Do you believe the 2 women Rangers passed on their own merits or were they given special treatment?

absolutely hell they were probably given more shit than the men just because of it

absolutely no doubt they passed and I'm sure they were very well prepared before they started no commander worth a dam would set up a solider to fail it not only reflects bad on the soldier but himself as well

At a minimum they were prepped and coached. The Rangers I know did it on their own. No breaks. No slack. These ladies may be good soldiers, but by accepting favors they broke their oath. Definitely cases of respect the rank not the person in my opinion.

Anyone who doubts this, who in not a Ranger or something similar, needs to get on that course and run it and see how they do.
I'm getting sick of all these ass clowns doing the armchair quarterback thing and insinuating that standards were lowered for the women. So if that was the case then how come only 2 made it? And how come more of the men didn't make it? Obvious answer is that standards were maintained and that the Rangers running the course have their integrity in tact.

Do you believe what the Officers and NCOs of the RTB and fellow classmates stated about the two Ranger school grads?

I wouldn't presume to know or even hazard a guess for that matter, but I would be curious to hear what the Ranger School instructors would say if they could speak freely without any worry of retribution-from anyone.

Of course the success of 2 females in Ranger school sparks the discourse of discussions as to whether or not they passed of their own merit. I'm betting it's been a very long time since anyone questioned the passing of any male soldier. Why is it so difficult for men to believe there are actually females with the physical, intellectual, and psychological fitness to pass this rigorous course?!? Never, ever, not even once was I, as a female cadet or officer ever given any sort of special treatment during training, and often found myself to be the only female in the entire group. At 5ft tall and 115 lbs, I would agree that most, if not all of the males I trained with were bigger and stronger than me physically, but I was absolutely, if not more intelligent and level headed as any of them. In fact, they often became more bent out of shape than I did over simple things! Anger, aggressiveness, ego, and the desire for power can be just as detrimental to a leader's judgement as any other emotional response.
As far as special training prior to the course, I would imagine that none of the females were infantry officers and training them in basic infantry skills would only serve to level the playing field, not tilt it to their advantage.

As a former RI and having good friends still serving as instructors in RTB. My buddies have said the ladies are legit.

First of all this question should never have to be answered in a social forum or anywhere else. I believe in the integrity of the Officers and NCO's that run the School and I don't believe they will make any exceptions to any candidate in spite of a General's wishes. I admit is is a first! I also admit that the cadre felt they were qualified to become Rangers and they earned the Tab. Now if you can show me other wise? I will rethink my comment. Rangers Lead The Way!

I think anyone who feels these two women were not held to the same standards are not attacking these two women, but instead the instructional institution at the course. Even if told to provide special treatment, this is in no way a lawful order, so it is on the cadre to decide whether or not to execute this request and to highlight the corruption if it does exist. As NCOs, this is part of their duty, so if these women did in fact get special treatment, then the accountability ultimately does not rest on them in my eyes.

If we want to stop the hateful remarks, we have to stop throwing people into the spotlight, but that won't happen any time soon thanks to the media of today. There are standards to meet, and to say that women cannot--yet men can--meet said standards has already been proven wrong for years; we have seen not all men are made from the same material, and many who try do not successfully make it through the entirety of the Ranger school. I don't have the data on how many men roll back three times in each of the Phases, but does it really matter? Males were given the same opportunities to continue the course that these three women were. To instantly presume that no woman has the physical, mental, or emotional capacity to complete this course is just ignorance talking. When we use this as a platform for women to pound their chests, however, we open it up for scrutiny.

If I'm not mistaken, the intentions of this course are to provide leadership qualities and enhance skillsets, so to withhold the course from women doesn't make much sense to me, anyway; I think there is still much discussion to be done in regards to where women can and will be integrated into specific forces as they provide combat capabilities in a joint environment, but opening this school up to women does not really factor into that debate.