Posted on Feb 7, 2015
What do you "Honestly" think about women attending Ranger School?
235K
1.43K
750
93
89
4
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
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 240
Males and females are built differently, with our own strength and weaknesses. Rangers should not have to change their standard based on females perception of discrimination. There may be females that could handle it, but could doesn't always mean should...
(1)
(0)
In this day and time, all qualified candidates, regardless of gender or race, should have the
oppurtunity to become a Ranger. Additional slots should be opened if necessary.
oppurtunity to become a Ranger. Additional slots should be opened if necessary.
(1)
(0)
1SG David Lopez
I respect your opinion on this issue. Although I've never seen "Race" as a result to change the standards so a set group could pass and/or graduate. It remains to be seen. I did not have any monitors there to question the RI'S when I knocked out more than 120 push ups, and had to do it again 5 minutes later in order to pass the PT test. Let's not forget the thousand or so push ups prior to getting to the APFT site. The standards have already changed, but that's what it is, and that preferential treatment is where it begins, just saying. ...
(1)
(0)
Why do some many people have to be so sexstis. Women can do anything a male can do. So why should women be told they can't do something just because they were born a women? It doesn't make any scene. ........
(2)
(1)
(1)
(0)
1SG David Lopez
This ain't just technical, it is extreme physical exhaustion. But you are right, women can do it. Somewhere there is a Super Human Female that is preparing for this and will accomplish. Not sure when that will be, maybe sooner than later.
(0)
(0)
SSG Wally Lawver
The military has no business getting all politically correct, our nations defense is nothing to tinker with, so if standards are UNCHANGED and EQUAL good luck , but unfortunately in todays politically correct world, we know that aint so:)
(1)
(0)
Thanks every body, we beat this dead horse over and over. The Big Green Machine (Army) is gonna do what it wants to do. We'll just have to stay tuned and see what happens. Good Luck to the Females that make it to Ranger School, "It is not for the weak or faint hearted".
(1)
(0)
Cpl Brett Wagner
1SG David Lopez - I just noticed your location. Bro what did they get you for? How much time you gonna have to do? lol ;-) Looks like your still kicking ass and taking names.
(1)
(0)
1SG David Lopez
I'm only there 8 hours a day, sometimes 16 hours. We are hiring if anybody needs a good paying job, we prefer military veterans.
(0)
(0)
This first iteration of an integrated RTAC has provided significant lessons learned as we conduct a deliberate and professional way forward to the integrated assessment in April," said Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence, Fort Benning.
The second iteration of RTAC began Friday at Fort Benning. As many as 21 women were scheduled to participate in that iteration,
including one of the women who did not successfully complete the first iteration of RTAC.
WTF?
The second iteration of RTAC began Friday at Fort Benning. As many as 21 women were scheduled to participate in that iteration,
including one of the women who did not successfully complete the first iteration of RTAC.
WTF?
(1)
(0)
And trying to avoid where some out side organization comea in and demands more pass when they haven't earned it. it is the one thing most if us includein many of the women who are going through this class will agree with. There should be one Standard that everyone strives for.
(1)
(0)
Whether a 19% pass rate for women at Ranger prep is good or bad depends upon perspective.
- Organizational. Good and bad. Good that evidently the same standards are being upheld regardless of gender. A drop in the standards required for Ranger Prep and Ranger School is bad for both individuals and the Army. Bad that 19% will not produce the numbers of female ranger students that are needed.
- Individual. Obviously bad for those women who did not pass but good for the women who did pass since this will give them confidence during Ranger School and credibility with others during Ranger School.
- Temporal. Bad in the near term but good in the long term since individuals will work to come into Ranger prep better prepared and data will be collected from the first group to determine what is causing the most failures. Analysis from this will help to provide guidance on how follow on women to Ranger Prep can come in better prepared and therefore better able to pass Ranger Prep and eventually Ranger School itself.
- Bottom line. The first group of women through Ranger School is a process not a destination. This is like making a final decision in MDMP right after mission analysis is complete but before COA development has begun. Be patient and let the process work as it should and is supposed to work.
- Organizational. Good and bad. Good that evidently the same standards are being upheld regardless of gender. A drop in the standards required for Ranger Prep and Ranger School is bad for both individuals and the Army. Bad that 19% will not produce the numbers of female ranger students that are needed.
- Individual. Obviously bad for those women who did not pass but good for the women who did pass since this will give them confidence during Ranger School and credibility with others during Ranger School.
- Temporal. Bad in the near term but good in the long term since individuals will work to come into Ranger prep better prepared and data will be collected from the first group to determine what is causing the most failures. Analysis from this will help to provide guidance on how follow on women to Ranger Prep can come in better prepared and therefore better able to pass Ranger Prep and eventually Ranger School itself.
- Bottom line. The first group of women through Ranger School is a process not a destination. This is like making a final decision in MDMP right after mission analysis is complete but before COA development has begun. Be patient and let the process work as it should and is supposed to work.
(1)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
First, congratulations to all who attempted it and especially to those who succeeded in passing. That is an outstanding achievement.
Time will tell if those who passed will be able to withstand the rigors and demands of the actual course. If they do, that is awesome, although I personally think it is just yet another attempt at liberal social engineering with no real military purpose and just another chink in the armor of our military.
I hope the Army is true to its word that the standards will not be reduced to allow females to be successful in this course. If they do, what does it prove?
Call me old fashioned, but I see no benefit from this whatsoever.
First, congratulations to all who attempted it and especially to those who succeeded in passing. That is an outstanding achievement.
Time will tell if those who passed will be able to withstand the rigors and demands of the actual course. If they do, that is awesome, although I personally think it is just yet another attempt at liberal social engineering with no real military purpose and just another chink in the armor of our military.
I hope the Army is true to its word that the standards will not be reduced to allow females to be successful in this course. If they do, what does it prove?
Call me old fashioned, but I see no benefit from this whatsoever.
(1)
(0)
19% seems like a good start to me.
Now we'll see how many pass the actual course.
Remember, if the pass number > 3 than Army beats the Marines! (based off the 3 graduates from Marine School of Infantry)
Now we'll see how many pass the actual course.
Remember, if the pass number > 3 than Army beats the Marines! (based off the 3 graduates from Marine School of Infantry)
(1)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Keep in mind it was 3 out of 15 for the Marines at SOI East ITB = Infantry Training Battalion). 20% graduation rate. One was held back for injury, not dropped initially so she would be classified as recycle.
Also keep in mind all Marines go through School of Infantry, it's just a case of whether we go through MCT (Non-Infantry) or AITB (Infantry).
Also keep in mind all Marines go through School of Infantry, it's just a case of whether we go through MCT (Non-Infantry) or AITB (Infantry).
(1)
(0)
Read This Next


Women in the Military
Ranger
Ranger School
