in combat and military people who want the best for the job. They arenât saying right out that women aren't the best, most military people I speak to are very "meritocracy" kind of folks, but don't want to run headfirst into something they don't know all the details of (fear is not being a coward, fear is a good thing).
Â
There is where the term "skeptical" comes in. Military don't like anything that isnât proven and they often have a high bar of what 'proven" is, thus the skepticism.
Â
I don't have an issue with that. I say let the ladies at them and let their own ability speak.
Â
I think military brass that are skeptical will see the light.
Â
Â
man or woman on the front lines shouldnt matter- BUT- they should be held to the exact same standards of physical and mental conditioning.
"He said she was forced to drop out because of a stress fracture that was so severe it could have left her permanently injured."
Â
Don't worry General, you will find a woman who won't suffer such an injury and will get through the training just like her male counterparts.
Â
I have no issue with skepticism. A healthy does keeps people grounded. My only issue would be to "close" any MOS to women simply because right now, none can meet the requirements.
Â
I think a better approach is to simply leave it open to whatever marine wants to try and let the chips fall. The best of the best will still rise and one or more might be female.
Â
Â
What does he know? He's just the Commandant of the Marine Corps. I'm sure the civilians in Washington know more about surface warfare and infantry combat than he possibly could.Word is that the women who are working on patrols, etc, with Marines already are being jacked with hormones to keep them from menstruating so their bodies and hormones are all screwy and they're practically men anyway, and they're showing signs of bone and joint damage from marching under combat load. So far I think a total of three women, if any, have passed the Infantry courses even though many have tried. (As far as I'm concerned, if they can pass it without destroying themselves, send them on.)Kerry's a veteran. I wonder what will change now that the lizard is out.The Marine Corps physical fitness standards are not the same. That has to change, because if not the woman and the men who will rely on them for unit cohesiveness are already unprepared, and it's totally unfair to them if they're thrown into the trench before they're prepared because if those young women fail it will cast doubt on all of them through no fault of their own.
 @PlayanekesÂ
Â
The "hormone" thing you mention happens to all females athletes, particularly runners.
Â
Â
Â
 @Repoman Interesting. If civilian athletics is some fraction as stressful as sustained mortal combat, one can only imagine what it's like in that environment. Women tend to make supernatural shooters, though. Snipers.
I've got a good friend that was a captain in a fire department in Callifornia. He told me that women that could pass the physical would work very hard to do just that. The problem was is that once passed they wouldn't keep up the workouts. So when it came time to do the job, they would have a problem with the physical aspect. Of course then they would need help. So you would run into a "manpower" shortage. He said you couldn't do anything about it either, If you tried to "write up" the female involed that would be harrassment and would put your job in jeopardy.
Â
I wonder if thats what's in store for our troops of the future?
 @Billy Batts Yes, that's exactly right.Also, since a lot of enlisted people who fail at everything else end up in the Infantry, that's unfortunately the default for women who aren't proficient in other roles.