17 pct of male Marines surveyed likely to leave Corps if women get combat posts

[Big_Mike]

52. I do not think that they replied from a sexist point of view, but one of readiness

I retired from Army service. My Marine brothers laugh at me, and say the Army is completely different, but in most respects these two services mirror one another. People look at women in combat and see it only in terms of equality of opportunity and that women can do any job out there. For over 90% of the jobs in the military, I agree women can do them. But not those jobs in the direct combat arms.

I led and mentored women in the Army for about 10 years of my service. I did 10 years in Combat Arms (Infantry and Combat Engineering) and 8 years in Combat Support (Heavy Equipment Engineer and Maintenance units) and two years teaching leadership (PLDC). Women can be as good or bad as any other troopie, mostly averaging towards a little better than simply good. Some were outstanding and some were duds. The outstanding I tried to promote a quickly as possible, the duds I retrained and they performed to standard or they were eventually separated from service. There is little room for under-performers in the military. The main thing about them however, is that you ALWAYS planned to use more bodies for a job when the physical requirements were severe in nature. When we had to bust tires on a deuce and a half, rather than 3 guys (maybe two with bigger guys), I'd assign six or seven females to break the tire loose from the split ring and then get the ring off the tire so that the tube could be repaired or replaced. I never of my own will assigned females to break track on the M88 recovery vehicle (was required to do it twice, and ended up having to help them rather than do my job just to get it finished). That job is a stone bitch for anyone, and getting the track back around the drive sprocket and all the rest of the reassembly is not something to remember fondly. I never ever saw a female replace individual track pads on armored vehicles. Occasionally, they would change track plates on dozers, but only very rarely. We would occasionally send down contact teams with females as attachments to combat units, but they were only attachments.

For the past 10 years, WOMEN HAVE BEEN IN COMBAT. There is no arguing that point. They have been there and done that, with some awarded Silver Stars for performance under fire. In particular, I remember the female MP whose convoy was ambushed. She took charge, drove across the ambush and counter-attacked. Tremendous leader, obviously. But closing with and destroying the enemy is not her primary job, it was something forced upon her by circumstance.

She operated a machinegun (an M60 I believe) and devastated the enemy. But she was not assigned to a foot patrol and ordered to carry the "Pig" ( a term of endearment among us old gunners) over the course of a 12 or 16 hour day of movement. Let me tell you, the pig weighs 23 pounds, each 100 rounds of ammo weighs around 7 pounds (gunner carries 300, so 21 more pounds) so just the guns is 46 pound to carry. Full battle rattle is another 40 pounds. There is 86 pounds already loaded on someone who might go as high as 140 - 150 pounds. In her performance, she crossed across the ambush and attacked. On foot, she most likely would failed to have accomplished what she did. Perhaps she could have crawled across the ambush, but she could never have run. I do not know this as a fact, but based upon 20 years experience, I would strongly bet that way.

Also, given the lack of upper body strength in most females, how long do you think she could actually function on a daily basis? In two years of monthly rotations teaching basic combat patrolling with 3 females out of my 15 soldiers, I never had one last more than about an hour as either pig gunner or as radio operator. I know that anecdote does not equal data, but I sure as hell could plan that way! Yes, there are a very few who could likely stand the pressure, but overall women in direct combat positions is a weakness and adversely affects readiness.

The physiological issues are simple - ignore it. If a unit is ever attacked by chemical weapons or is exposed to nuclear fallout, the decontamination points are co-ed. Everybody is decontaminated, stripped naked and showered as part of final decontamination. No separate lines. Ignore it and drive on. In combat, how they pee should not matter, just that they are by your shoulder, fighting to save your life as you save theirs. Unfortunately, there are many old people in the US who never grew up and are childish about this. It should not matter, but for many it does. Fuck it, ignore it is my motto.

I am a big supporter of women in the service, but I think both the unit and the individual suffer if women are added to infantry, armor, some cavalry, and most combat engineer positions; particularly when assigned to Light units. Maybe they could partly work out in a wheeled or tracked unit, but never in light units.) As an aside, Light only means that they carry everything everywhere they go. And let me tell you, it is NOT light!!). As a Combat Engineer, rather than machinegun ammo, I carried 20 - 60 pounds of high explosive. Kicked my ass every time. But I carried it, day in and day out. I climbed mountains, crossed jungles or trekked across deserts with my load. The terrain did not matter, mission accomplishment is all that matters.

And in my humble opinion, females in direct combat units will not foster mission accomplishment, only hinder it.