slowguy wrote:
jmh wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Allowing anyone easier access through a softened up selection process would be wrong and a disservice to all concerned.The standard is the standard. Combat is unwavering in its demands.
Agreed. However, it doesn't appear that pass/fail for this test is really an historical standard. It wasn't pass/fail before 2012, so it's difficult to make the case that "it's always been this way."
If the pass/fail standard was appropriate and necessary to screen properly qualified candidates, and is being relaxed now specifically to allow more women to get through, that's could be a problem. However, people should probably understand that entrance and screening requirements for various aspects of military service are adjusted frequently, for all sort of force shaping reasons. We're an all-volunteer force, and sometimes we have more or fewer candidates, and need to reach higher or lower numbers of people through training. Occasionally, that means we need to accept a slightly lower standard because it's more important to have the raw numbers. Other times it means we raise the standards because we can afford to cut more bodies and still have enough.
This is a very good way to look at it and how I looked at it in a past thread. Sometimes people can be pushed and trained to accomplish more than they thought they were originally capable of. I usually overreact, sometimes I feel my time in service was the greatest part of my life and don't want anything to change, whatever that means. I was also not really fully informed, thanks to the poster that filled us all in. Also, I did NOT mean the original post to be an attack against anybody, (I may have went off the deep end by including "women" in the title quoting the article, but I realize it is for all candidates / Marines.)