http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/21/m arine-corps-will-allow-w

Depends on how many pushups, I guess.

File: faggot marines.png (314KB, 600x563px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 600x563px

It's been here for some time. Next to male officers dating and smooching at the goddam Officer's Ball, girls not doing all their exercises is pretty weak tea.

>>32422808
you can do push ups or pull ups. If you do push ups you can not max out the PFT.

also new rule coming down the pipe if you score 285 or higher on the PFT/CFT you are no longer required to follow height and weight standards so long as you don't exceed them to an egregiously negative point. I.E. obviously fat as fuck

female pull ups or push ups will be mandatory next year and no flex arm hang

>>32422808
It really doesn't though, why lower the standards when women can't meet them?

>>32422833
It's not lowering them. Flexed Arm Hang was a joke and the pullup max was already low. It just gave incentive for women to not even try.

Now with the pushups you can only get a maximum for 70 points (out of the normal 100) for doing the maximum number. For women that is 50, for men 87. So for women who cannot do 7 pullups and can do 50 pushups, that is the better option (current pullup max for women is going up to 10 in January, previous 8).

If you want to talk shit about PT standards, the change from flexed arm hang to pushups is not where you want to look. That said there is a pretty big problem with women being shitbags in regard to PT, but whatever. Good female Marines will excel and bad ones will flunk.

File: 1480925118329.jpg (514KB, 700x498px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 700x498px

>>32422815

Imagine a modern, politically correct, forced equality focuses instead of performance focused hugbox western army having to fight a conventional war with someone like China, N. Korea or Russia.

We will be relying on technolgical and mechanical superiority for the reduced quality of troops due to this un-martial system that we've developed.

>>32423432
Does it mean we get waifus in power armor?

>>32423432

the south koreans could roll over the norks without breaking a sweat. what makes you think a hugbox couldn't?

>>32422798

EQUALITY OR BUST. Is that really too difficult a concept to understand? If they can't perform equally to everyone else, fail them.

>>32423637
The South Korean military isn't a hugbox. I know the Norks are largely a meme and logistics would prevent them from any meaningful sustained OP. But what fucking use would a USMC female 'infantryperson', who can do 2 pull ups with shitty form and just less that full range of motion in PT kit with no weight while struggling, be in an actual conventional fight or any situation where the old requirements of soldiers (endurance, physical and mental toughness, fitness, resistance to injury, able and conditioned to put up with hardship and hard physical work, lack of food, dehydration and so one) actually mattered again?

I'm not saying it's just the women either, males are getting as bad. The hugbox makes everything and everyone weak and unsuited for combat. Everyone who's not personally motivated, separate to the military, to be fit, competent, disciplined and, for lack of a less dramatic term, a warrior. And those people are a relatively small percentage, they're the guys that do well, succeed, and make up the bulk units like SF. The rest of the dross need to be kept efficient by strict military standards, take that away and you get pure shit. I've seen it in my unit, and infantry battalion.

>>32423432

But Russia had women fighting in combat back when smoking a cigarette in public was considered a radical feminist move in the US.

>>32423799
Russia was fighting tooth and nail for its continued existence.

>>32423808

And it still has women in the army.

>>32423799
Conscripted soldiers were expected to preform to a different standard, they compensated for this with huge numbers whenever possible. And it's likely those women were more used to hardship than most people in 1st world western nations today. I would be inclined to believe they were physically fitter, or at least more rubust, that the average failing woman soldier of today, but I can't prove it and it may well not be the case. After all that's purely on an individual level.

Still, I wonder how they did on long marches with all their equiptment? Probably not as well as the men. And I doubt the soviets would have used women, especially in combat roles, if they were not in a state of total war with their backs against the wall.

If women are competent soldiers why do they fail the standards that have been in place for men for literally generations and need revised standards of their own, or even no standards at all?

The integrated IDF units are also the worst preforming.

>>32423311
>Good female Marines will excel and bad ones will flunk.

And this will still be considered sexist since maybe 5% of females in any branch can be considered "good females".

>Good female Marines will excel and bad ones will flunk.
No. Things will just be revised until the bad ones pass and are accepted too. Because muh equality.

>>32423799
not in any sort of close combat requiring physical strength. They were pilots, snipers, medics etc.
They were never expected to throw around grenades and bayonet people.
there is a difference between storming a beach with 50kg of equipment and waiting for some kraut to pop his head out of his foxhole for a sec.

There was one Woman's Death Battalion (Russian version of Sturmtruppen units) at end of WWI, but that was more of a propaganda that anything and only fight they ever did was a losing one to a handful of commmie sailors

>>32422798
MO guard reporting, Evans is pretty hot senpai. Armed forces women will never change, this isn't just a Marine Corps(e) struggle. Same bullshit, different day.

>>32423923
>They were never expected to throw around grenades and bayonet people.
Except, you know, the entire female battalion that they had which fought in the first world war and participated in the Kerensky Offensive and actually gained ground against the Germans.

>>32423953
(you)(me?)
I miss the days where word filters were highlighted (senpai)alamborghini

>>32422798
>Three pull-ups or a 15-second flexed arm hang
But those are so fucking easy. I mean I'm a guy so my shoulders aren't naturally weak like girls' shoulders are but the majority of girls in my high school PE class could do 15 seconds arm hang. My 61-year old mom can do five pull-ups if I remember correctly. How the fuck can half of the female marine recruits not do it?

File: 358184.jpg (217KB, 780x1026px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 780x1026px

>>32423799
>But Russia had women fighting in combat
That was a propaganda stunt. Damn you westerners, how the fuck you manage to be so gullible and clueless?

>>32423923
>They were pilots, snipers
They weren't. Communists might have been delusional about many things but they had dismantled their ideas of "liberated and equal woman", dissolution of a gender roles and family unit in the early 20's as soon as they realized where things were heading.

File: roza_shanina_1.jpg (171KB, 1079x1600px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1079x1600px

>>32423991
> they weren't
you are correct that dissolution of sexual morals and gender roles disappeared from the commie agenda soon after the revolution
you are entirely wrong in saying there weren't women in the combat arms
Night Witches, the sniper girls, riverine navy crews, even tankies (Dmitri Loza even tells, in passing, the story of a husband and wife couple who respectively commanded and drove a tank from the Ukraine all the way to Berlin in WWII)

>>32423987
your 61 year old mum is literally beast-mode
most women can't do one

File: 1481620207001.png (1018KB, 1190x1206px) Image search: [Google]

1018KB, 1190x1206px

>>32424087
>you are entirely wrong in saying there weren't women in the combat arms
The examples you listed are miniscule exceptions that existed purely for propaganda purposes and had no effect on war's course, unlike their civilian sisters who were working day and night on the factories and fields, providing the army with vehicles, shells, ammunition and food.

The point is, women weren't and, thank God, still isn't allowed to join the combat units and take part in actual combat because neither Soviet nor Russian society wasn't THAT out of touch with reality.

>>32423987
12 year olds can do those fucking requirements

>>32422798
The US Army was months away from adding pull ups to a new PT test a few years ago when they realized almost no females could meet a pull up minimum and tossed out the whole test.

The simple fact of the matter is only a few woman can match even average male upper body strength.

Clearly the M.O. from the Department of Social Engineering is to ensure more Americans die than usual in the next Jew war

>>32424804
>exceptions that existed purely for propaganda purposes and had no effect on war's course
Ahh good ol' /k/, nothing like shitting on people who actually fault because it's contrary to your feels.

Those female units in the Soviet Union weren't made for propaganda purposes, and while it's fair to say they didn't effect the course of the war, that's fair to say about pretty much any individual fighting unit over the course of WW2, and more importantly ignores that they did in fact stand up and fight in defense of their nation.

File: 1478071099430.jpg (57KB, 320x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 320x480px

>>32424945
>Those female units in the Soviet Union weren't made for propaganda purposes
Please tell me more about my own country's history.

>did in fact stand up and fight in defense of their nation
So? My point being that women, contrary to seemingly popular belief, weren't allowed to join combat roles in SU's military.

On a side note it's surreal how half a century-old Soviet propaganda still affects the minds of young westerners most of whom didn't even get to witness the Soviet Union. But even now, more than 70 years later, pictures with lovely women in uniform holding rifles do their job. Makes me wonder how many other stories form other wars are in fact just vehicles for propaganda.

File: 1481041686952.png (99KB, 234x231px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 234x231px

>>32426575
>my country's propaganda wasn't propaganda! My country's propaganda says so!

>>32426575
So you don't know Russian history then, gotcha.

>>32426983
Not that guy but

>smug anime jpg

Discarded

>>32423432
Are they even letting the women near anything dangerous?
Like, a woman trudging around in the desert with a pack and a rifle ain't so bad for nobody except her squad, but it could be worse if you stick her behind a cannon or the controls of an APC or whatever.
I'm not gonna mention planes or tanks, since they'd have to go through some real schooling there before being let loose (r-right?).

>>32423991
>That was a propaganda stunt
For who? Who the fuck are they impressing with that "propaganda"?

>>32422815
That magazine every time

>HOO AH DONT SHOOT YOURSELF DEVIL DOG
>MARINDS ARE TOUGHER THAN BEARS

>>32422798
stop being retarded
there is no more flexed arm hang and you can only get 70 of 100 points if you (male or female) do pushups. Females can attempt either.
its tougher.
also
>flexed arm hangs are easy
lols

>>32426983
>>32426983
im not the russian dude but i'll fix it for you since your reading comprehension seems to be as shitty as the anime you watch.

>my country's propaganda was propaganda! My perspective on my country's history says so!

>>32427208
the fucking rest of the world's proletariat that isnt jumping on the communist train as soon as they can.

You know the nazis werent the only socialists in europe shitting propaganda on the rest of the world in order to acquire world domination or whatever ressembles it the most... right?

>>32427321
They are pretty easy.

>>32427321
This. they made it slightly easier to mid score, but even harder to max out.

Which will definitely be adhered too in the Infantry and other MOSs with difficult cutting.scores.

>>32423976
No they actually didn't. Modern reports clarify that they were basically combat ineffective

File: 1482174602366.jpg (88KB, 722x960px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 722x960px

>>32423432
This post is so retarded I can't even tell what it's trying to say. Are you seriously implying that better rifle + tanks = no need for infantry? Are you implying that knowing how to use a computer + a feminist yelling at you all day to not stare-rape or fart-rape them or whatever = better soldiers?

Let me phrase this a better way: Are you retarded?

>>32427044
>Acquires his knowledge about Russian history from staged photos of qts with funs
>Implies that he posses some unique insights into life during Soviet era

>>32428061
jesus its like every anime picture poster failed the most basic reading comprehension classes.

Im not that guy but i'll explain it slowly.

He is arguing that in a scenario where a politically correct government enforces an equalitarian army (men, women, trans, etc.), the troops would be so innefective that the only reliable asset in the military would be its technologic or mechanical superiority (if there was one).

He is not saying that they would be better and would win solely relying on technology, he is saying that it would be the only thing that could grant an advantage with such a polluted human resource.

>can't do three pullups
>I can fucking do 12 and barely ever work out
WHAT THE FUCK

>>32427321
No its easier, the flexed arm hang wasn't an option to some mos just pull ups, now you can choose pushups instead of having to do pull UP's