Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Marine study finds women suffer more injuries, shoot less accurately than men [View all]Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)53. It looks like physical differences predominated.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/280017557/Marine-Corps-gender-integration-research-executive-summary
Nor were the differences in targeting (hugely germane) at all attributable to training levels:
Graduation rates for infantry training were abysmal:
The cost of doing this alone is hard to justify; higher injury rates and lower effectiveness in action make it seem like a terrible idea. Fatigue due to physical differences probably accounts for the poorer hit rates.
Body composition: Males averaged 178 lbs, with 20% body fat: females averaged 142 lbs, with 24% body fat
Anaerobic Power: Females possessed 15% less power than males; the female top 25th percentile overlaps with the bottom 25th
percentile for males
Anaerobic Capacity: Females possessed 15% less capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with the bottom 50th percentile of males
Aerobic Capacity (VO2Max): Females had 10% lower capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with bottom 50th
percentile of males
Within the research at the Infantry Training Battalion, females undergoing that entry-level training were injured at more than six-times the rate of their male counterparts
27% of female injuries were attributed to the task of movement under load, compared to 13% for their male counterparts, carrying a similar load.
During the GCEITF assessment, musculoskeletal injury rates were 40.5% for females, compared to 18.8% for males
Of the 21 time-loss injuries incurred by female Marines, 19 were lower extremity injuries and 16 occurred during a movement under load task
Anaerobic Power: Females possessed 15% less power than males; the female top 25th percentile overlaps with the bottom 25th
percentile for males
Anaerobic Capacity: Females possessed 15% less capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with the bottom 50th percentile of males
Aerobic Capacity (VO2Max): Females had 10% lower capacity; the female top 10th percentile overlaps with bottom 50th
percentile of males
Within the research at the Infantry Training Battalion, females undergoing that entry-level training were injured at more than six-times the rate of their male counterparts
27% of female injuries were attributed to the task of movement under load, compared to 13% for their male counterparts, carrying a similar load.
During the GCEITF assessment, musculoskeletal injury rates were 40.5% for females, compared to 18.8% for males
Of the 21 time-loss injuries incurred by female Marines, 19 were lower extremity injuries and 16 occurred during a movement under load task
Nor were the differences in targeting (hugely germane) at all attributable to training levels:
Male provisional infantry (those with no formal 03xx school training) had higher hit percentages than the 0311 (school trained) females: M4: 44% vs 28%, M27: 38% vs 25%, M16A4w/M203: 26% vs 15%
Graduation rates for infantry training were abysmal:
Infantry Training Battalion graduation rates between Sep 13
Jun 15: 144 of 401 female volunteers (36%) as compared to 5448 of 5503 males (99%)
Jun 15: 144 of 401 female volunteers (36%) as compared to 5448 of 5503 males (99%)
The cost of doing this alone is hard to justify; higher injury rates and lower effectiveness in action make it seem like a terrible idea. Fatigue due to physical differences probably accounts for the poorer hit rates.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Marine study finds women suffer more injuries, shoot less accurately than men [View all]
mahatmakanejeeves
Sep 2015
OP
Many prefered using the M2AP round, because it was more accurate, and penetrated trees better. n/t
oneshooter
Sep 2015
#36
Thus the fear of a Communist Revolution was the driving force behind the surrender
happyslug
Sep 2015
#47
Also noteworthy - they did not come to the exercise with equal levels of training
caraher
Sep 2015
#13
I don't know why they had to spend money on a study, I found out men had better aim years ago
ripcord
Sep 2015
#14
so the study found men are,in general,heavier and stronger than women and in combat thats a big deal
Demonaut
Sep 2015
#15
Combat is a long, grueling, miserable occupation & that's just the physical aspect.
GOLGO 13
Sep 2015
#18
Navy secretary criticizes controversial Marine Corps gender integration study
mahatmakanejeeves
Sep 2015
#20
If you have to handpick "high performers" to be able compete with average male Marines
hack89
Sep 2015
#21
The pull-ups & push-ups is the dirty little secret they don't like to talk about
GOLGO 13
Sep 2015
#60
Maybe dosing women with testosterone would work if they want to be in infantry
AngryAmish
Sep 2015
#42
Read my comments above, I think it is training BEFORE one enters the service.
happyslug
Sep 2015
#55