Posted on Jan 15, 2015
Would uniform fitness standards between both genders help females adapt to Combat Arms roles, and prevent a reduction in standards?
5.84K
4
2
2
2
0
Recently read an opinion article stating that the reason females cannot pass the Marine Corps' Infantry Officer Basic Course was due to lower fitness standards of females - which suggests that our reduced physical standards are cultural and not physiological.
Would 1) more females be willing to risk being kicked out of the service for the sake of equalizing standards, and 2) would the concern of 'reduced standards' as a reason for not allowing females in combat arms be reduced?
Would 1) more females be willing to risk being kicked out of the service for the sake of equalizing standards, and 2) would the concern of 'reduced standards' as a reason for not allowing females in combat arms be reduced?
Fitness
APFT
Combat
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
I am obviously not a Marine, but I think the answer to this question is that the different standards for the "average" Marine are fine - one standard for males and one for females. When we move up to more demanding courses, such as the Marine Corps IOBC or Ranger training, then make the standards tougher for all. I know they are already tougher for Ranger School - for anyone attending, male or female - and I assume that the same holds true for Marine Corps IOBC. That seems to be a fair way to deal with standards when it comes to elite courses.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google