E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Luke Sharrett / Redux Pictures file
A Marine second lieutenant hangs on an obstacle course during the Marine Corps' Infantry Officer Course in Quantico, Va. on July 6. Beginning in September, women officer volunteers will participate in the course as part of a study to gauge the feasibility of allowing female Marines to serve in more extensive combat roles.
Come September, a small group of young female Marines will break through one of the last bastions of macho in the U.S. military. They’ll be the first class of female officers to take part in the grueling Infantry Officer Course in Quantico, Va., a test of both physical fitness and mental will that prepares the corps’ future platoon leaders.
All of these women will be volunteers, and their training will be closely watched. The new coed class has sparked suggestions that such training could lead to integrating women in the Marine infantry, with some saying they “would make excellent grunts.”
But at least one female Marine officer, a former college hockey player and battle-tested engineering unit commander still on active duty, says placing women in infantry units is just a bad idea.
Courtesy of USMC
Capt. Katie Petronio says women have no place in the Marine Corps infantry.
“Infantry is one of those fields we need to leave alone.” Marine Capt. Katie Petronio told msnbc.com.
Petronio was just back from Afghanistan last year — where she worked shoulder to shoulder with infantrymen — when she heard people arguing that it was a violation of rights to restrict women from combat. The rights advocates missed the point, she said.
“It would just keep me up at night when I’d heard these bleeps or opinions,” Petronio said. “I felt if I didn’t do anything about it that my silence was consent and if this would’ve have passed, I wouldn’t have done my due diligence in getting my point across.”
She was compelled to write what became a widely cited article in the privately published Marine Corps Gazette provocatively titled “Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal.”
The article details her personal experiences during deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, making the case that the physical rigors of infantry are not for women.
The Pentagon has changed some of its rules. Women will be permitted in crucial and dangerous jobs closer to the front lines. NBC's Jim Miklaszewski reports.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
“Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations,” she wrote, “and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?”
Even though she was a standout Bowdoin athlete and could bench press 145 pounds and squat 200 pounds, was ranked 4th out of a class of 52 in Officer Candidate School and excelled at Marine Corps fitness tests, Petronio's deployment in combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan took a brutal toll on her 5-foot-3-inch body.
Related: Pentagon's new rules deploy women closer to combat
In Iraq, she developed severe restless leg syndrome, and a spine injury pressed on her nerves. In Afghanistan she was the senior Marine in her engineering unit working 16-hour days for weeks at a time building patrol bases.
Courtesy of USMC
Marine Corps Capt. Katie Petronio, right, poses with children at Patrol Base Mateen, Afghanistan.
"By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change,” she wrote. “My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions.” She lost 17 pounds on an already lean body.
Her article has supporters and detractors, but Petronio said she’s just relating her own experience to avoid any sort of blanket policy that could end up putting lives in peril.
“People just think I’m just closed minded and I’m a sexist and I’m not looking to expand opportunities for females,” Petronio told msnbc.com. “And that is absolutely not true. There are a lot of jobs in the Marine Corps right now that could be open to females. My big point is there needs to be a distinct line when it comes to the infantry.”
The decades-long debate over changing roles of women in the military reached a turning point in 2011 when Congress directed the Pentagon to take a hard look at policies that restrict female service members. In February, the Defense Department relaxed some restrictions, moving women closer to combat, but a fuller review of combat jobs is under way.
It turns out that though women have fought and died in every American war, and many female troops performed with valor under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a lack of data to back any service-wide decision on which close-to-combat jobs would ultimately be open to them.
“We needed some data, some good recent Marine Corps data,” Maj. Shawn Haney, a Marine Corps spokeswoman, told msnbc.com. “There’s data from other services and other countries but we’re a little different.”
Even now, about 44 women across the Marine Corps are serving in jobs normally closed to women as part of the research program, Haney said.
The Iowa National Guard undergoes "Female Engagement Team" training prior to deploment to Afghanistan. Soldiers prepare themselves for cultural encounters with Afghan men and women played by actors in this video.
But whether women will join the ranks of grunts in the future is unclear.
“This has a lot do to with physical standards,” Haney said. “This is the Marine Corps. This isn’t JV. We've got to make sure we’re doing the right thing for the institution and the individual.”
As one female Marine told msnbc.com, "No one questions why there aren't any females in the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, etc. Olympic athletes are the elite of the elite. No one questions why the women compete against women and men against men. Those are great sports and achievements. But lives and missions aren't on the line. In our world, if you move slower one day, you don't get bumped off the medal stand, you could die or get someone else killed."
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- No charges for mother who abandoned severely disabled daughter at bar
- Sister gets text: 'The girl with this phone is dead'
- Drop the 'i' word? Debating the term 'illegal immigrant'
- San Bernardino becomes 3rd Calif. city in 2 weeks to file for bankruptcy protection
- Video: Teacher goes airborne on police pursuit
Leave a Comment:
“This is the Marine Corps. This isn’t JV." Seriously? It is those types of comments that show that we still haven't moved far enough with equality in the armed forces. I am retired Navy and female and I'm not sure that women should be there either. It isn't that many women couldn't handle it and haven't handled it but are the front lines the place for women? I understand that by not working on the front lines it can restrict women in advancement because they do not get the same experience as men but we talking about tough physical conditions that many women are just not up to. Some argue that ok, those that can should but do you want to be the only woman in a command on the front lines? We have had cases of rape by our own people. What would happen to a woman captured by some of these Muslims. I have been in the Middle East and even though we were covered completely they still looked at us like we were whores. Read history and see what happened to women during wartime, it was dreadful...truly dreadful and these were civilians. Women can and do a super job in the service and deserve the best but there is a time and place for everything and the rules aren't always equal and certainly other countries (men who shoot a woman 9 times in the back and head) do not have our same standards concerning women and our standards still need work.
The enemies of the Spartans also feared being captured...
If a woman wants to be a grunt and meets the same standards as her male counterpart then let her. I don't agree with the idea of women in direct combat. In part no doubt because I am a product of the fifties and was raised with the mentality of it is the mans job to protect the woman. I know that concept is outdated but at 61 years of age it is hard to get away from.
Well, at least you know the reasons you disagree with the notion of female combat troops. Knowing and understanding the "real" reasons behind people's own opinions is something few have mastered.
We as Americans no matter what size shape or form have the Right to do as we want WE ARE ALL EQUAL so give the women the Right if they want to Play GI Jane Let them play it wont last long
Nobody has the blanket right to do whatever they want. What kind of craziness is that?
With their faster reaction times and lower body weight, I would rather see women in air combat. By the way, 145lb bench and 200lb squat is what most guys warm up with and is, therefore, pathetic by male physical standards. Could she carry a 220lb comrade of the battlefield. I doubt it.
Actually, air combat can be one of the most physically grueling types of combat, especially with jet fighters.
NOT TO WORRY - only about 50% will get pregnant while in the front lines !
As long as a woman can pass the EXACT same tests the men, physical and psychological then, I have no problem with them serving in infantry however, this article mentions this heroic woman's 145 lbs bench press and 200 lbs squat as something superlative. Those weights would be my warm-up sets and I am very out of shape. Nothing against women but, most simply lack the muscle mass for heavy lifting.
I completed my Master's degree several years ago and my final paper was a statistical analysis on whether the opinion of having females in combat had changed in 50 years. I surveyed WWII vets and currently serving military pilots. My full belief was that the opinion would have indeed changed from a "No" to a "Yes." More importantly, I had the general belief that if a woman wanted to serve in combat and she was physically capable of passing the tests, she should be able to serve. At the end of my study, I discovered the opinion in 50 years had not changed. The consensus was "No, women should not serve in combat positions." I also received many valuable comments from both sides that led me to change my original position. It's not just a matter of the physical component. The addition of a female to a group of males immediately changes the dynamic of the group. The main focus of the males should be on the mission. If a female is present, the focus can be directed to the protection and concern over the female. The mission can be compromised.
No doubt that is true, however should we use men's protective stance as a reason to deny women the chance to serve in a combat capacity? Only through training and getting used to it will those attitudes change. You can't keep up a discriminatory law simply because of the attitudes of those that are doing the discriminating.
Double posted - edited to remove ... sorry.
Good point. Is it possible to change the natural inclination of ourselves?
so you asked WWII vets and cocky jockey-eyed pilots? <G> good survey. Hope the teach failed you on that report for not researching how to do a study.
Passed with flying colors. Thank you.
If women are physically capable according to the guidelines set (I am NOT for bending or changing guidelines) then hey, go for it. If their bodies deteriorate because of their service, that's up to them. If that is the price they feel is important to pay in order to defend their country, then go to it, I say.
This woman's experience is just that. Her experience. I appreciate her speaking out, and I do get her point, but she can't speak for anyone else's physical abilities.
Not every woman will deteriorate as quickly as she did. Not every woman CAN do what she did.
It needs to be on a case by case basis. If a woman can do the job the same as anyone else, great - in she goes! If she can't, no discrimination - she just can't do it. NBD!
Having women in the Infantry makes no sense to everyone except: 1. Women who want to be this generation's Shannon Faulkner (Google her if you're not familar with her story. SPOILER ALERT: It didn't end well.) and 2. People who have never served in the military and are opposed on principle to any kind of restrictions based on gender. Ask anyone else with knowledge of what the Infantry is asked to do and they will tell you that it is not a good idea. And to the women that want to be grunts, can you explain why?
Spoken like someone who has never really talked to people about what they like to do or don't like to do. Is it possible that women have the same likes and dislikes as men, is it possible they would like to make the same career choices? is it possible that they may decide to change their career later, just like men? Is it possible that they are just like men? is it? Why, yes it is. Not only is it possible, they ARE just like men in every respect except the physical. And in today's military, the physical part is not as necessary as it was say 30 years ago. why are we still stuck on all these retrograde chauvenistic neanderthal beliefs that keep us in the dark about people's true capabilities.
Funny you should mention Faulkner. She dropped out, unable to deal with the constant harassment she was dealt as the first female cadet at the Citadel. But since then, over 200 female cadets have graduated from that school. It's not always easy for the trailblazers, but their efforts can lead to change. The Citadel had to change, and the world didn't come to an end. Maybe it will be the same for the military.
Budro,
Our military is still very much on the ground and participating physically. Yes, technology has improved and there are many advancements but . . . our grunts? And our Army? They are still on the ground required to maintain physical contact with the enemy.
Budro221, you're one of the latter types that I was talking about, aren't you? Your opinion sounds like it was formed based on an overall belief that there shouldn't be any boundries based on gender. Philosophically, I agree with you 100%. Realistically, when it comes to women being Infantry soldiers, I don't think it applies. I would be interested in hearing from any women who want to join the Infantry. Why would you want to sleep in a hole, eat MREs out of a bag and not shower for days on end and bring close quarter violence to the enemy? I was a proud pogue and grateful to anyone who wants to be a grunt, I just don't understand why a woman would WANT to do it. I'm not being snarky Budro221, but if you're female, would YOU want to be an Infantry soldier?
If this woman had trouble and she could bench 145 and squat 200 which some guys couldn't even do than how would the average woman fair under those conditions.
Billy,
I am a ACE Certified Personal Trainer and I can guarantee you that combat marines that are doing there PT can easily exceed those weights. I am not sure where you can say "some guys couldn't even do"; unless you are referring to civilians. We gym rats warm up with this.
Hoops I'm 6'1 and 195 and go to the gym. I work out with a 45 plate on each side a total of 135. Don't squat much bad for my knees so I can't say if I could do 200. I am just saying that is pretty impressive for a girl.
What are you going to do when you gotta pee?
Do what you need to do, and hopefully, others will be mature.
Do you need a tutorial? guys unzip - women pull down their trousers (like when guys have to go no 2)
Sorry I went over your head with that al. Modesty goes out the window. Drop em and go. Is that better? Or you could go behind that building by yourself, and end up a POW.
Israel has women AND gays serving in all capacities in their military - and both have served with distinction, honor and bravery. Not everyone can be in the infantry or combat roles, but they should all be allowed to try.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces
Please do not even try to compare an israeli women with an american one in reguards to military service.There really is none.The american female soldier does not even come close.
overstated there, mutatedspecies. You have to put it in proper perspective. If the u.s. required everybody to do 2-4 years of service they would be equal, if not superior. However, you do make the point because in israel, all adults must serve a certain amount of time in military, all of them. And because they have been at war for more than 2,000 years, they tend to get better training right now. But you cannot sit there and compare 2 countries peoples under different circumstances and say one is better and one isn't... they're just different.
This is probably already stated elsewhere. But it doesn't seem like a good idea to employee soldiers who are very likely to be operating at less than peak for close to a week per month.
Sure, there are probably women out there physically/mentally capable of performing like a male marine grunt but there are even fewer who are capable of doing that and also not suffering from menstrual cycles.
Just doesn't seem like it's worth the money to go through all the testing and training of hundreds of women who apply to have only one or two a year actually qualify.
Well ... I wouldn't want to be on a female infantry person's bad side during that week - would you?? Perhaps the best time to launch counterattack.
I agree with al91206. Perhaps if we made sure that those women on their time of the month were in the most violent of places, most of the violence would be 'squashed'. Just sayin.
The birth control pill called Seasonale's main marketing point is that, while you're on it, you'll only have 4 periods a year. Problem solved.
The menstruating thing is really not that big an issue; it's really more a question of sheer size and strength. But if a woman can qualify, using the same standards as a guy, then let her try.
She is smart to know her own limitations. However, many men cannot do the job either. As we get fatter as a nation, more will not be able to fight. Draft them all and put them elsewhere they can best serve. BUT, add combat pay on top of rank and salary to make up for the risk of life and limb.
You got it "her own limitations" - she's speaking for herself, not for the thousands of women that do want to partake and maybe the hundreds that would qualify to become front line soldiers.
Lol, there hasn't been a draft in over 40 years dude.
.
Ok - We have a country where everyone wants to be equal in everything. I am cool with that - Why discriminate against anyone. If they want to die for their country - lets let them do it. I served in the Marines for 8 years - those women can do it especially if we soak their MREs in Durabol or Anadrol - they will be strong enough - might have mustache and sideburns in a couple of weeks
If they can meet the same requirements as the men, yes. If not, no. Simple as that...
Without sounding judgmental on the issue-there is a line between which kind of woman can handle the front lines. I am a very strong willed, opinionated, feisty woman; I am more tom-boyish than feminine. I can visualize myself on the front line but not my best friend. She would do great in the military but in a different department. I think if women want to be on the front line it would have to be determined on their overall mental state and additional attributes that would allow them to withstand the rigorous and strenuous activities that the front line offers. Bottom line I am not opposed to it but extensive therapy sessions to determine if any woman is capable of handling the situation; hell some men should not be on the front lines.
These mental standards you speak of are not put upon the men, why should they be put on women? I'm not disagreeing with you that they should be necessary though. But i am saying that the standards expected should be similar, if not equal.
The evaluation that I mention is for the purpose of determining if the woman is (lack of better words) a girly girl or a tom-boy. As I stated I am a tom-boy through and through; I cannot stand "chick-flicks", I love horror movies, I work construction-not just service but on a construction site, installing, I don't like to dress up or wear makeup. There are some women who are more than capable to pass the requirements for entering the military but are they still "girly-girls"? I also agree that there are some men that need a similar evaluation. So, really to answer your statement, if women want to be on the front lines, this process should take place and become a SOP for all.
Yes but are you ready to deal with the combination of full body fatigue, hypervigilance, mind-numbing boredom, and sense of imminent personal danger that accompanies every step and every second outside the wire? Because every grunt deals with these on every patrol. Then you have those adrenaline-fueled moments of sheer stark terror that strikes when bullets start whizzing by your face and the moment the face enters your crosshairs and the realization back in your hooch that you've just snuffed a human life from the earth. It's a wonder we're all not insane.
This woman could not cut it, so she thinks other women cannot? There are PLENTYof females that are not 5' 3" inches tall that are in excellent phusical condition that CAN dothe job. I served with many excellent women that would have made excellent infantry. It is a proven fact that female memebers of the military are often much more accurate shots than their male counterparts. Women in this country have fought for this right. Equal rights also mean equal responsibility.
You are correct about everything but the shooting. Women statistically have not been found to be any more or less accurate than men.
I think few women maybe could physically keep up. I think volunteer basic only. I am 5 ft and petite I would not want to be drafted or shoot women and kids. We are just made different how you going to carry your girl stuff around and get more of it in a combat zone. On the other hand right time of the month I probably could take out a villiage lol. Speaking as a women I really don't think it is a good idea. There are always the exception basic and should not rule out females completely. Some women are big as men and can kick butt.
Sorry to burst your bubble, brenda the blond bimbo with no brain, but the entire military has been voluntary since the Vietnam War. Nobody is forced to go, there is no draft, and hasn't been since i was a toddler, and most likely, since before you were even born.
Unnecessarily nasty, Bud.
As a former Marine Corps Infantry Officer I applaud the young Captains courage to state her beliefs, beliefs I wholeheartedly agree with. Her opinions are based on having served extensively in combat areas and therefore are beyond question. If any pseudo intellectual elitist or armchair feminist wish to question her I suggest they join the military, deploy to the sand box and see for themselves.
It should be case by case. Combat females s/b built like a Mack truck, not G.I. Jane.
If that's the case, there are a lot of men who should not be in there either, because they are not 'built like a Mack truck'. You ready to kick them out?
The military is not geared for making exceptions for individuals. This is a bad idea. Women are not going to make good grunts. Not now. Not ever. Ladies there are plenty of things you can do but this is not one of them.
This is just another example of a stupid woman who wants to 'have her cake and eat it too'. You want to be in the military, you want equal rights, you want equal pay, but you don't want to take equal risk. The argument not a long while ago was equal pay for equal work, if i can do the job, i should be allowed to. Saying that women in combat is a bad idea is like saying you can't do the job. You're either in or you're out, there is no in between. That being said, I believe women can do many jobs equally to a man (especially carrying a pack and pulling a trigger). But do not sit here and tell me you're entitled to all the stuff 'men' are, and shouldn't take the same risks as we do. Grow a pair, as the term goes.
This is the problem with most women's lib advocates. They want all the 'goodies' but don't want to pay the price for it. You're good enough to do the work and get paid for it, but you're not good enough to die? Remember this, that enemy is not going to care whether you're a communications operator or a highly trained SEAL, he's going to shoot you either way. You might as well prepare for it.
As far as the idiot spouting about children in some armies, they aren't 5 years olds dude, nearly all are post pubescent (that means hair for you r-tards). Some cultures still put a man at age 12. I can't totally disagree with that, there is a point where you're in between childhood and adulthood, and the U.S. is so far behind in that respect.
Anyway, that's my spout, no point in replying except for the other r-tards with no time on their hands because they have no life and no job. Some of us people have to go to work.
WAKE UP AMERICA!
Just keep the women in the rear with the gear....nuff said.
I've two opinions on this:
1) Women have already served in frontline formations in other countries under conditions far worse than what we face in Afghanistan (or have faced in Iraq). The Eastern Front in WW2 and the various battles of the Arab-Israeli wars highlight this.
2)It comes down to simple numbers. God forbid if we should find ourselves in another situation like having operations in two countries at the same time, you can't complain you don't have enough combat power, while at the same time excluding roughly half of you population from that duty. Either bring back the draft, or start finding women between 5'6 and 5'11 that can meet physical standards on the male scale (and institute some service wide training like when DADT was repealed).
and I've got two points to raise:
1) The Eastern Front (when the women were fighting at least) was in their neighborhoods not thousands of miles away with limited supplies and resources.
and 2) who's going to replace the population after a large portion of the male population gets killed off during that war on 2 fronts? You need women more than men to grow as a society.