The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on September 10, 2015, 09:12:26 PM
-
mahatmakanejeeves (6,986 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141204398
Marine study finds women suffer more injuries, shoot less accurately than men
:naughty:
The study, an executive summary of which was released Thursday, was carried out as all the services prepare to submit recommendations to Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter this fall on whether any jobs should be kept closed to women. In a landmark decision in January 2013, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta rescinded a decades-old ban on women serving in combat jobs like infantry, but gave the services until this fall to research how they wanted to better integrate women and if any jobs should be kept closed.
But But... War on Women and shit!
angryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries. The lbe is bound to cause back and shoulder problems. I don't know about shooting cause I'm a dead shot....or I was.
OFFS, boots designed only for men? Uniforms designed only for men? They don't even wear LBE anymore, dumbass.
HassleCat (1,870 posts)
7. How surprising!
Men are larger and stronger than women, particularly in terms of upper body strength. But these are just averages. There are women who can do just as well as most of the men. It's not a question of how to integrate women into combat positions, but a question of how to integrate certain women into combat positions. Not all men qualify for combat infantry type assignments, and not all women will, either.
Common sense will not work with liberals. Barry will declare all MOSs open to anyone and lower the standards so it is 'fair'.
-
angryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries. The lbe is bound to cause back and shoulder problems. I don't know about shooting cause I'm a dead shot....or I was.
Dead shot? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Only dead shot the dummie did was shoot itself in the foot.
-
... boots ... designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries.
OK, if some one is an expert in this, I'm willing to be set straight, but I think this is pure BS. Stress fractures are just that. Due to repetitive and excessive stress. Likewise knee injuries.
Athletic shoe manufacturers sell the same series of running, trail, cross-training, etc. shoes to men and women. The Brooks "Transcend 2" running shoes I use are available in women's sizes. The Nike "Dual Fusion Trail" trail shoes I use are available in women's sizes. Brooks, Nike, etc. scale their products to fit men or women. Unless military boot manufacturers are incredibly stupid - literally incredibly - they know how to and do scale boots for women to women's sizes.
Prevention of injuries is as much or more conditioning as proper equipment. IF women in the military are injured more often than men, the most likely cause is their physical conditioning prior to entering the military. angryvet provided nothing to support either his implied claim, that women are injured more frequently, or his stated claim, that their equipment is wrongly designed. Absent that, I'd say he pulled his claims from his rectal regions.
-
OK, if some one is an expert in this, I'm willing to be set straight, but I think this is pure BS. Stress fractures are just that. Due to repetitive and excessive stress. Likewise knee injuries.
Athletic shoe manufacturers sell the same series of running, trail, cross-training, etc. shoes to men and women. The Brooks "Transcend 2" running shoes I use are available in women's sizes. The Nike "Dual Fusion Trail" trail shoes I use are available in women's sizes. Brooks, Nike, etc. scale their products to fit men or women. Unless military boot manufacturers are incredibly stupid - literally incredibly - they know how to and do scale boots for women to women's sizes.
Prevention of injuries is as much or more conditioning as proper equipment. IF women in the military are injured more often than men, the most likely cause is their physical conditioning prior to entering the military. angryvet provided nothing to support either his implied claim, that women are injured more frequently, or his stated claim, that their equipment is wrongly designed. Absent that, I'd say he pulled his claims from his rectal regions.
No need for expertise. You're right. It's pure bullshit.
From (D)Ummies
...as usual.
-
[quoteangryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries. The lbe is bound to cause back and shoulder problems. I don't know about shooting cause I'm a dead shot....or I was.[/quote]
It has nothing to do with the boots they are wearing, DUche, and EVERYTHING to do with the amount of weight being carried. Infantry and Special Forces are glorified pack mules.. We carry everything to sustain ourselves for 72 hours on our backs. That means it's mostly ammunition, batteries, and a little food.
FM 3-21.10 (That would be the Infantry Rifle Company manual) states that soldiers should not carry more than 30 percent of their bodyweight or 72 lbs, whicher is greater.
I'll do the math for you DUche, that means a woman whose weight is 130 lbs should only carry 39 lbs and be at 30%. 30 pounds is approximately the weight of the IOTV, so she's already at her max weight without a weapon, or combat load.
If I move up and give her the maximum load of 72 pounds, that is 55 percent of her body weight. An average man in the infantry weighs 160 pounds at least. 72 pounds for the man will be only 45 percent of his body weight, he can carry it longer without tiring, fatigue or other issues. ten percent may not sound like a lot, but when you are walking 12 miles or more, it makes a HUGE difference.
So in summary DUche, it isnt the boots, its the amount of weight they are carrying. boots will only do so much. Stop pretending like you have a valid point to make, sit in the corner and color. :bigbird:
-
Thanks 98ZJ and Ray! I'm a life-long civilian, and am kind of on the margins of the running community - i.e. very little knowledge - but that post rang loudly of stupid. I have a running friend who has stress fractures and Achilles tears, and I'm certain she has excellent running/trail shoes. Her injuries are not due to her shoes, but the kinds of races - and how frequently - she's been doing the last several months.
-
[quoteangryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries. The lbe is bound to cause back and shoulder problems. I don't know about shooting cause I'm a dead shot....or I was.
It has nothing to do with the boots they are wearing, DUche, and EVERYTHING to do with the amount of weight being carried. Infantry and Special Forces are glorified pack mules.. We carry everything to sustain ourselves for 72 hours on our backs. That means it's mostly ammunition, batteries, and a little food.
FM 3-21.10 (That would be the Infantry Rifle Company manual) states that soldiers should not carry more than 30 percent of their bodyweight or 72 lbs, whicher is greater.
I'll do the math for you DUche, that means a woman whose weight is 130 lbs should only carry 39 lbs and be at 30%. 30 pounds is approximately the weight of the IOTV, so she's already at her max weight without a weapon, or combat load.
If I move up and give her the maximum load of 72 pounds, that is 55 percent of her body weight. An average man in the infantry weighs 160 pounds at least. 72 pounds for the man will be only 45 percent of his body weight, he can carry it longer without tiring, fatigue or other issues. ten percent may not sound like a lot, but when you are walking 12 miles or more, it makes a HUGE difference.
So in summary DUche, it isnt the boots, its the amount of weight they are carrying. boots will only do so much. Stop pretending like you have a valid point to make, sit in the corner and color. :bigbird:
Here is information straight from a WaPo article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/09/10/marine-experiment-finds-women-get-injured-more-frequently-shoot-less-accurately-than-men/?tid=sm_fb (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/09/10/marine-experiment-finds-women-get-injured-more-frequently-shoot-less-accurately-than-men/?tid=sm_fb)
A physiological assessment carried out by the University of Pittsburgh’s Neuromuscular Research Laboratory found that the average man in the experimental integrated unit weighed 178 pounds with 20 percent body fat, while the average woman weighed 142 pounds with 24 percent body fat.
Using those numbers, an average woman could carry a load of 42.6 pounds and not be encumbered according to Army Doctrine. Her average male counterpart could carry up to 53.4 pounds. If they were to go to the max recommended load of 72 pounds, the male would be carrying 40 percent of his bodyweight, the female would be carrying 50 percent of their bodyweight.
as an extreme, I list the weight of a Javelin gunner, carrying a load of 20 pounds in his web gear, a 10 pound rifle(with optics and lasers), up to 30 pounds of body armor, and a 35 pound packing list (food, water, spare ammunition, and finally the 45 pound Javelin missile and tracker. That is 135 pounds of gear (95 PERCENT of the average female's bodyweight as opposed to 75 percent of the Average male's) being carried for long distances. If you don't believe that the average woman won't break down, I want some of what you are smoking. :stoner:
Over time, women WILL get more stress fractures and injuries related to carrying excessive weight for long distances. It WILL happen, and then we as a nation are obligated to pay for their injuries, since it was service-related. Why are we going to allow them to do something we KNOW will lead to injuries? Oh that's right... So they can feel better about themselves... PARTICIPATION TROPHIES FOR ALL!! :censored: :banghead: :argh:
-
angryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men.
Fixed!
(http://15ff3995018c96c3d251-c244da9c488f4c6979035312792c51ef.r7.cf2.rackcdn.com/product-hugerect-252494-90947-1413528455-ccb543f862e20cc882b496afb3f61cb2)
-
Fixed!
(http://15ff3995018c96c3d251-c244da9c488f4c6979035312792c51ef.r7.cf2.rackcdn.com/product-hugerect-252494-90947-1413528455-ccb543f862e20cc882b496afb3f61cb2)
Oh no you dint. :rotf: :lmao: :salutearmy:
-
Only libs need studies to refute what they should know to be common knowledge.
-
Hi5, Sadly they need it spelled out for them in black and white, and... RACIST!!!ELEBINTY!!!! would be their only reply. Shifting the goalposts Lucy-style seems to be one of their specialties.
-
Smaller stature and bones + same minimum combat load = more injuries. Duh.
-
Smaller stature and bones + same minimum combat load = more injuries. Duh.
It's too bad it's not that obvious to libs in power.
Or maybe what's obvious obstructs the agenda.
-
You can tell a lot about a woman just by the shoes she wears, for example if they are behind her ears then she likes you. :-)
-
This thread is racist, and I'll tell you why...
Serena Williams, the best athlete ever...unless you are a racist, lost.
I can't understand this probably because of white privilege, even though I am black...in protest of the current administration.
That is all, for now.
-
Well Now the Secretary of the Navy has thrown the Commandant of the Marine Corps under the bus:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable (http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable)
"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," he said in an interview with NPR.
"When you start out with that mindset, you're almost presupposing the outcome," he said.
Gee Ray, Where have I seen something like that before? Oh YEAH GLOBAL WARMING!
So when the study doesn't fit the narrative, you will just modify it until it does Ray? Words cannot describe how angry I am right now...
-
Fixed!
(http://15ff3995018c96c3d251-c244da9c488f4c6979035312792c51ef.r7.cf2.rackcdn.com/product-hugerect-252494-90947-1413528455-ccb543f862e20cc882b496afb3f61cb2)
What part of men and women are different don't you understand? As a woman, all I need is to be able to shoot someone coming at me. At home, this can be achieved with a shotgun. Point in the direction of the threat and shoot. You idiots don't need to worry about who the hell is a better shot. Female Marines don't. They're Marines, just like the men and neither they nor the male Marines think of them as inferior. You have no understanding of the culture at all so STFU.
Cindie
-
Fixed!
(http://15ff3995018c96c3d251-c244da9c488f4c6979035312792c51ef.r7.cf2.rackcdn.com/product-hugerect-252494-90947-1413528455-ccb543f862e20cc882b496afb3f61cb2)
PS: I'd kill (a DUmmie) for those shoes! I'd love to wear them to the airport the next time my son comes home on leave. He's used to me being embarrassingly weird.
Cindie
-
Dead shot? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Only dead shot the dummie did was shoot itself in the foot.
The DUmmy's wife confirms that he is a dead shot, as do the three children who look like the mailman.
-
PS: I'd kill (a DUmmie) for those shoes! I'd love to wear them to the airport the next time my son comes home on leave. He's used to me being embarrassingly weird.
Cindie
If you do, Cindie, I expect to see pictures.
:thumbs:
-
Well Now the Secretary of the Navy has thrown the Commandant of the Marine Corps under the bus:
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable (http://thehill.com/policy/defense/marine-corps/253361-navy-secretary-rejects-report-showing-female-marines-less-capable)
Gee Ray, Where have I seen something like that before? Oh YEAH GLOBAL WARMING!
So when the study doesn't fit the narrative, you will just modify it until it does Ray? Words cannot describe how angry I am right now...
Being pretty sure what the outcome will be is a very different mindset from gaming the design of the study. This "gaming" probably consisted of being sure the mixed unit had a fair number of female members. This would result in reduced unit performance by one or more of the following reasons (and maybe more than occur to my mind):
* The women, being smaller, nevertheless carried as much as the men, resulting in unit members being injured or excessively tired;
* The women, being smaller, didn't carry as much as the men, forcing the men to carry more, resulting in unit members being excessively tired;
* The women, being smaller, didn't carry as much as the men, resulting in the unit being less well supplied, reducing unit performance.
Playing PC social-experiment games with the armed forces will eventually have another predictable result: soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen will be killed as a consequence of the games!
-
Smaller stature and bones + same minimum combat load = more injuries. Duh.
How dare you throw Human Physiology against teh wymmyns.!!!!1111eleBiNty!!!11
-
Being pretty sure what the outcome will be is a very different mindset from gaming the design of the study. This "gaming" probably consisted of being sure the mixed unit had a fair number of female members. This would result in reduced unit performance by one or more of the following reasons (and maybe more than occur to my mind):
* The women, being smaller, nevertheless carried as much as the men, resulting in unit members being injured or excessively tired;
* The women, being smaller, didn't carry as much as the men, forcing the men to carry more, resulting in unit members being excessively tired;
* The women, being smaller, didn't carry as much as the men, resulting in the unit being less well supplied, reducing unit performance.
Playing PC social-experiment games with the armed forces will eventually have another predictable result: soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen will be killed as a consequence of the games!
I have zero doubts that the exercise was conducted, under strict orders, with each and every Marine carrying the identical base load and 782 gear for weapon issued.
"When you start out with that mindset, you're almost presupposing the outcome," he said.
Complete and utter bullshit. Also, exactly what I would expect from a bureaucrat weenie who wouldn't have the slightest idea what it is like to shoot and move under any circumstance, much less a full load.
Imagine that. Mud Marines, who've seen it live and in color, telling you what will happen.
Heresy!!!!!!!!!!!!!
angryvet (90 posts)
2. yes...one reason is they are wearing boots and equipment designed for men. The design of the boot causes women to have stress fractures and knee injuries. The lbe is bound to cause back and shoulder problems. I don't know about shooting cause I'm a dead shot....or I was.
....says the MACALCE kommando who spent the majority of his 4-year career bitching about the breakfast bar at the Best Western. :bird:
-
FM 3-21.10 (That would be the Infantry Rifle Company manual) states that soldiers should not carry more than 30 percent of their bodyweight or 72 lbs, whicher is greater.
I'll do the math for you DUche, that means a woman whose weight is 130 lbs should only carry 39 lbs and be at 30%. 30 pounds is approximately the weight of the IOTV, so she's already at her max weight without a weapon, or combat load.
You're forgetting one critical thing, maybe two.
The DUmmie women look at their bathroom scales and think they should not have any problem carrying 75 pounds, let alone 100 pounds, that being closer to 30% of their body weight. :rofl: