TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Latest Woman to Try Marines' Infantry Officer Course Drops after Hike

JohnKimble111

April 27, 2016
59 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/04/26/latest-woman-to-try-marines-infantry-officer-course-drops-hike.html
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Latest Woman to Try Marines' Infantry Officer Course Drops after Hike
Author

JohnKimble111

Upvotes 59
Comments 48
Date April 27, 2016 1:10 AM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/4gm3aj/latest_woman_to_try_marines_infantry_officer/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/latest-woman-to-try-marines-infantry-officer.950822
https://theredarchive.com/post/950822
Top posts by JohnKimble111

Women Should Have to Register for the Draft, Congressional Commission Says

6700 upvotes
March 25, 2020
/r/PussyPassDenied

BBC admits its viral “women write better code” story was fake news

6298 upvotes
December 28, 2016
/r/MensRights

Gender pay gap in modelling sees men paid 75% less than women

6153 upvotes
February 8, 2018
/r/MensRights

Toxic Masculinity

5904 upvotes
March 10, 2018
/r/MensRights

After feminist cry sexism over BBC pay, official review uncovers more underpaid men than women

5789 upvotes
January 31, 2018
/r/MensRights

Controlling girlfriend, 22, who starved and stabbed her partner, banned him from her bed and took over his Facebook account is jailed for more than seven years

3826 upvotes
April 16, 2018
/r/PussyPassDenied

'If you tell anyone I've cheated, I'll ruin you': Cambridge don is cleared after his PhD student fiancee accused him of assault 'to get back at him' for calling off their wedding after she had affair in Galapagos Islands

3770 upvotes
September 16, 2017
/r/MensRights

Amber Heard loses bid to get $50 million defamation suit by her ex Johnny Depp thrown out

3737 upvotes
March 28, 2020
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]BigJ76 19 points20 points21 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

http://i.imgur.com/xhfIsNC.gif

[–]Devastration 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

So I'm assuming the one getting xer's shit kicked in was a female?

[–]Mitschu 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

You know, that image actually tells quite a lot of story in a short span.

Three white knights trying to break up a regulated fight between two participants with foam weapons, simply because the woman got bested temporarily.

One man, who didn't merely roleplay the "spontaneously charging aggressor" role, but actually went all in on making it realistic, aiming for her head to disorient her, and then continuing to pillow-whack her once she was down.

And... dat Mighty Mouse there deserves a loud HUA (I know, I know, Marines are too dumb to spell HUA, I meant oo-rah.) Once she's bowled over and stunned... her first instinct is to toss aside her foam weapon, struggle to her feet, and clench her fists, immediately ready to try jumping the aggressor's ass for that stunt.

That third white knight who was trying to help her up shifts gears partway through and has to grab her shoulders to hold her back from lunging into a bareknuckle attack on her sparring partner.

I see only two Marines in that entire crowd. One just got her ass knocked over, and the other just got thrown out of the ring.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, once somebody is on the ground you are not supposed to actually hit them, because that would be pointless.

Also, it looks like she could have been trying to get the foamy-thing back.

[–]Mitschu 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. Folk knowledge, let's say, but when I wrassled with my brother as a kid, it was a very valuable lesson to learn that when you lose a fight in real life, there aren't any referees to blow a whistle, and you don't get to holler for a time out. Nobody keeping track of points and saying that the fight is done.

The person who wins gets to decide when the fight is over. I fought to the extent of my abilities and put my everything into making sure that person was me, because if I were lax or casual about it for even a second, if my brother managed to get through my lazy guard and pin me down, no amount of begging would prevent him from raining blows down on me until his arms got tired.

Not out of rage, or hate, or malice, or even simple brotherly rivalry. He did his best to teach me how to fight, because I needed to know how to survive a fight. That included making sure I understood just how fucked I was if I lost a fight, so that I'd always fight with that extra edge of desperation and determination.

In that vein, it's vital that any soldier learns that same lesson quickly. If she's standing guard and some militant suddenly charges towards her with murderous intent, he isn't going to knock her over once and then tip his hat to her co-soldiers, his duty done. For that matter, there won't always be other soldiers there to break the fight up.

Never let the enemy get the advantage, because what they may choose to do with it is not bound by rules or regulations or concepts of fairness. Sometimes, they'll knock you to the ground before you're ready, and then start trying to bash your brain in with their rifle stock (like her sparring partner simulated), and if you aren't aware and ready for that facet of reality, the only person who'll listen to you crying foul about it when a real battle comes down the pipeline is whatever deity you believe in, if and when you check in to the afterlife.

She knew he was going to charge at her, a luxury most of us don't get in a real fight. Despite that, she wasn't ready, her stance was terrible and off balance. Hell, she jogged forward to meet him halfway, instead of readying herself to absorb or dodge the impact from a much larger person. In a real military engagement where he was legitimately fighting her, she'd be getting shipped home in a crate right now. How is she to learn that lesson if every time she repeats her mistakes, she has the safety net of three other guys standing by to give her another chance at it?

For that brief second before they did, and he was pounding her head with the padded pillow of doom, there was that element of disorientation and fear and sudden realization that being in an physical altercation isn't a game, the other guy really wants to hurt you - you can see it, because she reacted to it on blind instinct, rising up ready to start swinging.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You are wrong. If nothing else it wastes time to unnecessarily hit somebody when a gesture would suffice.

The point of these exercises is not to brutalize people, otherwise they would fight to the death with daggers and eat their opponents heart.

This is meant to teach basic skills in a controlled environment where everybody can learn.

PS: He should have stopped and the lesson of how she fucked up should have been explained to everybody present.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Marines are too dumb to spell HUA, I meant oo-rah

I think you mean "Hoo-ah" and "Ooh-rah".

[–]Bailie2 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

you are reading way to much into it. she is just stumbling to get her padded thing back. She doesn't know how to fight. She thinks she can just stand and swing. I fenced for a while, and honestly foot work is just as important as blade work. If you can't move quickly and correctly you are going to lose. Other guy is a bully and just knocks her down. I would agree with you though, typically military.

[–]Machnow 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

omg, i love this clip...does anyone have the source please! i've looked for a fuller version many times...don't know if there even is one....pls post if you find it...

[–]Machnow 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

this will be no problem whatsoever.....just as they dropped the chinup requirement last week...next wek, they'll scale back the portions of the IOC course that the women keep failing....then ta-da!...there you go, now you have a good, gender neutral test.

just watch, we'll all see Mabus eat his own words, and smile while he's doing it....as ordered to.

the Marines....the few, the proud...the feminine.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

the few, the proud...the feminine...

The United States Navy.

[–]italianlady13 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I don't know why some women are desperate to compete with men. It's foolish

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Money.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is okay.

[–]casemodsalt 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Girl power!

[–]Tedesche 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (51 children) | Copy Link

Instead of dropping testing requirements to artificially boost female numbers in the military, why not simply extend the duration of preparatory phases for women? If women need to work harder to reach the same levels of physical prowess as men due to their biology, it only seems fair to allot them extra time to train. That way, we'd have more female soldiers that are actually qualified without compromising the overall effectiveness of our armed forces.

[–]rossraskolnikov 16 points17 points18 points 10 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

All the training in the world can't trump biology.

Give me all the time and expertise on offer, I still wouldn't fancy my chances against a gorilla.

[–]Tedesche 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

Still seems like a better alternative to reducing passing requirements or simply excluding women from combat roles.

If we want men to not have a veritable monopoly in combat deaths, it's worth trying to think of ways to increase the number of female troops out there. I certainly don't want to compromise overall standards, but I also want women to have to shed their fair share of the blood.

[–]John_the_Piper 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

One thing I've learned since enlisting: If it makes sense, it's not the military.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

That does seem to be a somewhat worrying sentiment shared by many soldiers I've met. :-P

[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

We used to joke about being charged with common sense while in uniform.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Inconvenient implementation of logic, cadet. Give me 40!"

[–]locks_are_paranoid 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

How about keeping the test exactly the same, and just letting the women fail?

[–]Tedesche -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

1.) It isn't fair to expect women to meet the same physical standards as men without giving them more time to prepare.

2.) More legitimately qualified female soldiers on the battlefield means fewer dead male soldiers in cemeteries.

[–]Demonspawn 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It isn't fair to expect women to meet the same physical standards as men without giving them more time to prepare.

I don't give a fuck about fair. I give a fuck about an effective fighting force.

More legitimately qualified female soldiers on the battlefield means fewer dead male soldiers in cemeteries.

No, it means less effective fighting forces (look up the USMC study) who wear out quicker and cost more in medical after they are out, leaving less money towards supplying existing soldiers... so the end result is even more dead male soldiers in cemeteries.

[+]Tedesche -10 points-9 points-8 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I don't give a fuck about fair.

Aaaaand we're done here.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you know what else does not give a shit about fairness? biology.

[–]rudelyinterrupts 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

War isn't fucking fair.

[–]locks_are_paranoid 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

But it also makes the unit weaker.

[–]Tedesche 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

If they can perform as well as their male peers, how does that make the unit weaker?

[–]locks_are_paranoid 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

If they fail the test, they can't perform as well.

[–]Tedesche 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

...You're not actually reading my comments before you reply, are you?

I said don't lower the test requirements. Instead, give the female cadets more time to prepare for the tests. Women are at a biological disadvantage, but it has yet to be shown that extra work on their parts can't close the gap. We owe it to both them and the men presently risking their lives overseas to see if women can pull at least some of the weight.

What's there to disagree on here? More women in the field is a win-win for everyone, provided military standards aren't lowered to artificially boost female numbers.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Demonspawn -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If they can perform as well as their male peers

If.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

But that would not be an actual alternative. And I would rather have less military casualties which are all male than more which include women.

[–]Tedesche -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Fewer military casualties overall is definitely preferable regardless of gender makeup, but why is my suggestion not a viable alternative to lowering the standards? Women are physically weaker—it makes senes they'd need more time to achieve the same level of strength and endurance as men. A lot of people here seem to think that, even if they passed with more time to prep, they'd still be less qualified soldiers. I don't see why.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Because women cannot achieve the same physical standards as men, regardless of how much they train. The end result would be the exact same, a bunch of women who cannot meet standards.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Given the same amount of time and resources, yes, men will always out-perform women in acts of physical strength and endurance...which is why I'm arguing female cadets be given more. You're saying that even with that advantage, they still won't pass. What's the harm is seeing if that's actually the case then?

[–]WaitingToBeBanned -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

This is not a hypothesis, it is an established fact.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

It's an established fact that women, given more time to train up, can't achieve the same results as much who are given less? Where is that proven? Source?

[–]WaitingToBeBanned -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

That did not make sense.

But yes, women cannot match men in physical capabilities. Literally every sports record shows this.

There are teenage boys who are faster than the fastest woman to have ever lived. And I do not mean 19 and in the Olympics, I mean 14 and on their highschools track team.

[–]casemodsalt 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The problem is determination imo. Women aren't eager to build muscle to the level of even the average man that doesn't.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Determination is not the determining factor. Even female weightlifters are not strong enough to match the average Marine, because biology is unfair.

[–]Tedesche 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that's a huge assumption to make about women trying for these combat positions, but even if correct, why would giving them more time to build up said muscle be a bad policy to implement?

[–]Terryloves 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't really matter then does it. If u can't pass infantry training, u can't fight on the front lines. Looks like the gender issue for soldiers has been solved =)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Biologically, the female frame cannot handle carrying the loads soldiers are required to hump day in and day out. Most females wind up washing out with hip injuries.

[–]Rasalom72 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"My response was, 'no woman made it through IOC. Standards aren't going to change.'"

Fuck yea.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter