Update: Female Marines at USMC Infantry Officer Course

Oh, how I love these threads.

In the comments, to the OP's article, one person says: "They aren't going to have female enlisted infantry without female officers in their chain of command." There have been 100+ females pass the enlisted infantry course, but no female officers have passed the IOC. Something has to give. What will happen?

A retiring 4-start USMC General says "standards do not need to be etched in stone." Also, parroting earlier statements from SECNAV, Paxton says "The standards need to change; just as technologies; just as human abilities change; just as the way you can organize, train and equip teams change,” - http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/sto...ton-women-successful-infantry-units/88535008/

And General Neller, the Commandant, says, in the article posted above by Kinnem, the USMC "needs" to get to 10% women. "Needs" - what is the "need?"
 
Last edited:
We did a modified USMC PT in Cross Fit this weekend (I don't usually do Cross Fit, but I was visiting my parents so I went with my dad). Well, I won't be passing THAT anytime soon. HAHAHA....
 
LITS I am still thankful I can run 3 miles still! Won't be passing a PFT anytime soon, but I can still go for a jog, run some 5ks, and crush my the HIIT workouts with the young guys. So I won't complain.
 
but wait a minute Sledge, Mabus insists that the physical standards will not be changed. 0 for 30 so far on females in the officer infantry course, when will they stop beating a dead horse? Or more to the point when will the **EDITED** panderer in chief ORDER them to lower standards?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but wait a minute Sledge, Mabus insists that the physical standards will not be changed. 0 for 30 so far on females in the officer infantry course, when will they stop beating a dead horse? Or more to the point when will the **EDITED** panderer in chief ORDER them to lower standards?

This is what he said (quote was repeated in OP's article above): "Let me repeat that: Standards will not be lowered for any group to get through ” Mabus told Marines and sailors on April 12 at Camp Pendleton, California. “Standards may be changed as circumstances in the world change, but they'll be changed for everybody.” That "Circumstances in the world have changed" phrase is the new narrative being framed.

They'll just say, actually they are already saying, that "circumstances of the world have changed" such that we "need" a certain number or percentage of women in the Army/Marines combat formations. Boom, "changed" standards.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This thread is not in the Off Topic forum so political commentary is inappropriate according to guidelines provided by the esteemed moderators.
 
but wait a minute Sledge, Mabus insists that the physical standards will not be changed. 0 for 30 so far on females in the officer infantry course, when will they stop beating a dead horse? Or more to the point when will the **EDITED** panderer in chief ORDER them to lower standards?

Two things.

1. 30 women is not representative of the population of women. It speaks more to women's inexperience with the IOC and its demands on people, than women in general. The same assumptions were made about blacks not so long ago. Of course, as with many things, time and further evidence will tell.

2. I am a progressive, and politically a liberal, yet I attended USNA for a year. How could this be, other than that it is possible for decent and thoughtful people to differ profoundly on points of view, but still share similar values of duty, integrity, and service to others? I am in the minority ideologically here, and you are under no obligation to behave decently on an anonymous forum, but I would appreciate leaving namecalling like "**EDITED**" for other outlets. It makes no one better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see any thing political in Sledge's reply. He made some observations but did not attribute it anyone or anything. If you disagree, provide a rebuttal, rather than stopping it or redirecting it by classifying it as political.
 
I don't see any thing political in Sledge's reply. He made some observations but did not attribute it anyone or anything. If you disagree, provide a rebuttal, rather than stopping it or redirecting it by classifying it as political.

I don't think it was Sledge that they were referring to, just my guess.
 
The Marine Corps mission reads as follows: "Defending our nation at home. Protecting her interests abroad."

In my opinion, the Marine Corps actions should commit actions that are in the best interest of this mission; that or they should change what their website says their mission is.

-1337BeachedWhale1337
 
Last edited:
The Marine Corps mission reads as follows: "Defending our nation at home. Protecting her interests abroad."

Nope. Sorry.

The official mission of the Marine Corps is established in the National Security Act of 1947, amended in 1952. In the Act, the Marines are to:

  1. Provide Fleet Marine Force with combined arms and supporting air components for service with the United States Fleet in the seizure or defense of advanced naval bases and for the conduct of such land operations as may be essential to the execution of naval campaign.
  2. Provide detachments and organizations for service on armed vessels of the Navy and security detachments for the protection of naval property at naval stations and bases.
  3. Develop, in coordination with the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the doctrine, tactics, techniques, and equipment employed by landing forces in amphibious operations.
  4. Provide Marine forces for airborne operations, in coordination with the Army, Navy, and Air Force, according to the doctrine established by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
  5. Develop, in coordination with the Army, Navy, and Air Force, the doctrine, procedures, and equipment for airborne operations.
  6. Expand peacetime components to meet wartime needs according to the joint mobilization plans.
  7. Perform such other duties as the President may direct.

See also: https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/marine-corps-and-national-security-act#
 
Back
Top