Poll: 17 percent of Marines would quit if women are moved into combat positions

[mystery-ak]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/poll-17-percent-of-marines-would-quit-if-women-are-moved-into-combat-positions/article/2520291

Poll: 17 percent of Marines would quit if women are moved into combat positions
February 1, 2013 | 2:54 pm | Modified: February 1, 2013 at 3:00 pm

Charlie Spiering
Commentary Staff Writer
The Washington Examiner


According to a Marine Corps survey of 53,000 Marines, 17 percent of male Marine respondents said they would likely leave the Corps if women move into combat positions.

The results of the poll were released to The Associated Press this morning.

According to the Associated Press, male Marines listed fears of being falsely accused of sexual harassment, fraternization, other Marines getting preferential treatment, and having to deal with pregnancy or personal issues that could affect the unit before they are sent to the battlefield.

Four percent of female marines said that they would consider leaving if the ban was lifted, but 31 percent of female respondents say they would be interested in moving into a combat position.

[Oceander]

Each Marine should treated as exactly that - a Marine - without preferences for anyone.  It seems to me, being a civilian and all and looking in from the outside, that there is a single ideal - a Platonic Ideal - of the "Marine" and that the goal of the Marine Corps as a whole is for each individual to strive to achieve that ideal as closely as possible.  In other words, there are no hyphenated Marines.

If the Corps holds true to that ideal - that every member must meet the same requirements, no matter who, or what, each member is - then "allowing" women to hold combat positions should be a non-issue:  if an individual woman can achieve the goal of being a "Marine," then - it seems to me - she deserves to be treated with the same respect, and given the same duties, obligations, and honors as are given to each and every other Marine who happens to be a man.  To do anything less is do denigrate - it seems to me - what it means to be a Marine.

If 17% of the current crop of Marines (pardon the elision of the term "corps") would quit if women are moved into combat positions, then - it seems to me - they really aren't Marines in the first place, and the Corps would ultimately be better off without them.

But that's just the two cents' worth from a civilian who is now too old to sign on with any branch of the military, so if it seems to others to be not worth a plug nickel - or one of Obama's "promises" - then so be it.

[DCPatriot]

Since when can a Marine just up and "quit"?

There's no resigning before you fulfill your term......which YOU signed up for.

[PzLdr]

Since when can a Marine just up and "quit"?

There's no resigning before you fulfill your term......which YOU signed up for.

The services are far more willing to let you take a general and walk these days. And I've already read remarks attributed to very senior officers telling troops [could be Marines, could be Army], that if they don't want to get with the program they should leave.

[PzLdr]

Each Marine should treated as exactly that - a Marine - without preferences for anyone.  It seems to me, being a civilian and all and looking in from the outside, that there is a single ideal - a Platonic Ideal - of the "Marine" and that the goal of the Marine Corps as a whole is for each individual to strive to achieve that ideal as closely as possible.  In other words, there are no hyphenated Marines.

If the Corps holds true to that ideal - that every member must meet the same requirements, no matter who, or what, each member is - then "allowing" women to hold combat positions should be a non-issue:  if an individual woman can achieve the goal of being a "Marine," then - it seems to me - she deserves to be treated with the same respect, and given the same duties, obligations, and honors as are given to each and every other Marine who happens to be a man.  To do anything less is do denigrate - it seems to me - what it means to be a Marine.

If 17% of the current crop of Marines (pardon the elision of the term "corps") would quit if women are moved into combat positions, then - it seems to me - they really aren't Marines in the first place, and the Corps would ultimately be better off without them.

But that's just the two cents' worth from a civilian who is now too old to sign on with any branch of the military, so if it seems to others to be not worth a plug nickel - or one of Obama's "promises" - then so be it.

First off, the Marines [and the Army] will lessen the requirements so women can make the cut. They've done it before.  Then they will punish any superior who DOESN'T make sure the women are doing well [See: Kara Hultgren].  Then they'll try to give them the least demanding jobs within the MOS they can.

Second, successful military units have a unit cohesion and esprit de corps that adding women to the mix won't enhance. Almost ALL women aren't going to be able to drag their 200 lb. squadmate out of danger when he's wounded. Hell, most won't be able to hump a full combat load for a couple of days running. So causing massive disruption to the combat arms for a handful of women seems counterproductive.  But it is oh so PC.

And males are hardwired to protect women, even in this brave new world. And that's not even getting into the whole 20 yr. old testosterone fueled male thing. If I was in now as a young man [I was an Army tanker], and they put females in my tank, I'd leave, too. The military is an instrument of policy. It makes other people do what they don't want to do because the alternative is diasterous. It is neither a sociological petri dish, nor a jobs training program, a fact that has eluded too many of our leaders and too much of our society for far too long. 

[Atomic Cow]

This is all about getting rid of anyone who might be opposed to Obama.  Within 4 years, he will have the military at his command to do his bidding, because the patriots will have already left or been forced out.