First Female USMC Infantry Candidates Wash Out

by W.F. Price on November 27, 2012

President Obama has ordered the armed forces to integrate women, and the USMC has now opened infantry training to women. Out of 80 female officers in the first eligible group, only two signed up for the USMC officer infantry training program, which requires a significant amount of physical strength and endurance to complete. On average about 25% of men fail the course for one reason or another. Unsurprisingly, both women failed it, with one dropping out on the first day and another withdrawing due to “unspecified medical reasons” a little over a week in. The two women joined some 30 men who also failed to make the cut.

The USMC requires above average physical strength and endurance from men, and very few women are at that level. In fact, for women it is a higher hurdle than it might appear at first glance, because a woman who can match a man in one particular trait, such as strength, typically cannot match the same man in speed, endurance or other physical abilities. For example, a female Olympic weightlifter may be able to lift as much as the average male marine, but she will be short and stocky and prone to overheating on long marches. She’ll also be slow and clumsy on agility tests. A women who can run as fast and far as male marines is likely built like a whippet, and can’t even lift the standard rucksack. One who can do the pull-ups is probably under 5 feet tall and weighs 90 lbs, and so on…

Of course, there is now a mandate to have women in combat, so someone is going to come in and make changes to the infantry training program so that women can pass it. Marine Corps officials are already talking about “gender neutral” (i.e. lower) physical standards.

So, once again, we see our elected officials hard at work spending our money to make the US military less efficient and less capable. Feminism is now an expense one cannot avoid anywhere, even in matters as fundamental as national defense.

The end result will be a weaker, more expensive military — one that provides both paychecks and self-esteem boosts to people who can’t even perform the job. Kinda like our wonderful public schools.

{ 26 comments… read them below or add one }

Used to be a Marine November 27, 2012 at 12:49

I would not be surprised to see the Obama administration pursue a “disparate impact” strategy to mandate female integration into the infantry.

Take pull-ups. They are a highly functional test of strength, especially when performed overhand. (Some people call underhand pull-ups ‘chin-ups’, but I use the terms interchangeably.) Very, very few women can do them properly, but in every Marine platoon there will be a handful of guys that can do 20 dead-hang, perfect-form pull-ups.

If women can’t do them, then according to disparate impact the pull-ups are sexist!

Insistence on women’s inclusion in front-line infantry/tank units is a sign of a society that is no longer in touch with reality.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
ParatrooperJJ November 27, 2012 at 13:07

USMC HQ just announced a change to the women’s PT test starting in 2014. They will be required to do at least three pullups. That will get rid of at least 50% of the female Marines right there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Used to be a Marine November 27, 2012 at 13:23


Thanks for the information on the change to female Marine PFTs. I am pleasantly surprised.

Here is the link to the announcement for those who are interested:

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Tam the Bam November 27, 2012 at 13:55

What? Outrageous! Obviously a setup, to make women look bad. Women never fail at anything, unless men force them to.

The betas must be set to work stat, designing and manufacturing light, attractive, zero-maintenance personal arms. Carbon fibre, nanotubes, that sort of thing. And preferably ones that don’t go “BANG!” Recoilless, and only available in pink, obviously.

Meanwhile, a global campaign for less fit, less intelligent, less stoical and testosterone-poisoned foes must be pursued as a matter of urgency, and theaters that involve inclement weather or a lack of hot-water plumbing to be shunned, on principle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price November 27, 2012 at 13:59

USMC HQ just announced a change to the women’s PT test starting in 2014. They will be required to do at least three pullups. That will get rid of at least 50% of the female Marines right there.


Three unassisted pullups? That will get rid of a lot more than 50% of the females. More like 95%. Actually, it will effectively eliminate almost all of them, since most women who can do pullups are too small (e.g. gymnasts) to accomplish the other tasks.

Crank November 27, 2012 at 14:09

“. Actually, it will effectively eliminate almost all of them, since most women who can do pullups are too small (e.g. gymnasts) to accomplish the other tasks.”

You obviously weren’t paying attention during the movie Aliens, or Terminator 2 for that matter. Those women could pop out ten of those without breaking a sweat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Johnycomelatley November 27, 2012 at 14:33

What’s the bet squad formations and tactics will be changed to facilitate this?

A special technical, low weight, immediate defense position, something like a miniature UAV specialist?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
keyster November 27, 2012 at 14:36

Being restricted to non-combat roles limits their chances for advancement. And seeing as how combat has become almost an anachronism, with drones and precision munitions, it’s finally safe enough to allow our mothers, sisters and daughters to fight.

BUT, let there be one battle or skirmish where multiple females are killed and/or captured (think Jessica Lynch), and certian brave white-knight soldiers will risk their own lives to avenge or save the damsels in distress.

I suppose we need more women dying in combat, because there are just not enough young men doing it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
gwallan November 27, 2012 at 15:27

Only in Oz…
Taxpayer money spent funding breast enhancements

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
doclove November 27, 2012 at 15:52

I couldn’t make it in the U.S. Army Infantry as an enlisted man when I became age 35 on my birthday in Basic Training at Fort Benning. Trying to be an officer would be more difficult as they expect the officer candidates to be more physically fit than the enlisted. I was a Signal Soldier then a Chemical Soldier. Young Women in their 20s couldn’t do what the men did in their 30s and 40s especially when it came to upper body strength such as in pushups—-NOT EVEN CLOSE. Women were more comparable when it came to leg endurance such as running. They were more or less equal in situps.

Women also tended to have a higher percentage of drama queens in my anecdotal experience. They also had a much greater tendency to have sex with higher ranking male soldiers than the men did with higher ranking female soldiers from what I observed. Can we say HYPERGAMY? This is what made it very frustrating at dealing with them.

I served one tour in Iraq and one tour in Afghanistan. When we had guard duty with Iraqi or Afghan soldiers one American male soldier would be left with one Iraqi soldier guarding an airfield alone for instance or one American soldier would be guarding a guard tower surrounding the perimeter of the installation alone with an Afghan soldier. Sometimes the American male soldier would be alone with 3 Iraqi or Afghan soldiers from 10 to 30 minutes during the change of the guard. The American female soldiers wouldn’t be put with the Iraqi and Afghan soldiers alone. They would usually have a male soldier with them or at the very least have another female soldier with them. Much of our leadership thought that Iraqi and even more so Afghan culture taught men to treat women like pigs. They even thought this about our Iraqi and Afghan allies. They thought worse of our Iraqi and Afghan enemies. All my experiences with the Iraqi and Afghan soldiers were positive. Most American soldiers are. However, the past year has been murderous against American soldiers in Afghanistan. I’m glad I’ve been out for over 18 months now even though I’m proud to have served.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
TFH November 27, 2012 at 17:04

As I often say….. feminism, far from helping women, has instead exposed the full extent of female inferiority far more visibly than was ever possible before feminism.

The traditional restrictions on women were designed to hide their massive shortcomings.

Now, thanks to feminism, everyone can see why those restrictions were important.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Anon November 27, 2012 at 19:51

The Israelis have more experience with women in different combat roles; here’s what one of their generals has to say about it:

Major General (res.) Yiftach Ron-Tal has joined a growing camp in the military that objects to widening women’s participation in combat roles.

Ron-Tal’s voice is significant because he was one of the generals who led the process of integration of women into combat units a decade ago.

In an interview with Voice of Israel government-run radio, Ron-Tal said that “It turns out that the amount of stress fractures suffered by soldiers is dozens of percentage points higher among women than among men. As a result, the female soldiers are not required to carry as much weight.”

“I think that women’s service in combat roles in the IDF should not be widened,” he said. “I cannot even imagine a female soldier serving inside a tank or in elite infantry units, mostly because of operational considerations. The army must not allow this thing to interfere with its operational ability.”

From “General Who Supported Women in Combat Says: ‘No More!’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
greyghost November 27, 2012 at 20:13

Another thing to consider and is a small but big deal. Physical capacity is not the same as operating capacity. Ex my body has a physical capacity to bench press 315 pounds. I can only do that after weight training for a fairly long period of time. The job itself may need for each man to bench press 210 routinely. That is a good distance from the physical capacity but is a repeatable and sustainable operating capacity. So even if a woman managed to pass the course she would be operating at 90 plus percent of total physical capacity. That is not sustainable. It needs to be. I was was not marine infantry I was marine air wing but every once in a while we would find ourselves at 29 palms and would see the grunts humping. Them boys humped and it was over 100 degrees too. And Camp Pendleton with those goddamn hills had to be killer. Even riding around on a tank can become heavy and hard real fast keeping it running.
They are just going to have double standards GIRL POWER.
I got out in 96

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
highwasp November 27, 2012 at 22:50

Mr. Price = Please bring back the votes… !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
RTP November 28, 2012 at 10:14

Make an all female infactry unit. Send it into a hot zone.

Situation solves itself.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Tom Smith November 28, 2012 at 13:14

Mr. Price-Most women cannot meet the physical requirements of being in infantry, that should be obvious to anyone with even a low IQ. And there are many reasons many men cannot make the cut- but primary among them is that Americans have become fat bastards. And there is no need to lower the standards, rather, we need to get our nation back into shape.

Many years ago, I tried to go into the USMC as an officer. In the Marines, even professionals (i.e. doctors and lawyers) had to go through Officer Candidate School (OCS). At that time I was 30 years old.

The basic entry requirements were- for a 30 year old male (after basic physical processing): 1) run three miles no slower than 24 minutes, 2) do at least 100 sit-ups in 2 minutes, and 3) complete a minimum of 15 perfect pull-ups (hands facing forward on the bar). These were completed in that order (i.e. 1, 2, 3).

I would wager that somewhere less than 50 percent of your readers could pass these tests to get into OCS. But this is what is required for entry to become a basic infantry officer (without even going through OCS). After OCS, you can expect to be much stronger than that.

Don’t lower the standards, require all men to be this fit. And maybe women will be a little less independent after that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Passingby November 28, 2012 at 19:44

Any man in his forties or so and experienced in the world will know what I describe here. We have seen in professional life, academics, and every other setting that gives out status or rewards based on performance the creation of the dual tracks.

For men, there remains a difficult challenge of initiation, testing, proving oneself, and for some, eventual success. Some men are weeded out because they are simply not good enough, others lose heart, and some men are bounced for seemingly trivial or random reasons. Every guy understands that this is the replication of life itself in some ways: you must struggle to get rewards, and even if you do everything right, you may still fail.

The track for females in those same organizations? Help at every turn. Second, third, fourth chances. And if a fifth chance is required, that particular hurdle may simply be waived, because, … well, just because. A woman sales person producing numbers that gets a male fired? The norm. She likely gets promoted. A female lawyer who work is substandard, has no clients of her own, and whose advice is off key like a tone deaf trumpet player? Partnership material. A guy with the same performance? Fired.

We all saw it. The guys in the know either pretended not to see it and played the game for the slots still available to men, or they opted out of that game and went for more independent adventuring in non-institutional settings.

Up until now, it appeared that combat units and the death-dealing environments they operated in were exempt from the silliness of pretending women perform like men. (They don’t. They just don’t, folks.) But no longer.

In sum, women look around in a society. They see status and the honor given to men who compete and strive in some established setting like a corporation, profession or the military. Women then want that same honor and sense of accomplishment. Don’t we all? But for every man, the man has to earn the status. If they fail the entry tests, they fail. For women, when they find cannot replicate the effort and ability necessary to *earn* the accolades, they demand the accolades anyway.

Women want the status so much, they end up destroying the process which gives it. As men retreat from engaing in the now-rigged games designed to simply offer women status, there is a sense of anger and indignation among the women holding the title. They feel cheated and robbed, because the title means less now, and people don’t seem to care.

The women simply never realize that status comes not from the title bestowed, but from the struggle to earn the title. Dilute the struggle, and the title becomes meaningless. It becomes a currency without value.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
anonymous November 29, 2012 at 05:19

I wen to a service academy. We had a PT test every semester. The first event on that test was pull-ups. The men’s minimum was 7. The women’s was 1. And even at that, I don’t remember any female over 5’2″ who could pump out more than 3. Most of us were lucky to manage the 1. It just wasn’t something the majority of us were capable of doing. There were women there who could max out the female standards, but even at that, that would have been abour 350/500 on the men’s test, which wouldn’t be enough, I suspect, for USMC Infantry training. If you don’t see females out of the academies – who are usually athletes in high school, and some of the best-conditioned women you’re going to find anywhere in military – being able to do this stuff, what chance do the girls out of ROTC or regular enlisted basic have?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jean Valjean November 30, 2012 at 20:56

“The two women joined some 30 men who also failed to make the cut. ”

I can see the headline now, “More men than women wash out of Marine Infantry Training.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Jean Valjean November 30, 2012 at 21:08

@Keyster–”Being restricted to non-combat roles limits their chances for advancement. ”

No it doesn’t. Affirmative Action and fast track promotion over the last 40 years has moved women rapidly up the chain of command including commanding combat units.

These women have had all the promotions but never met the same requirements or faced the same risks.

By the sound of the posts above, becoming combat soldiers is a bridge too far for women. Unless (or until) they lower the PT requirements for women it doesn’t sound like any women are going to make it in unless they have a couple of undescended testicles. In which case they will probably get a medical discharge anyway.

I expect they will dramatically lower the standards for being Marine Infantry. I wonder if the Marines have the stomach to fight against that?

Bullets and bombs they can face. Screaming feminist harridans? Probably not.

I wish them luck though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
B December 2, 2012 at 21:54

Having done 4 years in Marine Corps Infantry in the 1990′s, and after going to OCS in 1999 with an Aviation contract , I personally did not want to pursue any more time in the ‘ground side’ of the Green Machine. My officer in charge was dissapointed with me, but for myself as you get older I was less willing to put up with that hard lifestyle.

Not suprising there were few female volunteers- any one who goes to OCS and TBS senses that ground combat is not a job women want to do in the military. Only an exceptional female would seek it out, and probably pass IOC in its current curriculum.

I think the issue now becomes a question of whether it is worth the time and resources to finds those exceptional females who are capable of becoming infantry officers, and convincing them to put up with all its BS for their contract duration. If women can compete in the Olympics they could maybe pass IOC, but would they be able to handle that lifestyle for four years or more ( or accpet the low pay that comes with a very dangerous job)?

Bottom line- its a social experiment that I believe the US military does not have the resources to pursue ( hell the US government is broke!). Just resolve the issue once and for all- keep women in support units.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Ginkgo December 4, 2012 at 11:52

“Of course, there is now a mandate to have women in combat, so someone is going to come in and make changes to the infantry training program so that women can pass it. ”

No. They will be fine for human wave attacks, which are kind of a Marine specialty anyway, and they don’t need much training for that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
paul December 4, 2012 at 19:42

recipe for disaster, but as long as everyone feels good…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
continent December 4, 2012 at 20:25

How would the militaty treat female soldiers who have constant craving for sex? Could it interrupt combat operation. Drudge Report

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
continent December 5, 2012 at 13:54

If women had served in The Civil War, would the battle of Gettysburg be lost by theUnion troops if women while reloading their guns would also have to masturbate while having a PSAD attack? Link;,2933,352357,00.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
gender foreigner February 3, 2013 at 15:27

Amen, brother.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: