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.
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
Suspended Profile
Good luck to the female soldiers who are interested in trying out for this. Good luck to all soldiers who go for it! I think it's good. If you want it, and can work to achieve it, it should be available to you :)
CPT (Join to see)
I knew a guy that spent 157 days at Ranger school. It is not for the weak or faint hearted. We will see how this turns out. With a attrition rate of more than 50% they are going to need a whole lot.
Should be interesting. If they can make it through the program, why not. I am reminded of the Most Pull-Ups I've ever seen. It was a Female Marine.
CPT (Join to see)
True but when it comes to rucking that is where you make your money in Ranger school.
I think some of them will be meaner and tougher than the guy!
when it comes to being prepared to lead men who are highly trained machines that drink motor oil, piss nails, and eat snakes for breakfast ... it is in my opinion that these women who get the chance to take on the challenge, will end up failing a good majority of the time. 4 hours of sleep a day, 20 hours locked and loaded ready to conduct combat mission objectives. Water survival, humping 90 lbs over 200 miles by day 61 ... mountains in GA, swamps in FLA, night patrols, land nav, combatives, force on force FTX's, mountaineering, air assaults, demolitions, etc .. the list goes on. This woman will need to have superior strength, mental focus, and a never quit attitude. She must be a fast learner, be able to handle the harsh terrain, the motivation for over 2 months of training against all that says the odds are not in her favor to complete every task to standard. This kinda woman better be able to grow some chest hair, she better be able to carry a battle under fire in a near ambush, she must not fear anything. Add all this together with about 100 other variables... i just don't see how it can be done large scale, and for what purpose, other than for equal opportunity and for women to feel accomplished. What will this say to those infantry grunts who do not attain Ranger status. Will they feel inferior. Will we always trust that this woman could lead like a man could? Will Ranger school start catering to women, and soften up to allow them to pass through easier than years past? Im not against them trying, I'm against them because I don't believe in having female tier 1 level operators at the ranks. Call it sexism, call it discrimination. There will always be things in life that are naturally intended to be a certain way. But For Gods sake, Let men do what men were meant to do.
SGT(P) (Join to see)
Women have been in combat since Joan of Arc, the Revolutionary War, Civil War, and even in WWII just to name a few in history. The point I was making is that Israel had already proceed that women can perform the same combat job in a Spec Op role. Israel's spec ops is not much different than ours except they are constantly defending their country. Being any kind of Naval aviator takes more mental stress and physical stress on the body than going through SF school, Ranger School, and Sapper School all rolled into one. As far as women tabbing through in large numbers the guys don't don't make it through in large numbers. More quit or wash out than graduate so what does that say about men? I think the numbers for women to make it through will be about the same as the amount of men that make it. As long v as the standards are the same and they have a fair shot why not let them go for it? I'm Airborne Infantry qualified and I have no desire to go to Ranger School as I know it's not for me. I could care less if my CO was a man or woman that is SF and Ranger tabbed, as long as they can do the job, are knowledgeable, willing to listen to the NCOs, and will take care of their Joes is all I need in a leader to follow through the gates of hell and back.
LTC Barry Hull
SGT(P) (Join to see) I agree with your fact abut women in combat for centuries. However, I must note that those instances have been but a minuscule percentage. is it worth compromising a system that has produced the best Army ever fielded to meet political correctness? A compromise that could lead to more death's in combat?
CPT (Join to see)
SGT(P) (Join to see) I think you may be a bit lost when you state being a Naval Aviator is more difficult than all the cool guy schools. It is a different world. There is no way that is possible. I took the AFOQT and bombed the Aviation portion of it. That is because I don't want to be an aviator. I was looking being a STO. It is a different breed of soldier. I would say that being Airborne Infantry is not really a gauge to estimate the stresses required for Ranger School. It is much more than that. In my class we had about 40 enlisted soldiers pass. The 90 others were officers from all over the Army that were in top shape and extremely competent with OPODRs. Carrying up to 100 pounds up a mountain is not the same as flying jets.
SGT(P) Jason D. Wendel
SIR... like I said being Infantry/Combat Arms... is different than flying aircrafts. I never referenced that going through Ranger was more difficult than being an aviator, maybe you should re-read what I wrote. In comparison, though, I am fully aware how in a technical aspect becoming an aviator is more difficult than that of what these guys train to do. If you're looking to measure who's more hardcore, or who's **** is bigger then you're sorely mistaken, flying planes is somewhere between being Field Artillery and that of the ground-fighter. Yes, it is difficult, and yes it can be dangerous, but not nearly as dangerous as close quarters combat situations infantry soldiers face everyday. I respect our assets, and surely aviation components have supported the mission, even saving countless lives. We could professionally debate all day about the difference of facing the enemy in direct fire engagements, to include near ambushes and dismounted IED's versus flying a AH-64 coordinating with ground elements, making close support ground strafing and tactical bombing of enemy infantry personnel. They are absolutely 2 different kinds of jobs, that are equally tough to perform in my eyes, should you not see it that way, I'd like to hear why?
I know of a few high speed female Soldiers that would be able to hack it. I know a few that could not. Same said for the male Soldiers that I know.
I agree, the standards should be kept the same. Only advice: Train up and get your head right for what you are getting into. My hat is off to anyone who completes that course!
I agree, the standards should be kept the same. Only advice: Train up and get your head right for what you are getting into. My hat is off to anyone who completes that course!
Oh Lord, I almost broke my phone before realizing it was a movie. Lol
People are insane if they do not believe the standards will be lowered. Both Airborne school and Sapper school are glaring examples of that. And I can barely get slots to send my infantry men to go to Ranger School, and now they are going to end up wasting countless slots on this pointless social experiment.
I'm behind the program 100% but
Fix that f--king head gear or this whole operation is a non-starting, no-go at this station. Like "GI Jane" - the military community will pay more attention to pictures like this than anything else.
Fix that f--king head gear or this whole operation is a non-starting, no-go at this station. Like "GI Jane" - the military community will pay more attention to pictures like this than anything else.
Read This Next