re: Gen. Barrow: Former USMC Commandant and Baton Rouge Native on women in combat

quote:

---

You're not too smart are you? You realize there are males in every infantry platoon who barely Make the standard right (certainly you can relate mentally at least)? That's why there's a standard.

---

I'm sure he won't tell you but I will. He was in Iraq in 2004 as a Marine grunt. He knows EXACTLY what it takes to not not become a casualty but to severely lower the risk of not only becoming a casualty yourself, but to the other men in your unit, platoon, and fire team.

quote:

---

ppl in this thread don't understand how much war has changed since then

---

It really hasn't. Combat is still one of the most primitive things on the planet. Maybe the style of fighting is different, less huge division sized assaults, etc. but combat on the small unit level hasn't changed at all.

quote:

---

So what?

---

So, how many more casualties do you believe we'd have had in Nasiriyah, Fallujah, Ramadi, Korengal, and Kandahar if women would've been in infantry units?

shite, I was in 29 Palms this summer doing CAX and do you know how many heat casualties we had THE FIRST DAY? This is with all male units. Tell me, how many women do you know that have a higher threshold for pain than men?

quote:

---

this same bullshite had been said about anything from homos to blacks etc.

---

You honestly don't see the difference here?

Jesus man, even if they meet the standards they will be the weakest in the unit. They will still get hurt faster and at higher rates. They will still get pregnant and not be able to deploy. They will still cause sexual tension.


And make no mistake, standards WILL be lowered to get more women in. Certainly to allow them to be promoted at the same rates as men.

quote:

---

I said if they can meet the standard

---

That's not the only thing that makes a good Marine or soldier. They need to be able to make sound decisions under fire. They need to be able to deal with people getting injured and becoming casualties. They also, like has been stated before many times; are a 100% risk at getting pregnant, and are more likely to get VD's, and are more likely to get PTSD. Having women in combat elements is a direct threat to everyone else in their units.

quote:

---

You realize there are males in every infantry platoon who barely
Make the standard right (certainly you can relate mentally at least)? That's why there's a standard.

---

The problem is perspective. You are speaking as though the world is some hypothetical place that you would like it to be, and we're talking about the real one - the one that actually exists.

And I'm not saying the we always have to accept the status quo. But this is one that is out of our hands. Women (collectively - there are always exceptions) are equal to or even superior to males over a whole range of human experiences. Certainly, I'm secure enough to admit that. I'm not saying that no man should ever by the primary caregiver for a child, but dammit, women are just flat out better at it (by exception, of course).

But, combat simply isn't one of those things. It's not even a square peg/round hole (pardon the pun) situation - it's not even a similar fit. Human sexual dimorphism is "a thing" - we're not making that up.

Women have smaller bone structures - are weaker per pound - have lower cardiovascular capacities and, I'll just say it - hygiene requirements that cannot be satisfied in a combat environment. Even the exceptional women who pass the male standards, will be near the bottom of physical performance. Those exceptional women might be able to sustain effort a few hours, a few days, a few weeks. Some may go through as good or better than the "worst" of the males.

However, they will break down and be combat ineffective at a much greater rate from mental/physical stress, injury, hygiene failures, pregnancy - and if we're hell bent to go to war with biology, biology is going to win every time. And the costs/risk/injuries/deaths are simply not worth this experiment to find this 1 percent of 1 percent who might be, on a good day, better than the worst quintile of males in combat units.

This is not about equal rights - this is not some nonsense pushed by white racists to keep black men from flying combat aircraft - and I'm not going to reopen the homosexual debate - suffice it to say a homosexual man is still, biologically a male - bone density, strength, endurance, hygiene requirements are all that of comparable heterosexual males - this is not about "fairness" it is about biology.

quote:

---

how many women do you know that have a higher threshold for pain than men?

---

Not saying that I think women should be in combat, but this statement is false. We are the ones that go through labor, and that is more pain than the vast majority of men ever experience.

quote:

---

They give drugs for that.

---

I didn't take any. I only took Motrin after. I know a lot of women who have done the same. Again, not saying that I think we should be on the front lines, but we don't have a lower threshold for pain.

A forced march with heavy weight is the male equivalent of labor