Since the Pentagon has ordered women in combat roles the Marines are trying to figure out what will happen.
As tests go, the results will be disputed. The Marines compared squads that were all male to squads with a mix of women and men. According to Quartz, “The US Marines tested all-male squads against mixed-gender ones, and the results were pretty bleak.”
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.
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.
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.
The reason the findings will be disputed is because the men were veterans of combat roles and the women were not. So we don’t know how that might affect the outcomes. I suppose some diehard biology-deniers will claim that there would be no difference—or integrated squads would be superior—if everyone had comparable work experience.
Of course, if the military brings in transgenders, perhaps they will claim to allow women in combat by including men who “identify as women.” The world really is insane now.
But the real shameful admission is glossed over right at the beginning of the Quartz article.
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.
So military leadership ordered gender integration without first ordering research and examining the findings of such research. The effectiveness of such combat units was not investigated.
Conservatives commonly claim that the military is the last place in which you want to do social engineering. Who are we kidding? It is a society where the members are required to obey orders without complaining. For Liberals, it is the ideal place in which they want to do social engineering.
The same insane Feminist utopianism that pushed these changes will also enforce the implementation. Women will be given politically-motivated promotions to command. As we know from all our combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last thirteen years, stories will be made up to bolster the new egalitarian order (i.e. fictional female heroics in this case) and stories of rapes and failures will be suppressed.
The Marines are now doing their studies under the gun from the higher command and the Obama White House. The decision is already made. These decision makers are all selfish pieces of human waste. They know they are pushing a regime on the military that will inevitably lead to losses in war and a greater number of both male and female deaths (along with more rapes in combat, etc). They don’t care. The people who made the decision will be retired and living off the rewards they received for enforcing a political ideology at the expense of the persons who serve.
Treating military service as a civil right is insane and sometimes lethal.
(For an example of how “leadership” is responding to the Marine study, see this post.)