As we move forward with the trials of integrating women in combat arms Ranger has became a focal point of this. We all have opinions. How do you feel about this and what do you think the impact of such an integration will have on the military overall?
*This is an attempt to consolidate all the women in Ranger School discussion under one thread.
*This is an attempt to consolidate all the women in Ranger School discussion under one thread.
Ranger
Standards
Posted 10 y ago
This is a duplicate discussion. Click below to see more on this topic.
Myself and hundreds of other Retired Rangers are tired of all this nonsense of women attending Ranger School. Why is the Army leadership encouraging special preference to attend a premier infantry and leadership school. It is a hard journey for qualified Male Infantrymen to compete for and get an extremely limited slot to attend the Ranger Course. Many of Rangers had to prove themselves to be hardened Infantry Sergeants in order to even be considered to attend the local Pre-Ranger Course, before even thinking of attending The Ranger Course. Normally an Infantry Company and/or Battalion could only send "one" representative soldier to the Pre-Ranger Course (per course). Infantry Soldiers competed amongst each other to get that slot. The 21-day Pre-Ranger Course, was definitely tough as or tougher than Ranger School itself, was hell to get through. And even after passing, was not a guaranteed slot to attend The Ranger Course due to budget, deployment, and training issues for the unit (not the individual soldier). If you did not get the opportunity to attend The Ranger Course within six months, well it was a requirement to attend the local Division 21-day Pre-Ranger (assessment) Course again. Once again, the male soldier had to pass all standards in order to be recommended to attend The Ranger Course. The Ranger Course had the toughest standards. To begin day one of the Ranger Course, during the APFT, the Ranger Instructor (RI) would not allow you to pass the push up or sit up event the first time. Every Male Ranger Student failed the push up event and had to perform the push up event a second time (five to ten minutes later) to Standard! My first attempt at the push up event, we had to complete at least 62 push ups. The RI was counting, 59, 60, 61, 61, 61... and so on. We were warned that we could not stop during the two minute event or else we would be considered a failure at this event. So I kept knocking out the push ups and asked the RI what it was that I was doing wrong. He answered with, shut up Ranger and keep knocking them (push ups) out or you will fail. I kept my mouth shut and knocked out approximately 120 push ups. The RI failed me. I got back in line and had the same RI grade my push ups again about ten minutes later. 59, 60, 61, 61, 61, once again I asked what it was I was doing wrong while I cranked out those push ups, and once again the RI stated shut up Ranger and keep knocking them out or else you will fail. That was the first moments of Ranger School and every standard was just as tough. If you were just there to earn your Tab, you were surely going to drop out of the course. But if you were a fully prepared Infantry Stud with the attitude that you attended the Ranger Course to test yourself and understood that you were going to have to push beyond all personal limitations in order to merely make it through the relentless day of Ranger Training. The one thing I really appreciated about Ranger School is that the Standards were set so high, every Infantry Soldier knew it was the very best training and test that any soldier can volunteer for. When finished, with an average of one hour of sleep per day, moving with heavy (very heavy) loads about 10 to 25 kilometers per day, performing tactical maneuvers, and being graded in leadership positions. It was far more harsh than I ever expected, every bit the hardest single accomplishment as far as physical and mental exhaustion in a training environment is concerned. Even for the most hardened and gruesome Infantryman. Ranger School was no joke. I'm not thinking it is at all a place for females. There is no way possible to keep the standards the same. We were not taken back to the rear with the gear to shower when we smelled. That is what Infantrymen do. It is dirty and frankly stinky, to say the least. I eventually became an RI in the Desert Phase and then later in my career a Senior Ranger Instructor in the Mountain Phase. It was a humbling experience serving with top notch soldiers / world class athlete Rangers. To say the least it was an Honor serving with the Ranger Training Brigade and maintain the standards. Let us not lose that, the standards. Let us not add the nonsense of preferential treatment. The RI's were hard as nails but fair. Let us not give away the farm to break the glass ceiling. You will rarely hear any news of Rangers in action, it is a quiet professional tight knit unit that prides itself on operational security. I can see no way to not change the standards once women attend the Ranger Course. This course will become a political agenda which will cause the truly dedicated Ranger Instructors to lose their jobs as RI's as we once knew it. Is it too late to turn back? Let the nonsense begin, female issues, separate but same, political agenda, media scrutiny, RI unfairness, sexual harassment, preferential treatment, male students No-Go's due to (female) not performing to standards during patrols... The list can go on, just ask any RI that has served a full term as an Ranger Instructor. Let us not forget the original intent for this course is to train men to lead soldiers into combat. When we give these limited (Ranger School) slots to female soldiers/officers, then we take away from the Infantryman, the soldiers themselves, and the Infantry Units. Let us not take this away.
Retired Ranger 1SG David D. Lopez
Paso Robles, CA
Retired Ranger 1SG David D. Lopez
Paso Robles, CA
Responses: 99
LTC (Join to see)
I am sure she could. Not sure you could yet though....
CPT (Join to see)
Eventually I will be ready, if we can ever get funding!
I think it is great that Ranger School will be open to women. As long as the standards remain the same, let all who volunteer get the opportunity to prove themselves. I don't care at all if the Soldier watching my back is male or female as long as they can pull my butt out of a burning MRAP if need be. As long as they can do their job and do it well, it shouldn't matter.
Just to clarify a few things. Ranger School is NOT open to females. They are merely seeking potential candidates who are willing to try. We are still not at the point where a female soldier can show up to Ranger. Even before that every division sends their soldiers to Pre-Ranger. That is the first test. That is really the first test if they can go to Ranger school. In my Pre-Ranger we went from 90 to 45 soldiers when we were done. Lets not put the cart in from of the horse.
Females are already in combat. That isn't a factor. Ranger should be a factor in that really. Soldiers currently go to Ranger school from other branches than combat arms. We had a supply guy and a MI guy in my class.
Females are already in combat. That isn't a factor. Ranger should be a factor in that really. Soldiers currently go to Ranger school from other branches than combat arms. We had a supply guy and a MI guy in my class.
CPT (Join to see)
SPC David S. On a side note I lost 30 pounds there. That was that physically demanding. I hope this adds some insight to your question also.
SPC David S.
Sir from what I take away from this is that Ranger school is like a 61 day long rugby game. I just don't see this working out to well for females as there is the peer element. Guys will be eye-balling females looking for a reason to vote them out. I wish they would let prior service go as I could drop 30lbs.
CPT (Join to see)
SPC David S. A lot of the smaller guys don't make it there. When you hit the mountains they stand out for their inability to carry large loads. A female may have to carry your own body weight up a mountain, and I mean a mountain. I was hurting and I was carrying about 1/3 of my weight. There is no way I could carry my own weight up a mountain like that.
COL Jean (John) F. B.
From my experience as a Ranger student and a member of the Ranger Training Brigade cadre, most of the attrition was due to failure to meet standards and injuries, rather than quitting due to a lack of motivation.
I agree with LT Rosa that, despite their best efforts, very few females would be able to meet the physical requirements of Ranger School. That is a physiological fact, not a sexist remark.
I also agree that, if the Army/US Government is sincere in incorporating females into every facet of the Army as equals to me, they need to start by doing away with anything that differs from male standards (APFT standards, eligibility for the draft, standards of appearance, etc.). Then fact that they recognize the physical and physiological differences in women by having different standards argues against the idea that they should be "equal" in all things.
I agree with LT Rosa that, despite their best efforts, very few females would be able to meet the physical requirements of Ranger School. That is a physiological fact, not a sexist remark.
I also agree that, if the Army/US Government is sincere in incorporating females into every facet of the Army as equals to me, they need to start by doing away with anything that differs from male standards (APFT standards, eligibility for the draft, standards of appearance, etc.). Then fact that they recognize the physical and physiological differences in women by having different standards argues against the idea that they should be "equal" in all things.
Surprisingly of all the "stolen valor" photos I've seen, she did about the best job of putting a uniform together. (other than a cockeyed screwy looking beret)
SGT Richard H.
LOL, I don't know for sure MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca....don't all high schools offer that?
MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca
Unfortunately not SGT Richard H., its all in the funding and interest. We almost lost our AF JROTC program here at Coventry High due to some big budget cuts. They got it back but had to guarantee at least 100 students enrolled to receive funding from the state.
SGT Richard H.
Actually, MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca I wish my daughter had an interest in JROTC. The program here at Flour Bluff Hiugh school is one of the best in the country, and even has a few national honors. She is, however, considering real ROTC.
They would - and likely will - rule. But I suspect it will be in relatively small numbers. FWIW.
As long as standards remain the same it should not matter what gender a soldier mighty be.
It seems like history keeps repeating itself with questions like this. Should women be in the Army? Should the WACs be disbanded and women integrated into non-combat arms MOS? Should women be allow to serve in the combat arms? Should women be allowed to attend Airborne School? Should women be allowed to attend Ranger School?
Over the years, when each and every one of the questions above were answered (although some have yet to be implemented), the answer always seems to be "Yes - if they can meet the qualifications" and the Army/DoD always states that there will be no reduction of the qualifications or standards. Well, the fact is that standards have been and will be reduced to ensure females can meet the standards. The reduction will be official or unofficial, but they will occur.
My opinion is that there needs to be a standard for every job, position, school, promotion, etc., and anybody who can meet that standard should be able to fill that position, regardless of sex. The key is to make the standard relevant to the position/job/school and then allow no deviations.
I also think that the so-called "full integration of women in the Army" needs to be just that or should be done away with. By that I mean that it should not be the current thinking of "if women want to do it". They should have no more right to opt out than a man does. Women should not be excluded from draft registration or the draft; involuntary assignment to combat arms; or anything else. If there is not full integration, I see nothing wrong with excluding women from certain things, like the combat arms and Ranger School. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Ranger School is a great course that is physically demanding and does a great job of teaching small unit leadership. Can women be integrated into Ranger School without changing the course? Sure, if women want to give up their privacy, hygiene, etc. Will that happen? Of course not. Even if a female student does not care, the Army will not allow that to occur so, as a result, the course will change. They will have to completely redesign the course to accommodate females, or at least adjust to allow for female participation. Either way, it will change the course and probably reduce the standards, despite assurances to the contrary. I saw that happen, to some extent, when they started allowing ROTC cadets to attend Ranger School during the summer. There were no wholesale changes and nothing drastically obvious, but there were, nonetheless, changes in standards in some of those classes.
Over the years, when each and every one of the questions above were answered (although some have yet to be implemented), the answer always seems to be "Yes - if they can meet the qualifications" and the Army/DoD always states that there will be no reduction of the qualifications or standards. Well, the fact is that standards have been and will be reduced to ensure females can meet the standards. The reduction will be official or unofficial, but they will occur.
My opinion is that there needs to be a standard for every job, position, school, promotion, etc., and anybody who can meet that standard should be able to fill that position, regardless of sex. The key is to make the standard relevant to the position/job/school and then allow no deviations.
I also think that the so-called "full integration of women in the Army" needs to be just that or should be done away with. By that I mean that it should not be the current thinking of "if women want to do it". They should have no more right to opt out than a man does. Women should not be excluded from draft registration or the draft; involuntary assignment to combat arms; or anything else. If there is not full integration, I see nothing wrong with excluding women from certain things, like the combat arms and Ranger School. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Ranger School is a great course that is physically demanding and does a great job of teaching small unit leadership. Can women be integrated into Ranger School without changing the course? Sure, if women want to give up their privacy, hygiene, etc. Will that happen? Of course not. Even if a female student does not care, the Army will not allow that to occur so, as a result, the course will change. They will have to completely redesign the course to accommodate females, or at least adjust to allow for female participation. Either way, it will change the course and probably reduce the standards, despite assurances to the contrary. I saw that happen, to some extent, when they started allowing ROTC cadets to attend Ranger School during the summer. There were no wholesale changes and nothing drastically obvious, but there were, nonetheless, changes in standards in some of those classes.
I used to know a Sergeant that was a female back in 1999 who wanted to be the first female Ranger. She was tiny, petite and from New York. She came to our post with her drill sergeant badge on and I met her in college there. She was mean as a snake and for a lack of better words, bad ass. She took nothing off anyone and was a PT stud, there was nothing a guy could do that she couldn't. I expect she would relish in this moment, but probably she is retired now. If anyone meets the criteria, has the pre-requisites and can meet the standard, then so be it.
SGT William Howell
I went to PDLC with someone like that. She weighed a buck 15. I was the 240 gunner and had pulled my back crossing a ditch. I was ready to give up on the forced march. She made me give her the HMG and would not give it back. It was the only way I made it though.
You want to see a woman do something. Have a man tell he she can't!
You want to see a woman do something. Have a man tell he she can't!
I read through all the posts and the word "they" is repeated so many times. We are one Army, one unit, it isn't female versus male, it isn't "us" versus "them." As leaders we should bring up the topic, discuss it, and find the best way to adapt to the situation. Regardless if the reason Congress passed the bill to allow positions to be open to all service members is for political gain, the fact is, it is now law. Let's use our energy to discuss how we can take this and make it a positive change. We have this great tool to discuss and find the best ways to implement change, instead of turning the situation into a conflict.
SSG V. Michelle Woods
There are some who need some convincing and others who may never change their mind however I love how many men on here support their sisters-in-arms finally getting this opportunity.
CW5 Sam R. Baker
Didn't use "they" in mine and it was posted prior to seeing yours! We are ALL green now aren't we?
I think this is a great opportunity and I am very happy the Military is making efforts to place the right person in the right job.
I think the issue shouldn't be male/female, I think the question should be, how can we best utilize the strengths and weaknesses of each individual person to lean forward in the foxhole and make the U.S. Military remain strong and relevant?
I whole heartily believe in the U.S. Army and it's approach to make things better. We are an adaptive Army and that is part of the reason we are an elite fighting force!
I think the issue shouldn't be male/female, I think the question should be, how can we best utilize the strengths and weaknesses of each individual person to lean forward in the foxhole and make the U.S. Military remain strong and relevant?
I whole heartily believe in the U.S. Army and it's approach to make things better. We are an adaptive Army and that is part of the reason we are an elite fighting force!
MAJ Bill Darling
I think we can start with a pro/con list. Developing a great military is not necessarily about addressing the use or needs of the individual but the best impact on the overall organization.
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google