Posted on Feb 7, 2015
What do you "Honestly" think about women attending Ranger School?
236K
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
Women in the Military
Ranger
Ranger School
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 240
2
2
0
I am not entirely opposed to women attending the school.
I AM opposed to opening slots for the sole reason of demonstrating our "diversity."
Training standards MUST BE EQUAL. Period. No observers. No brass facilitating the success of participants.
I AM opposed to opening slots for the sole reason of demonstrating our "diversity."
Training standards MUST BE EQUAL. Period. No observers. No brass facilitating the success of participants.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SFC James Needles
SFC Arthur Tucker -Thank you for your response SFC Tucker. I understand that there may be an investigation being conducted concerning the possible change of standards. Until said possible investigation reveals a change or no change in standards I will believe the standards were not changed. If the investigation shows the standards were changed I will admit on this forum that is was wrong and stand corrected. You may be correct in the belief of standards being changed. SSG Robert Webster has already shown that there was not fair and equal treatment in how the women were granted slots to RS. They were required by mandate to complete various training courses in order to apply for RS. There is no such mandatory requirement from any higher training authority for male applicants to RS. This is not equal, fair treatment. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
(0)
(0)
LTC John Wilson
I believe that females that want to attend the Ranger School should have the choice of selecting various training ventures to better their chances to complete Ranger School. Males can do it too! You don't have to wait to take some of these courses if you fit the criteria of that school.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Nothing is wrong with this honestly, I think it great that they willing to put time and commitment knowing this course is hard and challenging but they still try and succeed.
(2)
(0)
SFC Arthur Tucker
What is wrong with this is the time and energy spent trying to get them through and they will never be real Rangers.
(0)
(0)
SFC James Needles
SFC Arthur Tucker - I see your argument. A soldier should be given the same treatment, meet the same requirements regardless of gender. Even if these conditions are met and they complete RS. There is no guarantee the females will be granted a slot anywhere in the 75th Ranger Regiment.
(1)
(0)
LTC John Wilson
They are being given the same treatment and will be assigned according to the Army's needs not a macho agenda.!
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Two new Rangers have been added to the list and all Rangers should accept them as fellow Rangers being they completed the same requirements. How they will turn out is in the eyes of the future and the commander that commands them. If he is truly bias free they may succeed, if he has preconditioning against them, they will fail. The Army should not be used as a social experiment when lives are at steak. Finding out your buddy cannot cope with combat conditions is a blow that is hard to swallow. The Army says they are qualified! Salute these two and pray the standards stay the same as WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Army strong.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
LTC John Wilson
If females can qualify for Ranger Training then they should be given the opportunity to succeed in it. Not pampered, but a legitimate chance to earn the Ranger Tab. Some can do it!
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
As a female, I don't like it. It's a huge risk and could cause more problems.
Best thing I head... None, zip, zero even made it passed part 1 !!
Best thing I head... None, zip, zero even made it passed part 1 !!
(2)
(0)
1SG David Lopez
Thanks for your comment. I am open to equal opportunity, but I am not open to changing the standards. We want our beloved RS to stay harder than hard, tougher than tough, challenging, and not for the weak or faint hearted. Its main purpose is to train soldiers/leaders to lead men to successfully close with and defeat the enemy. We owe it to all of our Soldiers to provide the best training for those that accomplish the harsh task of completing RS.
(2)
(0)
SGT Mary Sweezy
Yes we do, we owe many that have saved our ass on many many missions.
Rangers are something of a right that in all reality should not include females.
*But as we all know Feminists are pushing harder to be equal
Rangers are something of a right that in all reality should not include females.
*But as we all know Feminists are pushing harder to be equal
(1)
(0)
LTC John Wilson
So, you are saying you couldn't make it and no other female should be given an opportunity to pass Ranger School?
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Any school should be open to both sexes. Don't change the requirements. Whoever can pass gets the privileges and responsibilities that come along with passing the course. 161 males failed that course along with 19 or twenty women. Still making men the primary failures of the course. Those women should be recycled just like any of their peers and given a second chance like any of their peers.
(2)
(0)
1SG David Lopez
Thanks for your comment. I agree with you whole heartedly, although initially I assumed that the standards would change like all other military scholls in the past when this occurred. I hope that having the FEMALE OBSEVERS / MONITORS will not influence the evaluations on any students in any way. That subject in itself is the first change of standards that we were made aware of when this first started.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Brad MarkW
Your point seems to be that the women that failed deserve to go again? Seeing as how all of the women failed at one point and the ones that did pass were recycled, I am not following your logic. From the news I understand that 19 women and 381 men reported for this Ranger School. Out of those, 2 women and 220 men graduated. That means the women had roughly a 90% dropout rate and the men slightly under 50%. All indications point to the theory that the women chosen were the best of the best. Cream of the crop. I don't have the time to look up how many recycles were given to the women or the men that eventually passed but the implication from the People magazine exposé was the women were given more opportunities to recycle and try again than the men. After all that, if they could only muster a less than 10% pass rate then that puts this experiment in a rather harsh light.
(0)
(0)
LTC John Wilson
Recycling does not have to be abused. a standard should be set and once you have failed you are not considered again, unless you can show you have done some training to allow you access in the School.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
1SG David Lopez Thanks for the information on the school, in the Air Force if you need the PME, Education, course you typically can get in within a decent amount of time, however I did know previously know how hard it was to get into Ranger school which CPT (Join to see) brought to my attention in another post. So with the education I believe if they are competing with the males for the slots and get in let em tear it up, if not cycle through like anyone else would have if they didn't get in. I think for all of the combat positions/special operations if the women want in they all need to meet the same qualifications if you have to carry a battle out some where you need to be able to do it, not check the box for a demographic. Im all for it for the same standards and same amount intestinal fortitude. I mean we are the military we all wear the same uniform and if you want that special status be it Ranger, Force Recon, SEAL, PJ ect meet that standard for that job or move along.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
As I have said in other posts about topics such as this "If they can hack it, let them pack it"
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I've said the same thing since this first started getting put out there as an idea/possibility. No. It's incredibly difficult to get a Ranger School slot in the 173rd. Now we have to compete with females taking precedence simply because they're females and the army is worried about PR and equality? There are only 8 left. All those other females that failed could've been a slot that one of our guys could've had. If and when the last female has either quit or failed, this will be more heavily scrutinized than it already is, if that's possible.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google