• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Marines delay plan to require pullups in female fitness test after half of recruits f

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
Where is the feminism outrage at lowering the standards?

With women being equal to men and all, I figure feminist would be pissed off at the lower standards for women.
I'm a feminist and in my view feminism is about equality. If women are having trouble meeting the requirements, tough shit; it's the same requirement for everyone. Lowering the standards to meet quotas is absurd.
 

Munky

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2005
9,379
0
76
No, if women can't do 3 pull-ups, then get rid of pull-ups as a requirement, and continue preaching how women can do anything men can only better, and all that equalism BS.
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
I can't help but feel like there is a spectrum of how a society can view/treat women, homosexuals, etc and somewhere like Afghanistan represents going way too far in one direction, and western nations now represent going way too far in the other direction.

I think the closest to the right balance was something like the US in the 1950's. I'm not saying it was perfect then, I think there was some adjustment necessary to open up more opportunities to women, but I think we overshot the mark by a very large margin when we sought to correct those.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
I can't help but feel like there is a spectrum of how a society can view/treat women, homosexuals, etc and somewhere like Afghanistan represents going way too far in one direction, and western nations now represent going way too far in the other direction.

I think the closest to the right balance was something like the US in the 1950's. I'm not saying it was perfect then, I think there was some adjustment necessary to open up more opportunities to women, but I think we overshot the mark by a very large margin when we sought to correct those.
I feel ya:

8 is Enough.
 

Dman8777

Senior member
Mar 28, 2011
422
1
76
Men and women aren't equal in all things, that's a simple fact. It's especially evident in the physical realm where for example female atheletes are never as fast or as strong as males in the same sport. I have no doubt that females can aim a rifle and pull a trigger just as well as males. However, front line troops have to do a lot more than that and as others have said, it makes no sense to fill the ranks with women as long as there are enough men wiling to do the job.

If there are women out there capable of passing the same tests that the men go through, they should be admitted though.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
My GF can do 10 pull ups, and she's hardly a mutant. Take those that fail and re-train them until they don't. They'll probably have to put in more effort than the men, but that's the price of being a female marine.
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
I have no doubt that females can aim a rifle and pull a trigger just as well as males.
Probably so, but on average male brains are much more effective at tracking and predicting the movements of an object in motion, and any other spatial awareness related task. Those are relevant in combat shooting. On a firing range with stationary targets, there's probably no significant gender difference... in a combat environment, I think there may be.
 

Dman8777

Senior member
Mar 28, 2011
422
1
76
Probably so, but on average male brains are much more effective at tracking and predicting the movements of an object in motion, and any other spatial awareness related task. Those are relevant in combat shooting. On a firing range with stationary targets, there's probably no significant gender difference... in a combat environment, I think there may be.
Is this anecdotal or have studies shown this to be true? It seems like something that would be difficult to experiment on and variance between test subjects is probably significant. As I said, if there are women that pass all the same tests that men have to pass, why not let them in?
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
My GF can do 10 pull ups, and she's hardly a mutant. Take those that fail and re-train them until they don't. They'll probably have to put in more effort than the men, but that's the price of being a female marine.
She is a mutant. Most women can't do a single pull up. (Watch fear factor for verification with normal type women.)

I remember going through OCS, where you have to do the number of pullups equal to how many weeks you've been there before every meal, and that number of chinups after every meal (so think 36 pullups before breakfast, lunch, dinner and 36 chinups after breakfast, lunch, and dinner,) and there were women who started able to do none (unassisted,) and finished able to do none (unassisted.) So even working, with assistance, multiple times per day, they never progressed to being able to do a single pullup on their own.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Is this anecdotal or have studies shown this to be true? It seems like something that would be difficult to experiment on and variance between test subjects is probably significant. As I said, if there are women that pass all the same tests that men have to pass, why not let them in?
This is well established. What's not clear is if it's a result of boys growing up with video games and building blocks vs. girls growing up with dolls and ovens.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,708
1
0
Hmm maybe only half the women should be allowed in a setting where you need a lot of physical strength?
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
Do you think that woman already don't serve in combat situations and haven't been captured and killed in combat?
I think that we haven't had a full-scale infantry war against a real enemy in decades. Women on the front lines is just fine so long as your enemy is by definition too weak to directly oppose you, but if we went to war against an actual army that could rival our own, things would be very different.

Granted there's no sign of such a war happening any time soon, but when it does women will be killed and raped in droves, front-line units with women will suffer more severe casualties, and women, barring those few that can pass the same tests as men, will be off the front lines.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
She is a mutant. Most women can't do a single pull up. (Watch fear factor for verification with normal type women.)

I remember going through OCS, where you have to do the number of pullups equal to how many weeks you've been there before every meal, and that number of chinups after every meal (so think 36 pullups before breakfast, lunch, dinner and 36 chinups after breakfast, lunch, and dinner,) and there were women who started able to do none (unassisted,) and finished able to do none (unassisted.) So even working, with assistance, multiple times per day, they never progressed to being able to do a single pullup on their own.
Apparently half of all female marines can do at least 3. They all mutants too?

I'll concede there are some women who can't do a single pull up, and they shouldn't be marines. Or in any branch of the military for that matter.
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
if there are women that pass all the same tests that men have to pass, why not let them in?
My more idealistic side says "absolutely, let them in" but I do think there is merit to the arguments some have made about unit cohesion and it being disruptive to the environment. I used to dismiss such arguments, then I actually served in the military, on a submarine, and was there when they were bringing on some of the first groups of female cadets. They weren't actually crew members yet, but these were young women (I think they were all teenagers actually) who were future officers and they wanted to expose them to a submarine underway. They weren't there with us for the entire duration, mind you, but I got a chance to see the impact.

Now, interestingly enough, at that time I was still a self-identified liberal and I actually argued against some other crew members who said they shouldn't start having women on submarines. I viewed this as an archaic, caveman attitude and I made some pretty impassioned arguments about "if they can do just as good of a job, why not?" etc. But in retrospect, I realize that their presence was incredibly disruptive and distracting. On another boat, not mine, the COB actually got fired for sleeping with one of them. There are also "health risks unique to women of child-bearing age" which exist on a nuclear powered submarine. Keep in mind that incident that got the COB fired happened within just the first year that ANY females were on submarines, at all, and in a very sparse and limited capacity no less.

So now I guess I've switched camps, but it seems the tide of history is against me. I am now at a point where I don't think women should serve in any combat role or be on any naval vessel, or be fighter pilots. I think there are roles for women in the military, but I think our grandfathers' attitudes on this sort of thing better reflected biological reality than our era's do. Even if they did not reflect the ideals of equality as well.

This is well established. What's not clear is if it's a result of boys growing up with video games and building blocks vs. girls growing up with dolls and ovens.
I think it's the result of what our ancestors were doing thousands of years ago, the last time natural selection really had a crack at our species. I think the men were out hunting moving objects, and the women were gathering berries, hence why women see colors more vibrantly than men, it is theorized that this may have been an evolutionary adaptation to distinguish types of berries (poisonous vs. not) and spot berries among the surrounding foliage better. Whereas tracking animals and leading your spear throw so it hits where the animal is going to be, rather than where it is, were traits selected for in male brains. The ability to keep track of where you are in a three dimensional space is also superior in males, for these same reasons.

Ultimately, I think we just need to face the fact that one of our species' genders evolved to engage in warfare and physical violence, and is suited for such, and the other, by and large, is not. Or at least, not nearly AS suited to it. We need to stop pretending our species has a "get out of natural selection free" card. Biology trumps our feelings.
 
Last edited:
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
This is just political correctness run amok. The women who can pass the test should be allowed in but no lowering of standards though. I do suspect that they will use this as an excuse to lower the standards and make it easier for women to join.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
Apparently half of all female marines can do at least 3. They all mutants too?

I'll concede there are some women who can't do a single pull up, and they shouldn't be marines. Or in any branch of the military for that matter.
Yes, they're all mutants. You do realize that to even make it to boot camp in this recruiting environment, these young women are in the top 10% of physically capable women.

I would say 90% of the women in the US couldn't do a single pull up. I know some really fit Crossfit chicks that can't do a single pull up. It takes some women (who really focus) up to a year, working lateral pull downs, before they can do a single pullup. The musculature is hard to develop on a female frame.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
I think the men were out hunting moving objects, and the women were gathering berries, hence why women see colors more vibrantly than men, it is theorized that this may have been an evolutionary adaptation to distinguish types of berries (poisonous vs. not) and spot berries among the surrounding foliage better. Whereas tracking animals and leading your spear throw so it hits where the animal is going to be, rather than where it is, were traits selected for in male brains.
All of a sudden I feel like I'm wasting my life, sitting here, not throwing spears at running animals. :'(
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,032
13
81
So pull-ups aren't important, the test should be how much gear you can carry for how long then.
I'd say the pull up is a pretty basic core fitness test of your overall core strengths. Pull ups chin ups for upper body, crunches for abdominal and back, and squats for lower body. If you can do a lot of pull ups, your upper body en masse is pretty strong. If not, you are not strong. It's quite simple.

I'm not a fan of women in combat I feel we are not ready as a society to accept mothers being killed in battle.
So you disagree with women being in combat for what is frankly an outdated reason, but agree with changing the tests in such a way that would have an actual detrimental affect on the performance of the unit?
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
All of a sudden I feel like I'm wasting my life, sitting here, not throwing spears at running animals. :'(
Yea. This is why violent video games are so much more popular among males than they are among females. It feeds a very deep need within males to have a clear enemy and engage in combat with that enemy.

Whether that's a first person shooter or something like the endless grind of killing animals in World of Warcraft or whatever, these tap into deep biological drives.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,583
430
126
I had no idea it was that hard for women to do a pull-up. Maybe we can just attach grappling hooks onto one arm, you know, Longarm of C.O.P.S. style?

 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
On an unrelated note, I appear to be on the phone with an ebay customer service representative whose name is Nemesis. She's a woman with an odd well... I don't want to say accent, but an odd way of employing the English language. She starts everything she says with "to be honest with you" and uses a lot of weird double negatives and such.

EDIT: She also just ended the call with "have a prosperous new year" which is pretty awesome.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,586
11
76
I had no idea it was that hard for women to do a pull-up. Maybe we can just attach grappling hooks onto one arm, you know, Longarm of C.O.P.S. style?

When CNN or someone ran the story of "3 pull ups separate women from Marine Corps jobs" I shared it on facebook with a comment like, "What's the deal with women and pull ups? You just grab the bar, then pull yourself upwards," you would not believe the amount of angry comments I got, all of them from "fit" chicks. None of them can do pullups, no matter how hard they try. I've actually seen them try! The problem is most of them can do lateral pull down of around 50lbs, so they're not even close, really.
 

Brovane

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2001
3,960
33
91
I think that we haven't had a full-scale infantry war against a real enemy in decades. Women on the front lines is just fine so long as your enemy is by definition too weak to directly oppose you, but if we went to war against an actual army that could rival our own, things would be very different.

Granted there's no sign of such a war happening any time soon, but when it does women will be killed and raped in droves, front-line units with women will suffer more severe casualties, and women, barring those few that can pass the same tests as men, will be off the front lines.
Realistically with Nuclear Weapons a full-scale infantry war isn't probably going to happen. We will continue to have low intensity conflicts like we currently are seeing.

The Soviet Union when push came to shove during the Great Patriotic War had no problem throwing woman into front line combat against the invading Fascist forces. Of course they had man-power shortages. However when push came to shove Russian woman where perfectly willing to volunteer for frontline combat duty.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
Realistically with Nuclear Weapons a full-scale infantry war isn't probably going to happen. We will continue to have low intensity conflicts like we currently are seeing.

The Soviet Union when push came to shove during the Great Patriotic War had no problem throwing woman into front line combat against the invading Fascist forces. Of course they had man-power shortages. However when push came to shove Russian woman where perfectly willing to volunteer for frontline combat duty.
Until someone develops a foolproof counter to ICBMs. Granted that likely isn't happening anytime soon either but it's certainly not implausible.

Women wanting to be on the front lines isn't in question, the issue is whether they can perform equally to men in infantry combat. The answer is in most cases no. I just don't see the point in risking and/or sacrificing soliders' lives just so radical feminists can jerk off.

Nature is not fair, war is not fair, irrational application of philosophy is no reason to sacrifice lives.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY