Comments on: George Will on Women in Combat: Will We “Gender-Norm the Requirements”?

By: Jeff Jones

Jeff Jones — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:14:10 +0000

Just one comment for George about size… 5 foot 5 inch tall, 110 pound Audie Murphy. The most decorated veteran of World War II. What was that about size again?

By: STABB

STABB — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 01:14:24 +0000

There’s a difference between serving on the DMZ and back at Camp Casey. All guards working on the DMZ must meet a height requirement. It’s a long time standing rule. It pisses off the North Koreans.

By: B-K KnightRider

B-K KnightRider — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:18:45 +0000

MIKE ELECTRICIAN: “And there are size standards even for men to serve on the DMZ in Korea, you have to be at least 6’2.” – - – Oh BULL hockey pucks. I don’t believe that for a second. And after a quick search online I have found more than few people who know someone way below that height who served in the Korean DMZ. When I was in boot camp my platoon Drill Sergeant served there and he was way shorter than me, and I am 6’2″. Can you quote and cite an official policy? I have not found one yet. Can you say urban legend?

By: B-K KnightRider

B-K KnightRider — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:10:00 +0000

COMMONESENSEPARTY: “You can’t gender norm requirements when you have to fireman’s carry a 200 pounder out of harms way. You also can’t really “pick and choose” the bigger stronger women to do it. That wouldn’t be fair or correct to do.” – - – To your first point, correct. If having to do a fireman’s carrry to pick up and carry a 200 pound person to safety is a necessary skill/ability for a job then it is not appropriate to gender norm a physical abillity/skills test that should legitimately include that ability as part of a test for a specific job. As I have explained several times, gender norming bona fide occupational requirements is not appropriate. But it is appropritate to “pick and choose” both the bigger and stronger women and the bigger and stronger men for that job by making EVERYONE pass the same test that effectively tests all bona fide occupational requirements. That way the only people who work in that job field are the ones who can demonstrate the ability to do the job. Now, if your point was that it would not be fair to gender norm the test and then end up only assigning the bigger stronger men and women to do some of the work then you are correct, that might not be fair.

By: mike electrician

mike electrician — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:46:18 +0000

What do I care, if some lady wants to be cannon fodder, let her. Since the standard for combat is the male training, if a woman wants to be in the front, she must do the same training. Period. And there are size standards even for men to serve on the DMZ in Korea, you have to be at least 6’2. And if some little guy can’t carry the weight, he is reassigned to other duty.

By: pksk531

pksk531 — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:32:39 +0000

SInking of the USA wrote: “Sen. Robert Menendez, what a guy!!!! now being investigated by the FBI for having sex with underage girls.. and Radical journalist Martha and her ABC comrades would never dream of asking this democrat any questions about that… the cover-up is in again?” WOW do you have that wrong! Here in NJ they have been reporting on how one of his former interns turned out to be illegal. Please source your other charges – and don’t say FOX NEWS – they are NOT reliable!!!

By: Commonsenseparty

Commonsenseparty — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:13:27 +0000

MyTake | January 27, 2013, 10:22 pm —- 20+ years in the USAF and the requirements differ with gender. You can’t gender norm requirements when you have to fireman’s carry a 200 pounder out of harms way. You also can’t really “pick and choose” the bigger stronger women to do it. That wouldn’t be fair or correct to do. Remember when the woman joined the VMI? She quit after a week. But she got plenty of attention huh? I will admit that men and women were made differently for a reason. Only mother nature can change that.

By: B-K KnightRider

B-K KnightRider — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:30:25 +0000

DALMATION: “I did, and you keep making the assertion that Marines, male or female, who meet physical requirements should be able to do the job. Well, the fact is that they DON’T have to meet the same physical requirements. A male Marine has to do a certain number of pull-ups more than his female counterpart -plus the fact that he’s probably hauling more weight up and down. Is the female just as qualified? No. They meet separate, and unequal, standards.” – - – OMG! ! ! How can such a simple concept be so friggin far above anyone’s head? What exactly did you not understand about the difference between physical tests that are ONLY meant to test for fitness levels and physical tests that are meant to test bona fide occupational requirements. I was in a Combat Engineer Company in the Army Reserve and guess how many times I ever had to do a pullup when we out in the field – ZERO. That skill/ability was not necessary for the job. But it was part of the fitness test. The test you are describing is ONLY about testing for general FITNESS, and so that is NOT a bona fide occupational requirement. Gender norming the kind of fitness test you are describing is FAIR and REASONABLE because men and women with the same fitness level will have different abilities. Guess what, they also do AGE norming. Why? Because a 40 y/o male Marine who has the same fitness level as a 20 y/o male Marine has different abilities. So, as long as the only purpose of a test is to test for fitness then it is okay, it is fair, it is reasonable to have different standards for different age groups AND different standards for each sex. But, if the purpose of a test is to actually test the physical skills and abilites necessary for doing a particular job (aka bona fide occupational requirements) then it is not appropriate to have different standards for the sexes or for ages. For example, if being able to lift and setup a 50 cal on the top of a tank is a bona fide occupational requirement to be tank crew member then EVERYONE, regardless of age or sex, should have to pass that physical skill test. If being able to lift and load 105 round is a necessary skill to be in a 105 battary crew then EVERYONE regardless of age or sex should have to pass tht skill test regardless of their age or sex. But a cook or a clerk an infantry rifleman should not have to have the same physical capabilities to pass that same test for the tank or battary crew member. Why is that so hard to grasp?

By: Kate

Kate — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:25:00 +0000

Wait a second. Obama says if he had sons he would be very concerned about them playing football because of the violence in the game but at the same time he has no problem sending young women into combat where they can be shot, raped, or blown up? Seriously?

By: Dalmation

Dalmation — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:35:45 +0000

“Try reading my posts at 10:44, 11:04, and 11:16″
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | January 27, 2013, 11:21 pm

I did, and you keep making the assertion that Marines, male or female, who meet physical requirements should be able to do the job. Well, the fact is that they DON’T have to meet the same physical requirements. A male Marine has to do a certain number of pull-ups more than his female counterpart -plus the fact that he’s probably hauling more weight up and down. Is the female just as qualified? No. They meet separate, and unequal, standards.