September 11, 2015
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus on Friday criticized a Marine Corps study that showed that female Marines in a mixed unit did not perform as well as men in several key areas.The
Performance of the female participants in these trials was not only below that of their male counterparts, but were sub-par over all.
The study showed that females in the unit were injured twice as often as men, were less accurate in shooting and were not as good at removing wounded troops off the battlefield.The Secretary of the Navy was disinclined to accept the conclusions from this test period.
(Navy Secretary Ray Mabus) argued that other studies, including one by the Center for Naval Analysis, say there are ways to mitigate gaps in performance "so you have the same combat effectiveness, the same lethality, which is crucial."
Mabus said some of the report's conclusions were based on generalizations and not the women's performance.
"Part of the study said women tend not to be able to carry as heavy a load for as long, but there were women who went through the study who could," he said.
"They started out with a fairly largely component of the men thinking this is not a good idea, and women will not be able to do this," [Mabus] said in n interview with NPR.
"When you start out with that mindset, you're almost presupposing the outcome," he said.
The thing about "tests" is, you don't start out with a pre-determined conclusion. You start out with a hypothesis, and the test results are intended to prove or disprove the hypothesis. It's a simple little thing called The Scientific Method.
The Secretary of the Navy, however, has it all back-assward. He started out with a "truth", and then directed his subordinates to validate .. not prove, but validate .. the truth which he had pre-ordained.
You know when your boss says PROVE THAT X =Y and your job depends on 'your performance', not on 'the truth'??? That's the way it works in the military. And even if it doesn't "work" .... well, if you have ever served in the military, you know,
But here, the truth was tested and rejected. By "The Boss". Only because he is "The Boss".
Doesn't speak well of the military, does it?
Doesn't say much for The Boss, either.
6 comments:
The truth is that there will be total gender and promotion equality in all branches of the military. By keeping women out of the combat arms they are being denied advancement and promotional opportunities. Also it fosters the belief that women are not the complete and total equals of men. Therefore, progressives and feminist demand that the various services open all their branches up to women, this includes the combat arms and special operations. The military must halt it's war on women. Thus civilian leadership of the military has decreed.
I am so happy that I retired when I did. Political correctness and idealogical agendas have taken over our military leaders.
Fundamental transformation of the American military is now almost a done deal.
Sorry for the rant, but...
So much fail in Mabus' responses....
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus on Friday criticized a Marine Corps study that showed that female Marines in a mixed unit did not perform as well as men in several key areas.
"Several key areas"? No. Try most areas. As in, 93 out of 134 areas tested, or around 2/3.
"Part of the study said women tend not to be able to carry as heavy a load for as long, but there were women who went through the study who could," he said.
True, but you don't build good policy based on exceptions. You build good policy based on generalities, and make exceptions to that policy for exception-worthy individuals.
But he would know that, if the goal were to build good policy.
And my favorite part:
"And part of the study said we're afraid because women get injured more frequently that over time, women will break down more, that you'll begin to lose your combat effectiveness over time.
"That was not shown in the study, that was an extrapolation based on injury rates," he said.
First, I just *love* the comparison between women and lemon cars: they "will break down more". Way to sell your point to the feminists, dude.
Second, there's no hard data on how often women in "elite" combat units get injured; they've never been allowed in. There's literally no data set! So the study authors did the most reasonable thing possible (at least to we rational people): they generalized based on current differences in injury rates. These are known facts with known patterns, so extrapolating from them is reasonable.
I'm guessing the good Secretary of the Navy would rather they had extrapolated from, what ... wishful thinking?
Some will say that denying women the rightto serve in the combat arms and special operations is akin to denying them the right to vote. Women comprise 50% of our population.
@ Anonymous, 9/17 0643:
Some could say that, but they'd be wrong. Women comprise 50% of our general population, but they are still a marked minority in the military (14.5%); the fact is, fewer women than men choose to serve in the armed forces.
I, for one, am all for allowing women to serve in combat arms and special ops, if they can meet the same qualifications and requirements as a man. As it stands now, very few women can. I see no sense in Sec. Ray Mabus lowering standards (and harming combat effectiveness) to pursue some misguided sense of "equality" instead of doing his real job, which is to ensure America has the finest fighting forces on the planet.
Post a Comment