A Tale of Two Combat Integration Tests: Army v. Marines | The Stream

With the January deadline approaching for Defense Secretary Ashton Carter’s decision on opening all combat units to women, the contrast between the Marines integration testing and the Army’s Ranger training is telling.The Marines set out to answer a question: Can women perform at the same level as men in the infantry? While adversaries of the women’s combat exemption have been hard at work trying to discredit the testing and the results, the Marines’ gender integration study was executed according to the Department of Defense’s (DoD) required methodology. It had buy-in and observation from the Center for Strategic & International Studies, the University of Pittsburgh, Michigan State University and Rand Corp. Contrary to the claim that the Marines were biased against the females, participants and overseers say the opposite was true.The Marines’ Ground Combat Element-Integrated Task Force (GCEITF) was directed “to test the hypothesis that an integrated ground combat arms unit under gender neutral standards will perform just as well as a similar all male unit.” The results disproved the hypothesis. All-male units outperformed coed units in 69 percent of the 134 combat tasks. Women were slower, were less accurate shooters, struggled with tasks requiring upper body strength such as climbing over walls and lifting a 200-pound dummy off the field, and retained more than double the injuries of men, among other things:

Source: A Tale of Two Combat Integration Tests: Army v. Marines | The Stream

Read the whole thing.

3 thoughts on “A Tale of Two Combat Integration Tests: Army v. Marines | The Stream”

  1. If I may oversimplify, I believe the School Catalogue lists Ranger School as a 53-day course. While a 53 day conflict of a continual operations variety could happen, that like two Irishmen walking out of a bar, it’s highly unlikely. It seems to me that the Marines conducted their test as an open ended conflict scenario more accurately assessing results. As it’s often said “…the clock can’t be stopped.” The Army female candidates had a concrete (roughly), end date, the Marines seem to have made their assessment process so long that a mental “end date” was removed from the process, and I applaud the approach.

  2. It seems the Navy Secretary looks even more partisan and less honest than he did. I didn’t think it possible.

Comments are closed.