First Four Female Marines complete Marine Infantry training.

Stars and Stripes brings us the news that four female Marines will graduate from The Infantry School.

For the first time, four female Marines have successfully completed the service’s enlisted infantry training and will graduate from the program, the Marine Corps Times is reporting.

The four were among a group of 15 enlisted women who were the first to participate in a Marine Corps study to determine which ground combat jobs should be open to women.

The Marines’ enlisted infantry training includes a grueling 20-kilometer hike wearing more than 80 pounds of gear. Seven women began the Oct. 28 hike. Three women and 26 of 246 men did not finish it, the Marines said.

Throughout the infantry training, the women were held to the same standards as men, including performing full pull-ups instead of a flexed-arm hang during the physical fitness test, the Marine Corps Times said.

A 74% attrition rate actually tells us it is folly to send women to TIS. It costs time, money, and training resources to send people to school. TIS isn’t a “weedout” course like Special Forces. The majority of attendees are expected to successfully complete the course.
So again, the diversity zampolits are sacrificing the good of the service for the optics of equality.
This isn’t to knock the accomplishments of the four Marines, just to note that just because something CAN be done doesn’t mean it SHOULD be done.

Via: TAH

11 thoughts on “First Four Female Marines complete Marine Infantry training.”

  1. Sorry to nitpick, but the image on the post is an Army Combat Infantry Badge.
    Regarding probabilities, I bet 75% of those male Marines who passed are 18-21 years old, and thus biologically incapable of acting rational when in close contact with women. The presence of women will be poison to combat units. That won’t be the fault of 75% of them who will have no intention of manipulating their position (either because they’re lesbian, professional, or both), but it will happen all the same. I saw it as an infantryman when we had a coed MP squad attached (our position turned into a reality TV show).

    Proponents wrongly point toward racial integration of the military, which largely succeeded for precisely the reason this one will fail: at their core, beneath culture and society, the races are as similar as men and women are different.

    I wish there was more discussion about the impacts of infantry service on the body. I know my four years had a profound effect on my back and feet. If I had a son I would caution him strongly (if he even needed that, having seen how dad walks in the morning before his back gets warmed up). If one of my daughters wanted to go infantry I’d simply tell her she’ll regret it

  2. A 12.5 mile (20km) conditioning hike with an 80 pound load is hardly “grueling”. Any and every grunt and artillery unit worth its salt goes a hell of a lot further than that with a hell of a lot more weight than that.

    So far, the Corps has held the line, thankfully. I do sense that there will be a push at both ITS and IOC (officers’ course) to water it down until attrition rates drop below 30%. Which will, of course, destroy the physical and psychological fabric of combat units, who build comraderie on shared sweat and adversity.

    But hey, the feminists will call it a win.

  3. Another point is, women will be working at 95% of capability at all times and thusly will burn-out of injure themselves. So your graduates are just the lucky lambs to slaughter.

    1. All to please the PC crowd. Will these women really ever see action? I highly doubt it. Women can make fine soldiers, no doubt, but Marine units are another thing altogether.

      1. Women can make fine soldiers, and they can make fine Marines.

        What they can’t do is make fine infantry in any numbers worth the upfront costs, and challenges to unit cohesion.

    2. I served with female Marines in combat. They did fine, by and large. But the incidental combat we saw, though fairly frequent, was not the door-kicking, movement to contact, close with the enemy combat that is the infantryman’s stock in trade. Nor is it the gut-busting manual labor and sweat of an artilleryman or a tanker.

    3. I can’t agree with you Brad. They can be fine WACS, or WMs, or WAVES, or WAFs, but a soldier is defined by combat capability and placing women in combat is foolish beyond words. Their bodies weren’t made for it, and we have no business “mainstreaming” women outside the old auxiliaries. They did very important work in those auxiliaries, but Soldiers and sailors they were not.

Comments are closed.