Posted: Nov 19, 2014 1:56 pm
by Nicko
Sendraks wrote:
Nicko wrote:Apparently she is going to take another run at it. Now that she has first-hand experience of what the course entails, she hopefully has a better idea of what she needs to aim at.

Well good luck to her. I was under the impression that they didn't allow people to retake the test though?

Nicko wrote:I'd stop at agreeing with Santangelo's suggestion that the lower standards for physical strength/endurance/speed applied to women in basic training constitutes discrimination. There are plenty of jobs in the military that don't require extraordinary levels of these attributes. Administrative roles, for example, can often be functionally indistinguishable from an office job in "civvy street". To hold female recruits to the same level of - for example - raw strength as male recruits would unfairly discriminate against them.


I concur. I don't think the lower standards are discriminatory. At the same time, for the higher standards which exist for select services like the IFC, there should be equal opportunity in training for all military personnel to train to meet that grade, if they want to.

Nicko wrote:That is the - dare I use the word - lesser physical standard to which women are held exists to prevent discrimination.


Which again is one of the quirks of equality. You can treat people as equals by recognising they are different, but making accommodations so they are not treated differently or also by making sure that they are not treated differently. There isn't a hard and fast way of delivering equality.


:thumbup:

Sendraks wrote:
Nicko wrote:Is PT in the USMC actually segregated to the extent Santangelo has characterised it? I mean, I know that there are separate women's groups for PT, but would she have actually been prevented from training with the guys?

Hard to say from the article. I get the impression that such a thing is not encouraged or advertised, as opposed to being proactively deterred.


So she was pretty much in the same boat as the male applicants to the IFC: kept in the dark as to the particulars of the course, knowing only that she needed to be pretty fucking awesome to pass and that it was up to her (just as it was up to a male applicant) to become fucking awesome on her own time.

My point was that information as to the various grades of performance in the USMC is not exactly classified (I don't think, anyway). Santangelo would have been fully aware of what the standards were for the top group in PT. She would have been fully aware that not all of the men in this top group would be able to pass the IFC. If she could not have inferred from this that she needed to be performing at least in the range of that top group, I would venture to suggest that she does not deserve to have the lives of other Marines placed in her care.

To reiterate though: it is not clear to me that there were any actual barriers placed between Santangelo and the training she clearly required to raise herself to the required standard. If the only barrier that exists is that no one actually told her she could start running (etc.) with the guys, then she hasn't got a leg to stand on. If, on the other hand, it's actually forbidden for a female Marine to train with higher-performing male Marines then I think she's got a point.