Posted on Feb 18, 2015
CPT Company Commander
10.3K
541
281
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.
Posted in these groups: P240 RangerChecklist icon 2 Standards
This is a duplicate discussion. Click below to see more on this topic.
1SG David Lopez
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
Responses: 99
Lt Col Aerospace Planner
I think it is fine. I agree don't change the standards. I knew a couple females back in the day that I imagine would have been able to it. We had one girl in our flight school class who was a weght lifting champion at the acadamy and could bench three plates on either side with no issues. She would jog around the track a few miles with a backpack full of rocks.

Not every female is going to be able to do it obviously, just like not every male is going to pass this type of course. I am 37 and meet the standards physically, but I would be out after being a wake the first 24 hours. At my age I like my sleep, as well as I am not a big fan of being in military training environments where I am being screemed at anymore.
SSG Accountant
Let them try to their limits, some will succeed, some won't. Me, not interested at all. I pass.
SSG Infantryman
No!!! Not that they're aren't women who can do it. N it's just they are very few who can so I believe it is waste of funding. Not the fact that the army pushes sharp every where it can. Be ready for a sharp rise in cases. Every pun intended. Infantry is a different breed. Coming from 13 years of USMC infantry and training with 2nd rangers and the 101st. We grunts have a type of bond and brotherhood that can't be compared to and that will be compromised. Which in turn will reduce readiness. This is my opinion. Women should be kept in other combat arms like artillery, and maybe even armor.
LTC Barry Hull
LTC Barry Hull
10 y
He is and so am I. I don't mean to to sound like a boys club but having females mixed into squads in combat adds complications to an impossible situation. Bad idea.
SGT William Howell
SGT William Howell
10 y
LTC I disagree. As a combat MP we had many females in our unit. Some good...some not so good. Just like our male soldiers. In a professional army that a female is able to do the same job as a male then she should be able to try.

In his memoirs General Chuikov, commander of the 62nd Army during the Battle of Stalingrad acknowledged that women were one of the reasons the Red Army won the Battle of Stalingrad.
LTC Barry Hull
LTC Barry Hull
10 y
SGT William Howell Yes, back to the wall, like the Soviets at Stalingrad, I would put a rifle in the hands of everyone that could carry one. Not exactly the same situation we have in our current conflicts. Given the option, I would put the rifle in the hands of the best available user, that will maximize the capability of the force.
SGT William Howell
SGT William Howell
10 y
In current combat women serve on the front lines and have rifles in their hands everyday. Our backs are not to the wall.

There was a time when it was believed that black soldiers were not capable of serving in a combat roll. It is embarrassing to think our government supported that for so long. We serve for a country where we our constitution says we are all equal. For that reason everyone should be afforded the right to try out for the Rangers, standards should not change.
SN Kevin Townsend
Let em go for it!!! simple as that.....
MAJ FAO - Europe
The only issue I have with this is that those who graduate from Ranger School won't be given the Ranger skill identifier. While I can't find the actual ALARACT to read, it seems this is just wrong-headed policy. Why not give all graduates the skill identifier? For records, would graduates be able to add Ranger documentation to their OMPF? Would Ranger Tab show up on their records brief?

"If selected, female volunteers who successfully complete and graduate from Ranger school will receive a graduation certificate and be awarded and authorized to wear the Ranger tab. However, pending future decisions about whether women will be allowed to serve in combat arms MOSs, they will not receive the associated Ranger skill identifiers or be assigned to Ranger coded units or positions."
CPT Company Commander
CPT (Join to see)
10 y
Ranger Branch is in Infantry Branch. They handle assignment for those with V and G ASI's. They are a part of HRC and not an actualy unit or branch. They are a part of the Infantry branch manager. This is to ensure that unit has a certain amount of Ranger Qualed guys in units. They also handle assignment to RTB. It's down at bennning. I know they deal with enlisted assignments but I may be in error by referring to them for officer assignments. MAJ (Join to see)
MAJ FAO - Europe
MAJ (Join to see)
10 y
Fair enough.
CSM(P) Telecommunications Operations Chief
CSM(P) (Join to see)
10 y
I think this is great and I'm excited to see how it unfolds.
CPT Company Commander
CPT (Join to see)
10 y
Looking back at this I pretty much realized that must officers in the infantry are G or V already and there really isn't a straight up Ranger assignment that couldn't be filled by just about any officer. I was enlisted and knew about and dealing with the infantry branch manager. I didn't take into account that enlisted and officer assignments are handled on a different plain.
CW5 Sam R. Baker
In my 27 years of service, I have known one who really wanted to go, she was a JAG NCO, former drill sergeant and honestly I beleive she could have done it, she drank straight shots and would open a can of whoop ass at the drop of a hat. One other female NCO I knew was equally as strong physically and also a former drill sergeant, but she had no aspirations of attending or wanting to go to Ranger School. This was of course 1989, well before the integration we have today. Both these fine NCOs I honestly believe were two of the only females I have ran across that would hold a 9mm and just shoot someone........in the face!
1px xxx
Suspended Profile
>1 y
There has been a lot of discussion about physical standards ect..

A few things come to mind outside of those...

Fraternization-not just in Ranger School but on the battlefield...Joe and Jane share a fighting position...Joe and Jane really like each other, are young and may be irrational...may or may not lead to inappropriate acts in the field...Jack is in the other fighting position, likes Jane, is jealous that Joe and Jane are together, starts competing against Joe for Jane, possibly making irrational decisions on the battlefield because of his feelings...leadership would have to ensure that every female had a female battle buddy at all times on patrols, ect...if there was an odd number, ect...issues arise, extra complications...

Passion- wounded male and female on the battlefield...male has open chest wound, female gunshot wound to the leg, not that severe...both screaming in pain...medic arrives on the scene, assesses the situation...many would say the male medic automatically tends the female out of instinct before even thinking of it

Sexual harassment/related issues- In Ranger School, we were often in a patrol base, I went during the winter time...all of us were basically on top of each other/huddled EXTREMELY close together in our fighting positions or sleeping areas (depending on what our task at the time was) in order to keep warm (all winter ranger students know of this)...could lead to issues with male/female...also, every patrol base has a slit trench within the perimeter, totally exposed to everyone on the perimeter/in the patrol base....would we need separate slit trenches one male, one female? What if someone glanced at a female or male real quick at the slit trench? SHARP complaint? Hide the female slit trench somewhere? outside the perimeter...not tactically sound at all....
CW5 Sam R. Baker
CW5 Sam R. Baker
>1 y
Sir, I honestly believe a medic will always take care of the wounded based on Triage and not for the reasons you suggest, I actually know more female flight medics than male.

As for the trenches, we had them uncovered and protected in 02/03 in both Iraq and Afghanistan and no one really has the sexual issues, if we all can try to think of ourselves as GREEN people with an asexual presence, this would be a lot easier!
CW5 Desk Officer
Edited 10 y ago
As I've said in other threads, CPT (Join to see), I'm all for it -- so long as they don't change the standards. If women can do the job (pass the course), they deserve a chance to prove themselves.

One of the questions is this ... Are "they" changing the standards just by making special allowances for women to get into the course? And I ask that semi-rhetorically, because it seems to be a bit of a Catch-22 to me. On the one hand, if they don't make some sort of accommodation, women will never get the chance. And on the other, are those women who will get into Ranger school displacing a man who would otherwise have made it to the course?

My questions are all kind of rhetorical/theoretical because without some sort of change, women will never even get the chance to prove themselves, and I think women deserve that chance.
1SG David Lopez
The standards have already changed! Why do we have Female "Monitors" to observe Ranger Training while females attend the Ranger Course? I'm assuming they are there to make sure the untrusting RI's do not act unprofessional towards the female candidates; or to make sure they identify sexual harrassment; or to offer a second assessment on their evaluation; We can go on...
CPT Zachary Brooks
Well I think they finally found a way to have equal standards for all:

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/ranger-school-replaced-by-9-week-long-online-game/
MAJ David Vermillion
I am not sure what the numbers are for washouts in Ranger School but I know they are high, probably along the lines of 50% or better. It stands to hold with the woman being the weaker vessel as the bible proclaims, it makes sense that a program like Ranger School was originally designed for men and not women. I believe the military is a place for both sexes but Ranger School is not one of them. This is not about pride or exclusion but about the unit on the battlefield being mixed with both men and woman. This would cause the unit to erode from within.

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close