U.S. Marines test all-male squads against mixed-gender squads: Results are bleak

[DigitalDrifter]

Anyone truly surprised ?
It won't matter at all though, we don't fight wars to win anyway.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines—100 of them female—trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every facet of their experience measured and scrutinized.

All branches of the military are facing a January 1, 2016, deadline to open all combat roles to women. The Marine Corps is using this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate.The Corps’ summary of the experiment, posted online today by NPR, concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women.

Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 93 out of 134 tasks evaluated. All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says:

All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.

And:

All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.

And:

All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty)

The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment.

"" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: bottom; width: 640px; height: 360px; max-width: 100%; max-height: 100%;">

Such conclusions may be disheartening to proponents of gender integration in combat, and certainly put a damper on the news that the Army’s ranger school recently graduated its first female soldiers. The tests come with at least one important caveat: As the Marine Corps Times notes, many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

 

[DigitalDrifter]

This is from NPR, I truly am amazed they found the balls to report this.

 

[bodecea]

Anyone truly surprised ?
It won't matter at all though, we don't fight wars to win anyway.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines—100 of them female—trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every facet of their experience measured and scrutinized.

All branches of the military are facing a January 1, 2016, deadline to open all combat roles to women. The Marine Corps is using this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate.The Corps’ summary of the experiment, posted online today by NPR, concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women.

Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 93 out of 134 tasks evaluated. All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says:

All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.

And:

All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.

And:

All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty)

The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment.

"" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: bottom; width: 640px; height: 360px; max-width: 100%; max-height: 100%;">

Such conclusions may be disheartening to proponents of gender integration in combat, and certainly put a damper on the news that the Army’s ranger school recently graduated its first female soldiers. The tests come with at least one important caveat: As the Marine Corps Times notes, many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

Interesting on the accuracy measurements.....I wonder if that could be trained out.

 

[bucs90]

Anyone truly surprised ?
It won't matter at all though, we don't fight wars to win anyway.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines—100 of them female—trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every facet of their experience measured and scrutinized.

All branches of the military are facing a January 1, 2016, deadline to open all combat roles to women. The Marine Corps is using this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate.The Corps’ summary of the experiment, posted online today by NPR, concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women.

Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 93 out of 134 tasks evaluated. All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says:

All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.

And:

All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.

And:

All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty)

The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment.

"" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; vertical-align: bottom; width: 640px; height: 360px; max-width: 100%; max-height: 100%;">

Such conclusions may be disheartening to proponents of gender integration in combat, and certainly put a damper on the news that the Army’s ranger school recently graduated its first female soldiers. The tests come with at least one important caveat: As the Marine Corps Times notes, many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

Interesting on the accuracy measurements.....I wonder if that could be trained out.

Doubtful. SWAT teams rarely include females and it's for the same reaoson....they don't shoot as well. They have smaller weaker hands. Accurate shooting requires many things...but a firm strong grip is crucial, especially with combat weapons (sniper rifles much different...women can easily do that just as well).

Pistols, shotguns, AR15....women almost never shoot as well and no amount of training will grow their hands to be larger and stronger.

 

[bucs90]

As for the OP.....you're very racist and intolerant for posting that. And I'm ready to see Obama protest the Marines. The test was obviously biased against female Marines.

 

[Mac1958]

Doesn't matter.

Priorities are priorities.
.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

As for the OP.....you're very racist and intolerant for posting that. And I'm ready to see Obama protest the Marines. The test was obviously biased against female Marines.

Clearly I have joined the war on women.

I joined mainly because I was promised a rank of General within one year of enlistment, and a desk job away from the front.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Doesn't matter.

Priorities are priorities.
.

Exactly. As long as combat units are integrated, winning is secondary.

 

[Vastator]

This is no surprise,whatsoever. It's been common knowledge for years, amongst those who've served.

 

[bucs90]

As for the OP.....you're very racist and intolerant for posting that. And I'm ready to see Obama protest the Marines. The test was obviously biased against female Marines.

Clearly I have joined the war on women.

I joined mainly because I was promised a rank of General within one year of enlistment, and a desk job away from the front.

Yes General. I'm the sergeant of the undercover Intel unit of our War on Women.

 

[bucs90]

This is no surprise,whatsoever. It's been common knowledge for years, amongst those who've served.

Women are naturally smaller and weaker. Their hormones are different. It's not an insult...just science. I'd imagine in WAR...close combat war...size, strength, hormones and emotions are very critical factors. Even local fire departments and police departments know women just aren't generally as capable for SOME high risk situations. But WAR ZONES???

 

[DigitalDrifter]

As for the OP.....you're very racist and intolerant for posting that. And I'm ready to see Obama protest the Marines. The test was obviously biased against female Marines.

Clearly I have joined the war on women.

I joined mainly because I was promised a rank of General within one year of enlistment, and a desk job away from the front.

Yes General. I'm the sergeant of the undercover Intel unit of our War on Women.

Make sure you send me the "under cover" pictures during your "investigation".
I will, uuuuuuh, need them for my reports.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

That can't be true. Why should putting incompetent people on your team affect its performance?

 

[bucs90]

As for the OP.....you're very racist and intolerant for posting that. And I'm ready to see Obama protest the Marines. The test was obviously biased against female Marines.

Clearly I have joined the war on women.

I joined mainly because I was promised a rank of General within one year of enlistment, and a desk job away from the front.

Yes General. I'm the sergeant of the undercover Intel unit of our War on Women.

Make sure you send me the "under cover" pictures during your "investigation".
I will, uuuuuuh, need them for my reports.

My probes don't usually come with pictures. But I'll try sir.

 

[bucs90]

I for one salute and say God Bless to any woman willing to go into those jobs. The fact we have so many is one reason America is great (still is...for now).

But....the raw truth is....high risk intense jobs have physical requirements. It's why females don't play in the NBA or NFL.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I for one salute and say God Bless to any woman willing to go into those jobs. The fact we have so many is one reason America is great (still is...for now).

But....the raw truth is....high risk intense jobs have physical requirements. It's why females don't play in the NBA or NFL.

And obviously there is a role for women in combat, but you take a cross section of men and of women and the men are going to fair better overall.
Should be common sense, but then again we live in PC America of 2015.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Conclusions drawn from a study and research? I thought republicans hated that kind of thing.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Someone decided that it would be nice to have both women and men in front-line combat roles in the military.

Does "nice" include more of them winding up dead, and more battles lost against the enemy? That's the result.

These experiments in using the armed forces as social engineering laboratories, will get more Americans killed. That's a high price to pay to satisfy some liberal's desire for "equality".

Do the liberals justify it by saying that the military deserves it, since they are basically evil?

What did one of them say recently, about the deaths of U.S. Border patrol agents shot with guns the leftists had provided to the Mexican drug cartels in Operation Fast and Furious?

"You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs."

Sounds like the same philosophy is at work on the personnel in our armed forces.

--------------------------------------------------

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak

Written by
Svati Kirsten Narula
4 hours ago

In 2013, the US military lifted its ban on women serving in combat. Shortly after, the Marine Corps began what it calls an “unprecedented research effort” to understand the impact of gender integration on its combat forces. That took the form of a year-long experiment called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force, in which 400 Marines—100 of them female—trained for combat together and then undertook a simulated deployment, with every facet of their experience measured and scrutinized.

All branches of the military are facing a January 1, 2016, deadline to open all combat roles to women. The Marine Corps is using this experiment to decide whether to request exceptions to that mandate. The Corps’ summary of the experiment, posted online today by NPR, concludes that combat teams were less effective when they included women.

Overall, the report says, all-male teams and crews outperformed mixed-gender ones on 93 out of 134 tasks evaluated. All-male teams were universally faster “in each tactical movement.” On “lethality,” the report says:

All-male 0311 (rifleman) infantry squads had better accuracy compared to gender-integrated squads. There was a notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system (i.e. M4, M27, and M203) within the 0311 squads, except for the probability of hit & near miss with the M4.

And:

All-male infantry crew-served weapons teams engaged targets quicker and registered more hits on target as compared to gender-integrated infantry crew-served weapons teams, with the exception of M2 accuracy.

And:

All-male squads, teams and crews and gender-integrated squads, teams, and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties. For example, when negotiating the wall obstacle, male Marines threw their packs to the top of the wall, whereas female Marines required regular assistance in getting their packs to the top. During casualty evacuation assessments, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, except in the case where teams conducted a casualty evacuation as a one-Marine fireman’s carry of another (in which case it was most often a male Marine who “evacuated” the casualty)

The report also says that female Marines had higher rates of injury throughout the experiment.

Such conclusions may be disheartening to proponents of gender integration in combat, and certainly put a damper on the news that the Army’s ranger school recently graduated its first female soldiers. The tests come with at least one important caveat: As the Marine Corps Times notes, many of of the male study participants had previously served in combat units, whereas female participants, by necessity, came directly from infantry schools or from noncombat jobs.

The Marine Corps summary report does not indicate or suggest that the Marines will be asking for an exception to the military’s integration mandate. However, it does quote this somber section of a 1992 government study on gender integration in the armed forces:

A military unit at maximum combat effectiveness is a military unit least likely to suffer casualties. Winning in war is often only a matter of inches, and unnecessary distraction or any dilution of the combat effectiveness puts the mission and lives in jeopardy. Risking the lives of a military unit in combat to provide career opportunities or accommodate the personal desires or interests of an individual, or group of individuals, is more than bad military judgment. It is morally wrong.

 

[The Rabbi]

Get women out of the military except in support roles. Get the faggots out too. Restore the military to what it is supposed to be: a force to fight America's war abroad, not a playground for cultural fads.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

In the NOT so shocking news of the day