Well, two women to graduate Ranger School....... [Archive]

View Full Version : Well, two women to graduate Ranger School.......

ABNAK

08-18-15, 09:18

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/18/army-ranger-school-to-graduate-its-first-two-women/?intcmp=hpbt3

They each recycled twice. Is that something that happens fairly frequently with male students? I read where ~ 1/3 recycle at some point but how about twice? I always thought that in such HSLD courses if you recycled (usually only allowed in cases of injury) you went back to Day 1. Apparently Ranger School recycles by phases.

SHIVAN

08-18-15, 09:21

I believe the recycle issue is a red-herring. At least one of the three was a medical recycle.

However, from Mike Pannone's FB post, it also sounds like a General was brought in to "score" this class.

ABNAK

08-18-15, 09:25

Eurodriver

08-18-15, 09:29

FYI - Zero females have graduated from USMC Infantry Officer School.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/10/no-women-pass-marines-infantry-officer-school-by-experiments-end.html

Vandal

08-18-15, 09:32

Was wondering if there was any behind-the-scenes shenanigans going on.

I've heard from several sources the Ranger Instructors had to sign NDAs regarding this class.

C-grunt

08-18-15, 09:34

I never went to Ranger School but have a good amount of friends that did. From what I remember you can only recycle each phase once. They all failed Darby Phase the first week (might have been the first day) twice. I was also told they were not allowed to be peered out. It's also strange that two people that failed the very first part of Ranger School twice, then complete the entire course, especially Mountain Phase which I've been told is the hardest.

Then again the owner of Ranger Up, Nick Palmaciano (I butchered that name), is a former Ranger Instructor and said he was told by his buddies there that they passed legit. So who the **** knows what's going on.

Digital_Damage

08-18-15, 09:35

If it was going to happen It was going to happen in ranger school... kidding aside.

Just wait 4-5 years, the books will be flowing about the details.

chuckman

08-18-15, 09:42

Then again the owner of Ranger Up, Nick Palmaciano (I butchered that name), is a former Ranger Instructor and said he was told by his buddies there that they passed legit. So who the **** knows what's going on.

http://rhinoden.rangerup.com/time-to-welcome-a-new-era-of-rangers-army/

Not a Ranger and my time affiliated with the Army is minimal (Navy/MC), so I don't have skin the game, but I find his comments interesting.

ABNAK

08-18-15, 09:43

FYI - Zero females have graduated from USMC Infantry Officer School.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/04/10/no-women-pass-marines-infantry-officer-school-by-experiments-end.html

FYI, coming to a service near you and that includes the jarheads too! Do they recycle? If not you may have your reason why.

Eurodriver

08-18-15, 09:50

FYI, coming to a service near you and that includes the jarheads too! Do they recycle? If not you may have your reason why.

Of the first group of 10 to volunteer for the course, nine failed to make it through the first day.

Recycle them from the first day?? You'd have to wait until another class began which may not have been for several weeks.

ABNAK

08-18-15, 09:55

Recycle them from the first day?? You'd have to wait until another class began which may not have been for several weeks.

No, do they recycle at all? Big difference if they don't. Edit: Did a little Googling and it appears that in the case of the women IOC candidates no, they were not allowed to recycle. Didn't see if men were allowed to return to a subsequent class but since the women were kind of on an "experimental" basis a completely new batch starts each IOC course. If the Ranger School did the same thing there would not be two women graduating, as they would not have been allowed to recycle.

FWIW there have been a few women graduate from the enlisted Marine SOI on an experimental basis. It's only a matter of time before one or more graduates from the officer version. Same with the Army. Yep, there are gonna be some pink saddles on the Marine white chargers saving the day. :laugh:

To wit:

http://archive.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20131219/NEWS/312190031/10-more-women-graduate-from-Marine-Corps-enlisted-infantry-training

Crow Hunter

08-18-15, 11:13

My cousin got his Ranger tab in his early 30's.

He said it was really, really hard. He had to recycle one of the steps. IIRC it was something related to rappelling so it was probably in the mountain course.

He said if he had been 10 years younger it would have been a lot easier.

He also said the worst part of it was not being able to shower for such a long time. He has always been a little preppy though. :)

SHIVAN

08-18-15, 12:20

If I am a male Ranger, at 175lbs + 85-120lb pack on, can either of the two who passed drag me across an opening to safety if I am hit?

FWIW, even in LAV's old Fallujah drill, some people couldn't drag some of the "casualties" and those were grown ass men, dragging grown ass men who had minimal kit on.

A point to ponder....

Abraham

08-18-15, 12:27

chuckman

08-18-15, 12:35

"He also said the worst part of it was not being able to shower for such a long time."

Yeah, there's nothing filthier than a soldier, if he's in the field for awhile.

Out in the field during basic and AIT, I hated my own smell, we all stunk to high heaven.

Then on long field deployments, ye gads we were filthy and I didn't know one soldier who wasn't disgusted by his lack of hygiene.

Off track: coming back home after some time in the field my wife made strip to my skivvies, on my porch, before I could go into the house, much to the horror and amusement of my neighbors. I think I was growing mold. On track.

OH58D

08-18-15, 13:42

I did Air Assault School at Campbell in July 1983 and there was one female "black shirt" instructor. If she had the opportunity for Ranger back in those days, I bet she would have done pretty good. She was a tough little bitch.

KalashniKEV

08-18-15, 14:08

http://rhinoden.rangerup.com/time-to-welcome-a-new-era-of-rangers-army/

...I find his comments interesting.

Understand his bias:

Obviously he's going to support the integrity of the institution where he taught- "Uphold THE Ranger Standard..."

Obviously he's going to support his fellow academy grads- "the Long Gray Line..."

The truth is the Standard is always applied differently to different students- even though there are evaluation criteria to keep it somewhat fair.

The truth is the Standard is always changing- every time they update the course it gets easier and everyone in the room nods their head and says, "Not easier, only different."

Case in point- my friend went to Ranger School 3x in his career, finally graduating as a Major. He just took an early retirement at 15 and when calculated, he will have spend a decent percentage of his time in School. He admits that the post-2006 changes made it substantially easier. Land Nav on patrols (after the test) is via GPS now, while you sip off your Camelbak, and wear Belleville 390 boots... no longer does the student have to cope with pine-needle-pointing his location under extreme mental and physical fatigue... he can just read a 10 digit grid off a LCD screen.

I wouldn't get hung up on the Recycle aspect either- one of the guys who graduated with me was tough as nails, and skilled, but somehow managed to get hurt or **** something up once per phase before he made it out.

People searching for outrage are simply late to the game. You're mad that they scoured the whole United States Army and found not one, but two females who could pass Ranger School???

Where was your anger when they switched to comfy socks, or started letting pogues in?

In 20 years it will be the feel-good-tab-of-the-year... just like what happened to Airborne School.

SteyrAUG

08-18-15, 14:32

It's all interesting and exciting until people who may not be qualified actually deploy.

Then the novelty wears off and you realize you are a danger to yourself and others.

There is a reason I don't build skyscrapers, it isn't because the work is beyond my ability, it is because I have no business being up there. I understand that.

C-grunt

08-18-15, 14:53

What MOS are these chicks?

KalashniKEV

08-18-15, 15:00

It's all interesting and exciting until people who may not be qualified actually deploy.

Deployment is the natural counterweight to Ranger School.

Part of what the Tab does is provide field cred to those who have not deployed and led patrols/ raids/ OPs/ other real world operations. You get to stand in front of the group and open your mouth and not be immediately told to STFU.

Awards and badges don't mean anything in theater, and you will quickly find out who a real ninja and who 'aint one... regardless of what their uniform looks like.

Circa 2005, try convincing one of your shit hot team leaders that he needs to find time for 61 days of pure suck during his 12 month dwell time... but not too close to JRTC/NTC/MRX... because it will be good for his career and he'll be a better leader.

He's got his cred, and he knows his people (perhaps better than you do), and he just wants some time to drink a beer for a bit and then get back into working with his guys so they're *all* ready for the next deployment.

Now that we are transitioning back to the peace-time Army, all this stuff is going to get really important again. Getting school slots and sewing on all your badges- Ranger/ ABN/ AASLT/ Patchfinder.

My solution years-ago was to create a whole-new-tab devoted to convoy ops, guard tower, gate guard, TCPs, etc and make it open to all MOS's. Make it GWOT specific and then shut it down after it loses it's relevance... everyone who went can feel OG like some "Jungle Expert." Call it a "Warrior Leader's Course on Steroids" and simply keep the same standards, change the conditions to suck, and have a real attrition rate.

The cost to the Army would have been minimal and we would have had better junior NCOs and pogue officers.

But then again, if it was within my power to do that I can already hear people complaining- "Ohhh General KalashniKEV wants to make his own special tab!"

I guess now the Ranger Tab will become that.

chuckman

08-18-15, 15:10

Understand his bias:

Obviously he's going to support the integrity of the institution where he taught- "Uphold THE Ranger Standard..."

Obviously he's going to support his fellow academy grads- "the Long Gray Line..."

The truth is the Standard is always applied differently to different students- even though there are evaluation criteria to keep it somewhat fair.

The truth is the Standard is always changing- every time they update the course it gets easier and everyone in the room nods their head and says, "Not easier, only different."

Case in point- my friend went to Ranger School 3x in his career, finally graduating as a Major. He just took an early retirement at 15 and when calculated, he will have spend a decent percentage of his time in School. He admits that the post-2006 changes made it substantially easier. Land Nav on patrols (after the test) is via GPS now, while you sip off your Camelbak, and wear Belleville 390 boots... no longer does the student have to cope with pine-needle-pointing his location under extreme mental and physical fatigue... he can just read a 10 digit grid off a LCD screen.

I wouldn't get hung up on the Recycle aspect either- one of the guys who graduated with me was tough as nails, and skilled, but somehow managed to get hurt or **** something up once per phase before he made it out.

People searching for outrage are simply late to the game. You're mad that they scoured the whole United States Army and found not one, but two females who could pass Ranger School???

Where was your anger when they switched to comfy socks, or started letting pogues in?

In 20 years it will be the feel-good-tab-of-the-year... just like what happened to Airborne School.

Like I had said, aside from larger weakness-to-national-defense implications, as I was not in the Army I have no skin in the game. I have not been to Ranger school so I don't know what is "easy" or what is "hard." His comments are a bit dissimilar from what most people are saying, for sure, but as he is still somewhat "connected", he has to know his comments are not popular and would accordingly alienate quite a bit of his Ranger Up base.

As for a standard applied differently to different people, then it ceases to be a standard. I do understant that some units go for the "whole man" approach, and while standards are not necessarily lowered different emphasis is put on different metrics and more of a composite is composed. It is my understanding that Ranger school is not like this, but again, I have no idea. I will say that none of the Navy or Marine Corps schools I went to allowed a student to pass if they did not meet an expected standard, and some of those schools were mixed sexes.

I also realize that RS is not The Regiment and that RS is just that...a school, a leadership school. Likewise I also harbor no illusion that somewhere down the road all SoF will be pressured to have women mainstreamed in and the whole "changing standards" argument will be on again.

Before I get outed as a pro-feminist, let's-equalize-at-all-cost kinda metrosexual, I really oppose women in Ranger school, SoF, or any of the other programs for exactly the reasons that have been illuminated here and elsewhere. At the end of the day while I am not a really a misogynist, I do believe they have roles, and the combat arms ain't them.

Failure2Stop

08-18-15, 15:21

chuckman

08-18-15, 15:28

Take a look at any unit with a decent female population and within a few minutes of conversation you will readily learn who is sleeping with who behind who else's back, much to the chagrin and jealousy of many others.

Word. I served in mixed logisitics/support units and all-male meat-eating units, and as we all know the drama in the all-male units is about nil.

SHIVAN

08-18-15, 15:53

There are women out there that are stronger, mentally and physically than the majority of their male peers.
True, that percentage is pretty low, but there are women that are wholly capable of serving in direct combat.

Knowing your background, I'd love to hear the equivalencies, and what units.

If it's a female "motorpool" gal vs. the average male "motorpool" guy, Ok I might see that as being possible, and they could both definitely see some shit. Two way action, etc.

I can not imagine that the two female graduates from the Ranger School will compare favorably to any, even in the bottom 1/3rd of that class, or to the rest of the Ranger tabbed world.

I am clearly, clearly out of my lane, but as you say the percentage has got to be not only low, but minuscule.

SteyrAUG

08-18-15, 16:36

Awards and badges don't mean anything in theater, and you will quickly find out who a real ninja and who 'aint one... regardless of what their uniform looks like.

Agreed, and pretty much the point I was making. But even with a freshman ninja class going out on first op, if you have people who lack the same "training" background and standards as everyone else, it gets progressively worse.

I'd rather have a guy who never deployed but has a legit Ranger tab than somebody with a "participation" ribbon and "best attendance" medal.

SteyrAUG

08-18-15, 16:39

There are women out there that are stronger, mentally and physically than the majority of their male peers.
True, that percentage is pretty low, but there are women that are wholly capable of serving in direct combat.
This is, however, not the real problem with females in combat arms.
The issue is that 18-25 year olds, when put in close constant proximity, will f**k each other with astounding predictability, and that, my friends, is how one guts the integrity and combat effectiveness of a unit.
Take a look at any unit with a decent female population and within a few minutes of conversation you will readily learn who is sleeping with who behind who else's back, much to the chagrin and jealousy of many others. Even highly trained and disciplined individuals are not androgenous robots; pretending otherwise is asinine to a criminal degree.

If I was single and thought we might all get killed tomorrow, I'd be ****ing if ****ing is an option. It can really take the edge off of being IED'd all damn day.

pinzgauer

08-18-15, 17:15

have a kid in the RS pipeline, so this is something I've been following and learning about.

While 3rd chances (the day one recycle after 2 recycles with no-go's) are not common, they can occur if the RTB believes the candidate has what it takes to finish. But a day one recycle means repeating RAP week, most men decline. Likewise, no day 1 recycle (or recycles in general) if they were dropped for lack of motivation or honor violation.

Recycling multiple phases is not unusual even for men. There are proud wearers of the tab who repeated each phase twice, and some even with a day 1 recycle to boot!

There is no doubt the females who finished were extraordinary and quite possibly more capable than 97% of the rest of the Army. (Almost by definition)

We'll never know if they compromised the standard. Two star Generals walking the patrol lane and issuing the "go" decision is viewed by some as undue command influence. Others swear the General has uncompromising integrity and would uphold the standard.

The trick will be whether the Army delays it's decision on IN until another crop is through. My bet is they will not. There will be another female graduate before January and exceptions to opening IN and AR to females has to be logged. They would have to present evidence showing both how they were unable to meet the standrd and why that standard is mission critical.

With three passing the Infantry gold standard (Ranger Tab), there is no argument to be made. So while I don't agree with the decision, I expect we'll see AR for sure and most likely IN opened up to females without restriction other than Ranger Regiment. SF (18x) MOS I expect will remain closed for a bit, but who knows. This is not an informed military insight of mine, just an informed civvy conjecture based on the politics and timing. But I'd bet money it will happen.

I'm sure now we'll hear from the misguided children that RS is a chick's school, where IOC is clearly not! :-)

pinzgauer

08-18-15, 17:21

I'd rather have a guy who never deployed but has a legit Ranger tab than somebody with a "participation" ribbon and "best attendance" medal.

For most Infantry units currently they won't give a cherry 2LT a platoon without an Ranger tab. It's pretty much a career killer to leave Benning without one unless it was medical. And even then heat/cold drops have some negative stigma and restrictions on returning.

So all the abstract badgefinder aspect of the females in Ranger School news aside, for most of the male 2LT's in RS or waiting to get in, RS is the single most important thing on their horizon.

ABNAK

08-18-15, 18:56

Since there are conflicting anecdotal accounts of what has taken place, I'd like to know if there was any brow-beating or pencil-whipping taking place to ensure that Der Fuhrer's edict about women in combat units actually came to fruition. I wasn't a Ranger, just plain-old Airborne Infantry, but I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to make it through. I also know a number of guys who have been in Ranger Regiment as well as graduated Ranger School. Having been a grunt I would like to know if these women carried the same ruck loadout as their peers, if they took their turn humping with the SAW and 240, etc. Sure, I know what the official version will be but did they actually do it? I suspect that only students of this class will be able to voice their opinion (as opposed to cadre), and even then I wager there will be career-endangering roadblocks put in place for those who do so.

KalashniKEV

08-18-15, 21:56

...I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to make it through.

I would like to know if these women carried the same ruck loadout as their peers, if they took their turn humping with the SAW and 240, etc. Sure, I know what the official version will be but did they actually do it?

I suspect that only students of this class will be able to voice their opinion (as opposed to cadre), and even then I wager there will be career-endangering roadblocks put in place for those who do so.

1) If they did RAP week, twice, in 120 days, and made it through all the phases putting one foot in front of the other, they're tough as nails. Period.

2) I'm sure they carried 240s, tripods, and SAWs. That's not insane. Plenty of smaller statured Rangers do every cycle.

3) In my experience, there are no such thing as "career ending roadblocks" in the Army. **** up to move up.

My main question at this moment, and what I have heard conflicting intel on, is "Were the female students only grading each other on peers?"

Originally I heard that because men would instantly peer them to protect the Y-ness of the Tab, they had immunity from peers... then I heard they graded each other... now it sounds like they were normal students...

Also, not that it would make a difference, but was there a "female combat veteran cheerleader" following them through the course delivering motivation?

Did a 2-star seriously grade their patrols? Who was he?

pinzgauer

08-19-15, 08:01

1) If they did RAP week, twice, in 120 days, and made it through all the phases putting one foot in front of the other, they're tough as nails. Period.

This is known to be the case... They were getting no-go's in patrols. The anomaly is that the recycle/failure rate for males went up significantly during this period as well. Conjecture is they were upholding the standard, but were even stricter on males to show there was not bias. We'll not know for years.

2) I'm sure they carried 240s, tripods, and SAWs. That's not insane. Plenty of smaller statured Rangers do every cycle.

We don't know one way or the other, but by all accounts they were hanging in there physically. If they shirked the heavier loads this would get out. It would also significantly work against them in peers.

3) In my experience, there are no such thing as "career ending roadblocks" in the Army. **** up to move up.

My comment was more for new Infantry officers. Tabbing is not optional if you want to be given a platoon in one of the light units. My son is being told don't bother to report to his unit without a tab.

My main question at this moment, and what I have heard conflicting intel on, is "Were the female students only grading each other on peers?"

Originally I heard that because men would instantly peer them to protect the Y-ness of the Tab, they had immunity from peers... then I heard they graded each other... now it sounds like they were normal students...

I've heard both. Don't know what the ground truth is. Most of the buzz about only peering each other was in Darby.

Also, not that it would make a difference, but was there a "female combat veteran cheerleader" following them through the course delivering motivation?

Female observers for sure, who had previously observed all male classes to get a baseline. Sounds like a circus with press, female observers, Maj General Miller, etc. How much they were allowed to coach/cheer is not known due to the gag order/NDA.

Did a 2-star seriously grade their patrols? Who was he?

I've not seen this confirmed officially, but it's known that Maj Gen Scott Miller walked the lanes with them as he has commented on observing them. Some accounts indicate he gave the go personally. The shame is this will taint their tabs... My bet is the females would not have wanted the attention or special treatment, just a fair shot.

The main problems getting go's occurred in Darby patrols it appears. They seem to have done better in Mountain & Swamp phase. But no one will know for years if there was undue command influence. I expect once RI's retire we may learn more.

Personally, I have less of a problem with females being allowed to attempt RS if it was done truly without bias and change of standards. But we know that's virtually imposable to do. The bigger issue is the 2 (soon 3) female tabs will be used to justify opening Infantry up. They are hell bent on doing this.

pinzgauer

08-20-15, 10:15

Rumor debunking: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/08/20/ranger-school-officer-combats-rumors-about-how-women-passed-in-pointed-facebook-post/

6. The commanding general [Editor’s note: Miller] walked a patrol in each phase of Class 8-15. It was his 30th anniversary of attending Ranger School. He intentionally did not walk a patrol that a female was being graded on to ensure there was no conflict of interest. The infantry commandant [Editor’s note: Rainey for most of the female soldiers’ time at Ranger School] has walked patrols and so has the CG. This is not unprecedented.

7. Observer/Advisors – This subject has caused a lot of consternation. They are non-grading cadre [of women] who were assigned to the RTB to help. They had no authority and they worked for the chain of command.

8. The ridiculous rumor that President Obama was coming to this graduation and that RIs were told to pass them before they even started Florida is absolutely false. He isn’t/wasn’t coming to graduation. [Editor’s note: A White House official confirmed that is accurate.]

26 Inf

08-20-15, 18:19

Is it just possible that when given a shit sandwich, knowing that people are going to hate no matter what you do, that this little microcosm of America did what we like to think we (Americans) would do? In other words the honest thing, regardless of outcome?

That is where my vote is going.

pinzgauer

08-20-15, 19:29

That is where my vote is going.

I'm there. I have to assume the RIs kept the standard.

Pilgrim

08-20-15, 23:38

Personally, I have less of a problem with females being allowed to attempt RS if it was done truly without bias and change of standards. But we know that's virtually impossible to do. The bigger issue is the 2 (soon 3) female tabs will be used to justify opening Infantry up. They are hell bent on doing this.

My son just got back from the Jacksonville MEPS tonight. He went there to rewrite his 11x contract... Good thing he already had 11x as infantry was not even available today... There were three Option 40 spots open though, and he got one! He ships in 10 months... I told him Ranger School ought to be easy, I mean, even a girl can do it!

SeriousStudent

08-20-15, 23:52

My thanks and congratulations to your son on his new chosen profession. I know he will make your family and our country proud with his honorable service.

Best wishes for success to your new Soldier.

jpmuscle

08-21-15, 02:05

Question. As I have minimal knowledge on the subject.

I have seen a lot mentioned about day 1 recycles. I assume this to mean the recruit failed to complete the day 1 tasks which are what out of curiosity?

pinzgauer

08-21-15, 06:18

I have seen a lot mentioned about day 1 recycles. I assume this to mean the recruit failed to complete the day 1 tasks which are what out of curiosity?

Four distinct phases: RAP Week, Darby/Patrols, Mountains, and Swamp

A recycle normally only goes back to the beginning of that particular phase. A day one recycle goes back to repeat all phases, including RAP Week. Not a good thing, and not commonly offered, and even less common to take. (19 males declined their day one recycle when the two females did theirs)

Recycle Mountains, you repeat just Mountains. Day one recycle while in Mountains, you have to repeat RAP Wk, Darby, and Mountains.

Normally no recycles in RAP Wk, you have to reapply. It's more of a screening/filter for PT/motivation.

pinzgauer

08-21-15, 06:26

My son just got back from the Jacksonville MEPS tonight. He went there to rewrite his 11x contract... Good thing he already had 11x as infantry was not even available today... There were three Option 40 spots open though, and he got one! He ships in 10 months... I told him Ranger School ought to be easy, I mean, even a girl can do it!

He may want to check into armyranger.com (https://armyranger.com). Bunch of Rangers there that help the option 40's get ready and prep for the regiment. Very strict mod rules, but good guys who help kids get their option 40's, then make it into the regiment. Also a good contact point for current and retired Rangers.

Congrats regarding your son. With any luck mine will be through by then but if something changes let me know.

pinzgauer

08-21-15, 06:31

The two females graduating is not the only amazing story this week.

This new Ranger from the same class started his 3rd attempt shortly after completing chemo for cancer:

http://chrisjanowski.hubpages.com/hub/56-Weeks-In-The-Making

JHC

08-21-15, 09:16

Hopefully a lot of speculative questions about standards are being answered. A close friend is a former RI, recently retired from active duty. He's connected and has been tracking this. He shits me not that from all he has gleaned and from his network and playing with the stats of recycles/drops/peer evals this class is still in the average range which he considers a strong sign of consistent standards applied. I don't think I've heard yet of someone with a back channel to the current staff that signals two standards.
The anecdotes from their TV panel discussion sounded legit.

I'm one of many admins for a group of closed FB pages that exist to provide info and support to families of service members who vanish into Ranger School like they'd been deployed. One of our leaders has contacts with the RTB to keep us in the loop on current policy, changes etc. He tracks rates of recycle/drops etc very closely and has for several years. Class to class there are sudden spikes one way or the other from time to time. It's happened that nearly entire platoons have been recycled en masse if there was a team work issue prevalent. So it seems hard to gauge too much with minor deviations. The weather is a HUGE factor with the class starting in Jan typically having the lowest pass through rate of the year. Again, this past winter that bumped up as it was more mild than many most winters.

Personally I did not think the bodies of the female students could take the beating of the heavy rucks; largely based on the stats overall for female athlete ortho injuries vs males. However these are not the typical female scholastic athlete even. These are ferociously determined Soldiers; I don't see how that could be doubted any longer.

On my card this is Olympic Gold level of grit and determination. My oldest son just graduated Dec '14 and it kicked his ass. And he's certainly one of the toughest 190 lb 405 squatting former wrestler beasts I've known. He tips his cap to them as his memories are still fresh.

I can't help but feel great pride in the young Americans that are drawn to this craft. Although I did not even pursue going to Ranger School while in the Army I hope those with tabs and scrolls can take great pride in the RTB because all signs point that they really stepped up and delivered consistent with their traditions. That has not happened in many past programs across the larger Army in times past.

And while most focus is on males and whether they can buy in that there was one RS standard here; I think it's also valuable that females can look at what it took for a few exceptional individuals to make it through with all those recycles and then Day 1 re-start. And see that now with two earning their "Victor" designation there was no good old boy fix in to derail them; that the standard is not set unreasonably high (as some outside of the Mil have been questioning); it is just THE STANDARD.

SHIVAN

08-21-15, 09:28

SHIVAN

08-21-15, 09:30

There is a picture of one of the two women carrying the M249, but her pack looks smaller than everyone else's. Is that common? Does the M249 gunner carry less gear on their back to offset the heft of the SAW? That would make sense, but am not sure.

KalashniKEV

08-21-15, 09:43

And see that now with two earning their "Victor" designation there was no good old boy fix in to derail them;

Officers don't get SQI codes.

There is a picture of one of the two women carrying the M249, but her pack looks smaller than everyone else's. Is that common? Does the M249 gunner carry less gear on their back to offset the heft of the SAW? That would make sense, but am not sure.

In addition to your personal gear and assigned weapon, you'll also have a load of stuff to get divided up before you SP, as well as phase-specific equipment to carry (Who remembers being down X number of caribiners in FL during inventory and finding them clipped to rucks and life jackets? LOL!)

Rucks can look big or small depending on what's in them.

The smallest looking ruck on a big hoss of a Ranger might just be full of gun rounds.

When the stuff gets divided, the Squad Leader isn't going to make the little Asian guy carry the tripod and a whole bunch of other stuff. If he does (and he might), there's always peers, and the rest of the squad...

JHC

08-21-15, 10:21

Awesome! So the standards are passable by all genders.

That being said, as more try, and more fail, the politics will become overwhelming. The Big Army's distinct PT standards for male vs. female should indicate that in the long run, most women can not pass the RS standards as they are, just as none can pass the Marine Infantry Officer School standards, as currently written. The challenge will be, "Does THE STANDARD really need to be so demanding to do that job?"

What if in the next 10 Ranger Schools these two women are the only ones to pass? Does everyone really think that will be allowed to stand?

I think they will stand for RS; it's advantage is it is what it is; but that is not a specific MOS.

There's been much talk of the Army going to MOS specific gender neutral PT standards. So AG does not have the same PT standard as Infantry etc.

I don't know where that project is. Seems like it would not be that hard to figure out, they already have a SF PT test and a Ranger PT test. Figure out one for Inf.

FA PT test should include hauling 95 lb 155 rounds around a lot.

pinzgauer

08-21-15, 11:38

There's been much talk of the Army going to MOS specific gender neutral PT standards. So AG does not have the same PT standard as Infantry etc.

I don't know where that project is. Seems like it would not be that hard to figure out, they already have a SF PT test and a Ranger PT test. Figure out one for Inf.

FA PT test should include hauling 95 lb 155 rounds around a lot.

This is a reasonable approach. But should be more than just PT stds... Probably aptitude as well.

You'd still have the issue with the Ranger Reg as its not a separate MOS. But at that point, if they can make it through SURT/RASP, do we really care?

It will be interesting to see if there is a flood of female enlisted applicants for RS, much less IN. I predict just a handful, and that just at first.

Already at USMA females are having to be forced branched to combat arms (mainly FA). I think AR could be popular, and probably reasonable. But based on voluntary participation in the serious field stuff (sapper, other IN related competitions, etc) beyond ABN and AASLT, I expect forced branching to start for IN.

JHC

08-21-15, 11:58

This female does a decent job of hitting the big issues; her conclusions notwithstanding. My sample size of females on active duty in the Army is much smaller than the males but the general attitude I've run into is similar to this one. One standard. Everywhere.

http://www.breachbangclear.com/are-you-a-bitch-or-a-slut/

Moose-Knuckle

08-21-15, 14:10

So they earned a Tab . . . not the Scroll.

I would be really interested to hear what the RIs of that class have to say "off the record".

C4IGrant

08-21-15, 14:15

There is an article out there now by one of the guys that graduated from these girls class. He said that they were "legit."

C4

SHIVAN

08-21-15, 14:20

In addition to your personal gear and assigned weapon, you'll also have a load of stuff to get divided up before you SP, as well as phase-specific equipment to carry (Who remembers being down X number of caribiners in FL during inventory and finding them clipped to rucks and life jackets? LOL!)

Rucks can look big or small depending on what's in them.

The smallest looking ruck on a big hoss of a Ranger might just be full of gun rounds.

When the stuff gets divided, the Squad Leader isn't going to make the little Asian guy carry the tripod and a whole bunch of other stuff. If he does (and he might), there's always peers, and the rest of the squad...

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee192/SHIVAN308/firsts.jpg (http://s235.photobucket.com/user/SHIVAN308/media/firsts.jpg.html)

Pilgrim

08-21-15, 22:50

My thanks and congratulations to your son on his new chosen profession. I know he will make your family and our country proud with his honorable service.

Best wishes for success to your new Soldier.

Thanks. He's been wanting this for a couple years now, seems unreal that he actually got it. I asked him how it felt, and he said very happy... and SCARED SHITLESS!

When he was at MEPS yesterday some of the guys were incredulous that he was adding Ranger School to his contract. Why would you want to do that? a guy asked him that had just got a 92G Food Service job... He told them they most likely would not understand, but to him Airborne/Ranger is a calling and he'd never be satisfied with anything less.

I'm willing to bet these two women, who are most likely painting Columbus red tonight, have that same drive and determination. Agree with women in combat or not, these are no doubt a couple of very tough women.

Bet they can't wait for their hair to grow back!

Pilgrim

08-21-15, 23:13

He may want to check into armyranger.com (https://armyranger.com). Bunch of Rangers there that help the option 40's get ready and prep for the regiment. Very strict mod rules, but good guys who help kids get their option 40's, then make it into the regiment. Also a good contact point for current and retired Rangers.

Congrats regarding your son. With any luck mine will be through by then but if something changes let me know.

Thanks for the heads up on that website, it will be a big help, if something changes I'll certainly let you know but he still has to finish his last year of high school. Been getting ready for infantry school for over a year now, thinking he was going Airborne, but not really expecting to get a shot at the Regiment.

Prayers out for your son that he can stay healthy, injury free, and earn that Ranger tab!

Pilgrim

08-21-15, 23:39

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT0_IVWlWzU

Todd00000

08-22-15, 02:23

Is it true they couldn't get peered out?

Leonidas24

08-22-15, 02:32

Thanks. He's been wanting this for a couple years now, seems unreal that he actually got it. I asked him how it felt, and he said very happy... and SCARED SHITLESS!

When he was at MEPS yesterday some of the guys were incredulous that he was adding Ranger School to his contract. Why would you want to do that? a guy asked him that had just got a 92G Food Service job... He told them they most likely would not understand, but to him Airborne/Ranger is a calling and he'd never be satisfied with anything less.

I'm willing to bet these two women, who are most likely painting Columbus red tonight, have that same drive and determination. Agree with women in combat or not, these are no doubt a couple of very tough women.

Bet they can't wait for their hair to grow back!
Good luck to your son. I never got the option 40 when enlisting as 11x back in 2007. I ended up attending a pre-Ranger event in Germany in 2008 once I'd gotten to my unit. My battalion had four slots and there were 40 or so hopefuls including myself. I was doing well until I fractured my patella and tore my ACL during a march. That ended my hopes for getting tabbed and eventually pushed me out of the Army in 2010.

If he's motivated I'm sure he will do well.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Wake27

08-22-15, 02:53

Is it true the couldn't get peered out?

I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Campbell

08-22-15, 05:42

Awesome! So the standards are passable by all genders.

That being said, as more try, and more fail, the politics will become overwhelming. The Big Army's distinct PT standards for male vs. female should indicate that in the long run, most women can not pass the RS standards as they are, just as none can pass the Marine Infantry Officer School standards, as currently written. The challenge will be, "Does THE STANDARD really need to be so demanding to do that job

What if in the next 10 Ranger Schools these two women are the only ones to pass? Does everyone really think that will be allowed to stand?

I have to agree, this is just complete PC, genderblending crap... bless them for their willingness to serve always, but that doesn't change the facts. We all know there is no end to it, but that does not make it right/legit.

Iraqgunz

08-22-15, 06:52

Give them scrolls, Budweiser badges, SF tabs, who cares? All I want is for all females to be required to register for selective service. And let's do away with male and female PT standards and height and weight standards. I want them the same across the board since we are striving for "true equality".

pinzgauer

08-22-15, 07:59

And let's do away with male and female PT standards and height and weight standards. I want them the same across the board since we are striving for "true equality".

Agreed.

And now we are hearing for guys in the class:

http://sofrep.com/42761/really-happened-women-ranger-school-class-06-15/

ABNAK

08-22-15, 15:22

MountainRaven

08-22-15, 16:02

"News flash: these women passed “peers” in all three phases of the course.
"I have read nothing but conspiracy theories on undue command influence all week. I keep reading that a guy heard from a guy who knows an RI in Florida that was told by another RI who heard from a staff guy at Ranger School HQ that the women MUST pass. I can’t scroll through my Facebook or Twitter feed for more than three seconds without seeing this shit."

The Problem with Every Dumb Ranger School Conspiracy Theory: Peer Reviews | @TheRhinoDen | Home of All Things Military (http://rhinoden.rangerup.com/the-problem-with-every-dumb-ranger-school-conspiracy-theory-peer-reviews/)

I'm sure the same people who are behind women passing Ranger School also touched off the demo charges in the World Trade Center, pulled the rug from under the coup against Gorbachov, personally pulled the triggers on the rifles that killed Kennedy and MLK, and ensured that nobody at Pearl Harbor knew anything about a pending Japanese air attack.

They probably kept Lincoln off the ballot in the South, opened fire on Fort Sumter, assassinated Lincoln, killed John Wilkes Booth, fed Custer bad intel on the Sioux, blew up the USS Maine, published the Zimmerman telegram, and crashed the stock market in '29, too.

Wake27

08-22-15, 16:30

pinzgauer

08-22-15, 16:42

Question for you guys in the know: am I correct in assuming that the highest passing rate (for any given group) would be enlisted guys sent to Ranger School from one of the Ranger Batts? You figure they've passed RIP to get in the Batt, then have lived the life for maybe 6 months or a year (or however long it is before they'll send you). Then an authentic Ranger Batt "Pre-Ranger" to make damn sure they aren't wasting a slot. I'd wager almost all of them pass the School (?).

Not "In the know", but this is a subject discussed by those in the pipeline or through it. And it's not quite as simple as you proposed. It is a dynamic that does surface though, as the bulk of most classes is cherry 2LT's and enlisted (with a dose of Batt Boys).

In addition to all the suck/physical stuff, RS covers skills that officers have been doing for a while that enlisted have little experience in. (Op orders, Platoon leader stuff, etc). Fresh 2LT's get a tune up or at least level set in IBOLC over 4-5 mths. USMA grads do quite a bit of this in their 4 years before that. OCS just had a big dose of these skills. ROTC seems to vary the most with some dialed in, some not so much. Meanwhile, Pre-ranger for enlisted and older officers does a very compressed job of it.

So by all accounts, the experienced enlisted and officers have complementary skill sets. The successful ones learn to work as a team. And that's the point.

Darby Patrols is where quite a bit of attrition occurs in addition to RAP week, and that's mostly Platoon level ops. And to get a go, each candidate has to successfully fill the different roles including planning, brief (op order), and then execution. Being a good teammate with great mil skills helps with peers. Being a bad team mate can get you dropped or peered out. But the only way to get a go is to successfully do what most would consider "officer stuff" (PL) when it's your turn.

This aspect continues into Mountain & Swamp phases. But most ether have learned the complementary skills by then due to recycles, or already had them.

Huge over simplification. And we should really hear from those with tabs. But that's the dynamic I hear from those in the process now and those just through it. cherry 2LT's and batt boys need each other!

Now a prior enlisted from the regiment via OCS, that's the combo that has a big advantage. :-) My son has one in his IBOLC company. Huge respect, and they are already betting he will be the honor grad. :-) Just that squared away!

pinzgauer

08-22-15, 17:14

Not only are they very well prepared, they have quite the good ole boy system for Batt Boys. Which is disappointing.

By most accounts, this can help, or it can hurt. Remember, there are multiple networks in play. The USMA 2LT's just went through a joint experience of a different kind of suck. Not at all comparing them, just recognize that the point of RS is to learn how to get the job done as a leader with demotivated, hungry, sleepy, broke down squads. Likewise, usually officers slightly outnumber enlisted in any given class. And other enlisted often outnumber Ranger Reg.

Most indicate that gaming the peers does happen, especially in earlier phases. But often boomerangs in later phases. Literally, if the squad does not learn to work together they will all have a hard time getting go's. Even harder yet in Mountain & Swamp phases when the patrols shift from squad level leadership to platoon level. Play favorites, and the team could drag just enough to prevent you from getting a go when you it's your turn. Or help with a critical skill that you may not be as strong in.

Benito

08-22-15, 17:53

There are women out there that are stronger, mentally and physically than the majority of their male peers.
True, that percentage is pretty low, but there are women that are wholly capable of serving in direct combat.
This is, however, not the real problem with females in combat arms.
The issue is that 18-25 year olds, when put in close constant proximity, will f**k each other with astounding predictability, and that, my friends, is how one guts the integrity and combat effectiveness of a unit.
Take a look at any unit with a decent female population and within a few minutes of conversation you will readily learn who is sleeping with who behind who else's back, much to the chagrin and jealousy of many others. Even highly trained and disciplined individuals are not androgenous robots; pretending otherwise is asinine to a criminal degree.

This is the best take I have read on this entire thing.

The two females graduating is not the only amazing story this week.

This new Ranger from the same class started his 3rd attempt shortly after completing chemo for cancer:

http://chrisjanowski.hubpages.com/hub/56-Weeks-In-The-Making

That is actually orders of magnitude more amazing than the females finishing Ranger School. I wouldn't even fathom somebody contemplating this, let alone doing it. Unreal.

Wake27

08-22-15, 17:54

I wasn't talking peers so much as I was cadre. Again, I haven't been, but I have heard it from numerous people, to include my best friend who graduated less than a year ago. Obviously the more experienced enlisted and the somewhat switched on LTs can form an awesome combination, as is ideal. But I was talking about many of the regiment dudes getting off pretty easy when others wouldn't.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jwinch2

08-22-15, 18:04

A good breakdown of what happened by someone who was there.

http://sofrep.com/42761/really-happened-women-ranger-school-class-06-15/

The following was written by Rudy Mac, a Ranger-qualified, company-grade infantry officer serving on active duty in a light unit in the U.S. Army.

By the time most of you read this story, 96 newly tabbed Rangers and their friends and families will be celebrating the completion of one of the most arduous and demanding courses that the Army has to offer. For them, this coming weekend will undoubtedly involve hours of some of the most satisfying sleep of their lives, interspersed with exorbitant feasts of all of the foods that they have been dreaming about, talking about, and listing in their Rite In The Rain notebooks for weeks and weeks.

They will return to their units with a few new skills and a better understanding of small-unit tactics, but more importantly with a new confidence in themselves and their fellow tabbed Rangers. They will be marked for the rest of their careers with a $1.80 strip of cloth that tells whomever they meet that when tested with adversity, pain, and discomfort, they can be trusted to find a way to get the job done and complete the mission. For the first time in history, two women will pin on this badge of survival and perseverance, and you know what? They f*****g earned it. Every last thread of it.

I started and finished Ranger School this year with Class 06-15, although since I neither recycled nor had to endure a winter phase of the course, my tab should probably be just a little bit smaller than the tabs that many of my peers wear. We were the first gender-integrated Ranger School class, starting on April 19th, with 19 female and 381 male students.

Since my graduation, I have followed the progress of these remaining female Rangers with interest. Although virtually all of the discussion I have heard surrounding their advancement through the course has been pretty positive up to this week, since the Washington Post broke the story of Ranger Griest and Ranger Haver getting their go’s in Florida, I have read and heard an increasing amount of bad-mouthing from a plethora of haters, dismissing their accomplishment as the product of slipping standards or some ultra-liberal, feminist plot by the government and Army leadership. I am speaking out to tell you that these insinuations could not be further from the truth. Ranger School is still hard, and these women earned their tabs.

Before I discuss my own subjective opinions, let’s talk about the numbers, starting with my class (Class 06-15). In 06-15, we started 400 Ranger students in April and graduated fewer than 100 in June. Twenty-eight of us (that’s seven percent), went straight through the course without recycling. In Darby Phase, our recycle rate was almost 75 percent—the highest for the phase in over five years. In my squad of 17 Ranger students, only four of us went forward to Mountain Phase. Another squad in my company (Alpha Company) sent only two of 17 forward. In Mountain and again in Florida, we only had enough students for one platoon in my company. I believe the same was true of Bravo and Charlie.

For those who have claimed that the packing list was reduced for this year to make patrols easier: We weighed our rucks before the Mountains FTX and the Florida FTX. My ruck was 85 pounds at the start of Mountains as a team leader and over 100 pounds at the start of Florida as a SAW gunner. For the past three classes of the course (06-15, 07-15, and 08-15), the course graduation rate has been about 30 percent, much lower than the average for FY10-FY14 of 42 percent, and significantly lower than the historical average of nearly 50 percent. If you believe that the standards at Ranger School have been lowered for recent classes in order to pass the women who attended, you are simply wrong. The numbers reflect what the Ranger Training Brigade officers and NCOs have been saying for months now: The standards at Ranger School are as high or higher right now than they have been in many, many years.

Now, let’s discuss the process that the Infantry School went through to select and prepare female soldiers to attend the course. After the Army sent out the ALARACT message looking for female Ranger School volunteers, they had nearly 400 female soldiers express a desire to attend the course. One hundred and nine of those female soldiers eventually attended the RTAC, the ARNG Warrior Training Center’s two week Pre-Ranger Course, which is second only to the 75th Ranger Regiment’s SURT (Small Unit Ranger Tactics) Pre-Ranger Course in terms of success rate at Ranger School. Several of the women who failed RTAC went back and tried again, for a total of 138 attempts by female students.

Twenty female Ranger Students eventually passed RTAC, and 19 of those 20 started Ranger School with Class 06-15 on April 19th. From this point on, anyone who has followed the story probably knows what transpired. Eight of those 19 female students passed RAP (Ranger Assessment Phase) Week at Camp Rogers, where about 60 percent of Ranger School failures historically occur. All eight went to Camp Darby with Class 06-15 and were either recycled into Class 07-15 or dropped from training. After another Darby Phase with Class 07-15, again, none of the female students received their go’s, and three remained in the course to start over as day one recycles with class 08-15. As an aside, during RAP week with class 08-15, Ranger Kristen Griest finished second out of the entire class on the 12 mile ruck—an astounding achievement, especially considering that she had just gone through RAP week, two Darby phases, and another RAP week, all back-to-back. CPT Griest and 1LT Haver went straight through the rest of the course with class 08-15, finally earning their Ranger Tabs today after 124 days in Ranger School.

Lastly, for what it’s worth, I would like to offer my own impressions of what our class was like with female students in RAP week and at Darby. Unlike many, I didn’t doubt that some female soldiers in our Army would at least have a decent shot at getting their tabs. There are a whole lot of female collegiate, professional, and Olympic athletes who can PT a whole lot better than me, so why shouldn’t they be able to at least come close to passing a course like Ranger School? Like many, however, I was somewhat skeptical that the cadre at RTB could successfully administer a course with extremely close living quarters and significant field time like Ranger School without compromising the integrity of the training.

I quickly found, however, that the gender issue was a non-issue. The barracks at Camp Rogers are shaped like a ‘U’, with a latrine and shower facilities forming the center of the U, connecting two long bays of bunk beds and wall lockers, with doors at the end of the bays. The female students in our company slept towards one end of the bay, where an enclave of wall lockers formed an area for them to hurriedly change in when the need arose. In the latrines, during the absurdly short time hacks we were given to use the bathroom, the women simply walked past the men and used the stalls. After the first real smoke session of the week on day one, nobody cared much about using the same latrine. We were all just Ranger students.

During the few times we were able to take showers, the cadre dedicated the showers on one side of the bay to female students for one quarter of the shower period, and a Ranger instructor and female NCO stood in the center of the ‘U’ to avoid confusion. RAP week passed and we were on to Darby. In Darby, the female students in our company dispelled any doubts of their ability to hump weight on patrols during the first few days in the field. If I remember correctly, Ranger Griest carried the M240 for her squad on day one of patrols and another female in her squad carried the radio as the RTO. The next day of patrols, they switched, with Ranger Griest humping the radio and the other female student carrying the M240. Physically, they were studs. They carried their own weight and then some.

In the two months since I have graduated, I have spoken with countless fellow tabbed Rangers on the topic, both from my class and from previous classes. Every morning, my Facebook news feed is filled with statuses from my peers, with links to articles on the topic and discussions on the progress of the females left in the course. We are universally in awe of what these two female Rangers have accomplished. Everyone I have talked to is of one mind. They earned it. Without the same wide shoulders, large frames, and high testosterone levels of their brother Rangers, they earned it. Unfortunately, the naysayers will continue to talk trash and belittle CPT Griest and 1LT Haver’s historic accomplishment. In response, I would like to close with a recent quote from MAJ Jim Hathaway, the current RTB executive officer:

No matter what we at Ranger School say, the non-believers will still be non-believers. We could have invited each of you to guest walk the entire course, and you would still not believe, we could have video recorded every patrol and you would still say that we “gave” it away. Nothing we say will change your opinion. I and the rest of our cadre are proud of the conduct of our soldiers, NCOs, and officers; they took the mission assigned and performed to the Ranger standard. Rangers Lead the Way!

If you want to read more hard hitting news about the world of Special Operations and Intelligence services, subscribe to SOFREP today!

Read more: http://sofrep.com/42761/really-happened-women-ranger-school-class-06-15/#ixzz3jaW5DNAu

JHC

08-22-15, 19:57

Wake27

08-22-15, 19:59

Not saying they don't recycle or get a free pass. Even little things make a big difference in that environment though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

KalashniKEV

08-22-15, 21:22

Is it true they couldn't get peered out?

I definitely heard they were immune from peers because guys would autopeer them... this is not true though.

They were subject to normal peers and passed.

Question for you guys in the know: am I correct in assuming that the highest passing rate (for any given group) would be enlisted guys sent to Ranger School from one of the Ranger Batts?

No.

Officers pass at higher rates for two reasons:

1) There are way more of them.

Average Ranger Class
AVG Ranks / Numbers
CPT/ 1LT 35
2LT 115
SFC / SSG 20
SGT/ CPL 35
SPC /PFC 85

http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/content/PDF/Ranger%20School%20web11.pdf

2) IOBC is very similar to Ranger School- you give OPORDs, you conduct operations, you get graded.

In fact, the difference between IOBC and Ranger is:

TASK(S): Exactly the same
CONDITION(S): 500x more miserable, tired, starving, tired, wet, dirty, cold, injured
STANDARD(S): Exactly the same

In other words... You don't get to **** up 15% more in IOBC for doing the same shit... the standard is to always the same- do it correctly and don't **** up. The conditions in which you perform though go to level-10 suck and beyond.

I have yet to go, but from everything I hear...

Again, I haven't been, but I have heard...

Are you kidding me???

You should STFU until you earn your shit.

Seriously.

...undoubtedly yes. Not only are they very well prepared, they have quite the good ole boy system for Batt Boys. Which is disappointing.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHA

...But I was talking about many of the regiment dudes getting off pretty easy when others wouldn't.

Yeah... RI's love to lower the bar for dudes going back to Regiment. All the SOCOM units, really.

They're like... "Hey sweetie, Ranger Standard... Ranger SHMANDARD! I share a foxhole with your soft, pink self any day! Show me some love!" *FIST BUMP*

Who the heck is telling you this??????

(...and are you sure they're not clowning you?)

Wake27

08-22-15, 21:28

I definitely heard they were immune from peers because guys would autopeer them... this is not true though.

They were subject to normal peers and passed.

No.

Officers pass at higher rates for two reasons:

1) There are way more of them.

Average Ranger Class
AVG Ranks / Numbers
CPT/ 1LT 35
2LT 115
SFC / SSG 20
SGT/ CPL 35
SPC /PFC 85

http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/content/PDF/Ranger%20School%20web11.pdf

2) IOBC is very similar to Ranger School- you give OPORDs, you conduct operations, you get graded.

In fact, the difference between IOBC and Ranger is:

TASK(S): Exactly the same
CONDITION(S): 500x more miserable, tired, starving, tired, wet, dirty, cold, injured
STANDARD(S): Exactly the same

In other words... You don't get to **** up 15% more in IOBC for doing the same shit... the standard is to always the same- do it correctly and don't **** up. The conditions in which you perform though go to level-10 suck and beyond.

Are you kidding me???

You should STFU until you earn your shit.

Seriously.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHA

Yeah... RI's love to lower the bar for dudes going back to Regiment. All the SOCOM units, really.

They're like... "Hey sweetie, Ranger Standard... Ranger SHMANDARD! I share a foxhole with your soft, pink self any day! Show me some love!" *FIST BUMP*

Who the heck is telling you this??????

(...and are you sure they're not clowning you?)

Chill guy. I said it was not personal experience because I have none and am always honest about that, but I don't throw stuff out there if I hadn't heard it from more than one source that I trust.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

KalashniKEV

08-22-15, 21:49

I said it was not personal experience because I have none and am always honest about that, but I don't throw stuff out there if I hadn't heard it from more than one source that I trust.

Roger.

There are too many insinuendos flying around from folks who flat out don't have a clue.

As MAJ Hathaway, the RTB XO recently said, there are going to be non-believers no matter what.

I expect that in the future they will multiply rather than go away, because homeboys will be saying to themselves, "Man... RAP week broke me in less than 36 hours... you're telling me some female did it twice in two months... and finished the course? No wayyyyyy..."

MountainRaven

08-22-15, 22:20

Dakota Meyer posted this to his Facebook page yesterday:

2 women, Capt Kristen Grist and 1st Lt Shae Haer, have passed Ranger school. First and formost congratulations to these two for having the courage to step up to the challenge and to have the strength and tenacity to see it through to the end.
Now on to my point of writing this... I fail to understand why men and women, both civilan and veteran/active, have an issue with this. Men, are you upset that two women passed and this somehow brings into question your "manliness"? Women, these two have leaped into an entirely new arena which has show the strength of women and have made it through. You should be supporting them and celebrating their accomplishment instead of bashing them. It is grossly apparent that those who trash these two are insecure in themselves, feel somehow threaten by this, and are hopping on the latest "hater" bandwagon and I think it is pathetic.
To the warfighters that have seen more combat than most I want share this, I've stood next to men serving at all levels of the military in both the Marines and Army with the bullets flying in all directions and can say that I have seen men at all levels fail to rate their position or maintain any manner of composure for that matter, Army Rangers included. My point is that it shouldn't matter your sex. To be part of a group, an elite fighting force of any level, if you can meet the standards then you rate to wear the title.

Wake27

08-22-15, 22:57

Roger.

There are too many insinuendos flying around from folks who flat out don't have a clue.

As MAJ Hathaway, the RTB XO recently said, there are going to be non-believers no matter what.

I expect that in the future they will multiply rather than go away, because homeboys will be saying to themselves, "Man... RAP week broke me in less than 36 hours... you're telling me some female did it twice in two months... and finished the course? No wayyyyyy..."

I'm sure it varies from instructor to instructor and cycle to cycle just as anything. My basic experience was very different than a sister company right next to us. Just the way things are. But, I have heard it enough to be more than just isolated incidents. Anyways, back to what the thread was actually about...

Apricotshot

08-24-15, 06:50

Dakota Meyer posted this to his Facebook page yesterday:

Dude almost married a Palin....

KalashniKEV

08-24-15, 10:13

Dude almost married a Palin....

Dude "stood next to men serving at all levels of the military in both the Marines and Army with the bullets flying in all directions and can say that I have seen men at all levels fail to rate their position or maintain any manner of composure for that matter, Army Rangers included."

Pretty well traveled E5...

26 Inf

08-24-15, 13:53

Dude "stood next to men serving at all levels of the military in both the Marines and Army with the bullets flying in all directions and can say that I have seen men at all levels fail to rate their position or maintain any manner of composure for that matter, Army Rangers included."

Pretty well traveled E5...

Not sure if that was sarcasm, but yes, I think he is.

26 Inf

08-24-15, 13:59

Dude almost married a Palin....

To paraphrase the Spartans - 'almost' (When Philip II sent a message to Sparta saying "If I enter Laconia, I will raze Sparta", the Spartans responded with one word: αἴκα, "if")

But as far as that goes he can pretty much do what he wants:

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving with Marine Embedded Training Team 2-8, Regional Corps Advisory Command 3-7, in Kunar Province, Afghanistan, on 8 September 2009. Corporal Meyer maintained security at a patrol rally point while other members of his team moved on foot with two platoons of Afghan National Army and Border Police into the village of Ganjgal for a pre-dawn meeting with village elders. Moving into the village, the patrol was ambushed by more than 50 enemy fighters firing rocket propelled grenades, mortars, and machine guns from houses and fortified positions on the slopes above. Hearing over the radio that four U.S. team members were cut off, Corporal Meyer seized the initiative. With a fellow Marine driving, Corporal Meyer took the exposed gunner's position in a gun-truck as they drove down the steeply terraced terrain in a daring attempt to disrupt the enemy attack and locate the trapped U.S. team. Disregarding intense enemy fire now concentrated on their lone vehicle, Corporal Meyer killed a number of enemy fighters with the mounted machine guns and his rifle, some at near point blank range, as he and his driver made three solo trips into the ambush area. During the first two trips, he and his driver evacuated two dozen Afghan soldiers, many of whom were wounded. When one machine gun became inoperable, he directed a return to the rally point to switch to another gun-truck for a third trip into the ambush area where his accurate fire directly supported the remaining U.S. personnel and Afghan soldiers fighting their way out of the ambush. Despite a shrapnel wound to his arm, Corporal Meyer made two more trips into the ambush area in a third gun-truck accompanied by four other Afghan vehicles to recover more wounded Afghan soldiers and search for the missing U.S. team members. Still under heavy enemy fire, he dismounted the vehicle on the fifth trip and moved on foot to locate and recover the bodies of his team members. Corporal Meyer's daring initiative and bold fighting spirit throughout the 6-hour battle significantly disrupted the enemy's attack and inspired the members of the combined force to fight on. His unwavering courage and steadfast devotion to his U.S. and Afghan comrades in the face of almost certain death reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the Marine Corps and the United States Naval Service.

AKDoug

08-24-15, 16:04

Dude almost married a Palin....

He's lucky that he got out when he did...

Big A

08-24-15, 17:44

KalashniKEV

08-24-15, 17:49

He's lucky that he got out when he did...

He didn't exactly make a clean getaway...

SeriousStudent

08-24-15, 20:46

What is this thread about?

Stay focused, or start a new thread.

ETA: I'd also caution anyone thinking of talking shit about a Medal of Honor recipient on this board.

Pilgrim

08-24-15, 22:54

OK I get it, all the scuttlebutt about class 6-15 to 8-15 is wrong, the official Army statement is right, I've stopped being 'afraid' of these two women...and well, I've actually developed kind of crush on Haver... I watched the graduation with rejoicing...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDJnIgvWU5M

But all that being said, do we open up MOS 11 series, 18 series, and (what the heck) 19D to women now? I mean why not, we can plainly see that women are more than capable and have earned the right.

Or do we go the other direction and close Ranger School to anyone NOT 11 or 18?

Plumber237

08-24-15, 23:29

This is an interesting opinion piece done by Mr. Blonde over at OAF, they posted it on FB today: Women in combat units is still a bad idea (sorry) (http://www.oafnation.com/hitter-feed/2015/8/21/sorry-women-in-combat-units-is-still-a-bad-idea-sorry)

R0N

08-25-15, 06:23

The problem is we are dealing with unicorns, yes there is the 1 percent of women who meet the minimum male standards (UK MOD studies show the top 10 percent of women have the strength and cardo capability of the average man), that require more physical training time to maintain that standard and significantly harder to find. Which equates to more cost.

So is the cost worth it?

ForTehNguyen

09-10-15, 21:05

http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/marine-corps-study-shows-that-men-are-far-better-in-ground-combat-than-women/

Marine Corps Study Shows That Men Are FAR Better In Ground Combat Than Women
Austin Petersen September 10, 2015 War & Peace

Republish Reprint
By Jonah Bennett

An experimental Marine Corps study looking at female integration into ground combat units has determined that women perform far worse than men.

The study, called the Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force (GCEITF), was conducted with 200 male and 75 female volunteers to provide officials with more information on how females perform in ground combat situations.

The Navy’s top admiral also recently said that the service intends to open up the Navy SEALs to women, so long as they can complete training at existing standards.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter intends to open all combat specialties to women at the start of 2016, unlessthe services specifically request exemptions. Those exemptions have to be backed by detailed evidence and must be submitted by October, Christian Science Monitor reports.

What the study found is that women are about 15 percent less powerful than men, and that in terms of performance on the distribution, “the female top 25th percentile of women overlapped with the bottom 25thpercentile for males.” A lack of power means, for example, that men were able to throw their heavy packs on top of the wall, but females required assistance.

Men had better firearm accuracy, hitting targets 44 percent of the time, in comparison to females, who only scored at 28 percent. Male-only squads were also faster.

According to the study, “All-male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated … as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews.”

Women also were more likely to suffer injuries, a conclusion backed by research from the British Ministry of Defence, which found that because of physiological differences, women are burdened with musculoskeletal injuries at a rate 10 times higher than men. If a woman has to carry a pack more than 25 percent of her bodyweight, her risk of injury skyrockets by five.

In the GCEITF, the actual injury rate for women, focusing on muscles, tendons and ligaments, was 40.5 percent. Men came in with an injury rate of only 18.8 percent. Despite the results of the GCEITF and the fact that no female volunteers passed the infantry officer course opened earlier this year, it’s unknown whether the findings will be convincing enough to persuade Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who has previously gone on record stating that he does not see a reason for requesting an exemption and that ultimately, it’s his call.

The Army, Air Force and Navy have not yet officially said whether they will seek exemptions or not.

FromMyColdDeadHand

09-10-15, 22:01

According to the study, “All-male squads, teams and crews demonstrated higher performance levels on 69 percent of tasks evaluated … as compared to gender-integrated squads, teams and crews.”

You would expect them on average to be better in 50 percent, 69 doesn't sound damning. Does this mean the GI (gender integrated) ones were better 31 percent of the time?

Firefly

09-10-15, 22:03

Benito

09-10-15, 23:50

I'm absolutely not a Ranger but if they passed they passed.
Warfare is changing. I doubt Ranger schools will start resembling Girl Scout retreats but women can be pretty tough in their own way.

Warrior women are nothing new. Some were successful. Some weren't. While unusual, it can't be too bad.

I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree.
The following article makes some great arguments for why women do not belong in infantry units - not for why they can't make the cut - but for why they don't belong. It's an important difference.
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/2014/09/why-women-do-not-belong-us-infantry

While reading the February issue of the Marine Corps Gazette, I skimmed past the “Be Bold” advertisement calling for readers to submit articles that challenge a Marine Corps policy or way of doing business. Immediately a current “hot topic” came to mind, but as usual I quickly discarded it because I have purposely avoided publicly disagreeing with the passionate opinions of many of my female peers and friends. After weeks of contemplation and debate, I am “being bold” and coming clean: I am a female Marine officer and I do not believe women should serve in the infantry. I recognize that this is a strong statement that will be vehemently challenged by many. I have not come to this opinion lightly and I do not take joy in taking a stance that does not support equal opportunity for all. I have spent countless hours discussing this topic with many civilians and Marines and have discovered that a large number of people agree with the arguments in this article but do not wish to get involved in the public discussion. Interestingly, most of the people who want to incorporate women into infantry are civilians or young, inexperienced Marines. Most of the more seasoned Marines with whom I have spoken tend to oppose the idea of women in infantry—perhaps this is failure to adapt or perhaps it is experienced-based reasoning. National Public Radio’s recent segment, “Looking for a Few Good (Combat-Ready) Women,” stated, “Col Weinberg admits there’s anecdotal evidence that female Marines, who make up 7 percent of the force, aren’t rushing to serve in ground combat.”1 If the infantry had opened to women while I was still a midshipman or second lieutenant I probably would have jumped at the opportunity because of the novelty, excitement, and challenge; but, to my own disappointment, my views have drastically changd with experience and knowledge. Acknowledging that women are different (not just physically) than men is a hard truth that plays an enormous role in this discussion. This article addresses many issues regarding incorporating women into the infantry that have yet to be discussed in much of the current discourse that has focused primarily on the physical standards.

Before you disagree, remember that war is not a fair business. Adversaries attempt to gain an advantage over their enemies by any means possible. Enemies do not necessarily abide by their adversary’s moral standards or rules of engagement. Although in today’s world many gory, violent war tactics are considered immoral, archaic, and banned by international law or the Geneva Conventions, adversaries still must give themselves the greatest advantage possible in order to ensure success. For the Marine Corps, this means ensuring that the infantry grunt (03XX) units are the strongest, most powerful, best trained, and most prepared physically and mentally to fight and win. Although perhaps advantageous to individuals and the national movement for complete gender equality, incorporating women into infantry units is not in the best interest of the Marine Corps or U.S. national security.

It’s Not About Individuals
My argument has little to do with whether women can pass the Infantry Officer Course or Infantry Training Battalion, or endure the hardships of combat. Even those select women who can physically endure the infantry are still posing a threat to the infantry mission and readiness. Female Marines who want to stir the pot by joining the infantry ranks are more interested in their careers than the needs of the Corps—they are selfish. 2dLt Sage Santangelo’s recent article in The Washington Post about why women are failing Infantry Officer Course argued that “the Marine Corps needs to set women up to succeed in combat roles.”2 Why? How will that contribute to a better fighting force, the needs of the Marine Corps, and the success of young enlisted Marines? The time, energy, and conflict associated with setting women up for success in infantry billets will not make the Marine Corps more combat effective.

I have no doubt that there are women who can pass initial infantry schools—and I applaud their strength. However, as Capt Katie Petronio argued in her 2013 Gazette article, “Get Over It! We are not all created equal,” long infantry careers for female Marines will eventually lead to career-ending medical conditions as they get older and their bodies are unable to withstand the years of constant infantry training.3 For the already fiscally strained military, this will lead to an increase in medically retired Marines who rate medical financial support for the rest of their lives.

Women who claim that they are not afforded traditional leadership opportunities by not being infantry officers are clearly not aware of the plethora of leadership opportunities in the Marine Corps. There are many other MOSs that provide great opportunities for leadership, some even more so than in the infantry. For example, communications or logistics lieutenants could have as many as 60 Marines in their charge. Great Marine officers embody leadership principals regardless of the MOS or billet they are assigned. Marines are taught to “grow where planted,” and a female Marine officer, regardless of MOS, can be just as successful as a male infantry officer if she is truly a leader and puts the needs of her Marines above her own. Success is about performance, not MOS. Women should seek opportunities to serve where they will be of most use to the Corps, not where the Corps can serve their personal career interests.

Many (mostly civilians) have argued that it is sexist and against the Nation’s attempt to promote gender equality to refuse infantry to women. Personnel in leadership positions have kept quiet or agreed to open the infantry to women for fear of being called sexist or of not promoting equal opportunities, or not wanting to be attacked by feminists. I am forever indebted to the many women who courageously advocated for the women’s rights that I enjoy today. Perhaps it is slightly unfair to the few women who desire to join the infantry, but that should be a necessary accepted evil because the needs of the Marine Corps are more important to society. Keeping women out of the infantry is not about oppressing women’s rights or blockading gender equality, it’s about maintaining the most combat effective military. In an age where U.S. hegemony is slowly decreasing and nations like China, Iran, and North Korea are building their conventional forces, citizens should be more interested in creating the strongest, best-trained, most ready infantry force to defend our national interests.

The Mission
Incorporating women into the infantry does not add to the infantry mission to “locate, close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver and/or repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat.” Period. The mission does not say, “with ranks of equal men and women, locate, close with close with, and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver and/or repel the enemy assault by fire and close combat.” The implied task is to create an infantry community of warriors that can best accomplish the mission. As all Marines are taught from day one of training, the mission always comes first. Marines attempt to accomplish the mission at all cost, and it is the duty of the higher headquarters of the Marine Corps to provide Marines with the best training and circumstances possible to accomplish the mission. Incorporating women into the infantry will actually make the mission more difficult to accomplish and take away from the training, readiness, and morale of the infantry units.

Several years ago the Marine Corps began allowing women into certain sections of special operations forces (SOF) and into the counterintelligence/human intelligence (CI/HumInt) MOS. The purpose behind this was to fill a gap and tap resources that men in those MOSs were unable to access. By nature of their gender, women were able to gain placement and access to information and locations that were previously untapped by men. As a result, the SOF and CI/HumInt communities grew stronger and more effective, and better accomplished their missions. The need for females to accomplish certain mission sets drove these communities to accept women. This same need does not exist in a basic rifle squad. Furthermore, the average age, experience, and maturity level of Marines in the SOF and CI/HumInt communities is much higher and more tolerant, which mitigates much of the testosterone-driven behavior that is a common characteristic of young infantrymen.

The argument that Israeli, Kurdish, and various other nations’ women serve in their infantries, therefore American women can serve in ours, is flawed. The Palestinians have vowed to “wipe Israel off the face of the planet” and are constantly causing riots or staging violent attacks in Israel. Israel’s mere existence is always in jeopardy, and in order to ensure its survival, they rely on conscription. Saddam Hussein conducted mass genocide of the Kurds in a campaign known as Al-Anfal. Kurdish women bore arms during Al-Anfal and have remained a Kurdish Peshmerga infantry unit ever since. In order to preserve their existence, Israelis and Kurds understand that they need manpower, professional training, and constant readiness within their infantry. They train women in their infantry to ensure they do not lose in a war of attrition or face another genocide. Israeli and Kurdish infantry women provide necessary manpower to their mission of survival. Its not about equal opportunity for the Israelis and Kurds, it’s about cultural survival—which is why it works. The all-volunteer U.S. military is not at war to defend the Nation’s existence; on the contrary, it has a surplus of manpower, is downsizing its number of servicemembers, and can afford to be exclusive. Again, there is no need to incorporate women into the infantry.

The Infantry Brotherhood
In addition to theoretical opposition to having women in the infantry, there are also very practical reasons why women do not belong amongst infantrymen. Having women in an infantry unit will disrupt the infantry’s identity, motivational tactics, and camaraderie. The average infantryman is in his late teens or early twenties. At that age, men are raging with hormones and are easily distracted by women and sex. Infantry leaders feed on the testosterone and masculinity of young men to increase morale and motivation and encourage the warrior ethos. Few jobs are as physically and emotionally demanding as the infantry, so to keep Marines focused, the infantry operates in a cult-like brotherhood. The infantry is the one place where young men are able to focus solely on being a warrior without the distraction of women or political correctness. They can fart, burp, tell raunchy jokes, walk around naked, swap sex stories, wrestle, and simply be young men together. Although perhaps not the most polite environment, this is the exact kind of atmosphere that promotes unit cohesion and the brotherly bond that is invaluable. This bond is an essential element in both garrison and combat environments. Ask any 0311 what encourages him to keep training or fighting in combat when he thinks he can go no further, and he will respond, “My brothers to my right and left.” No matter how masculine a woman is, she is still female and simply does not mesh with the infantry brotherhood.

While standing in line at the shoppette in civilian attire a few weeks ago, two young grunts stood behind me intimately describing the toned, fit body of a female on the front of a women’s athletic magazine. Subsequently, the Marines discussed how attracted they are to women who are in shape and how they can’t wait for the weekend when their squad was planning to go to the club to pick up ladies. Women in the Marine Corps are already in better shape than the average civilian and it can be assumed that any infantry woman will be a physical specimen. In the young, testosterone-filled infantry ranks, this is asking for love triangles, unit drama, and the potential for intraunit relationships. Platoon commanders in co-ed units already deal with a tremendous amount of drama, pregnancies, and sex in the co-ed unit barracks. Each time an issue arises, the platoon leadership spends a lot of time switching Marines’ barracks rooms, billets, etc. Oftentimes the unit equal opportunity (EO) representative must get involved to ensure gender bias does not occur. Infantry units bring significantly less drama to work because they don’t have women in their barracks or workspaces. This allows them to better focus on their mission, training, and readiness.

Logistics will also need to change if women are added to infantry units. Women require separate billeting, bathrooms, and other various “womanly” needs—things that could be difficult to provide in a combat environment and costly to build in the existing garrison infrastructure. Yes, in some situations (such as at The Basic School) women and men share fighting holes; however, doing so for extended periods of time in isolated combat environments with a population of stressed out 18- to 22-year-olds poses the potential for sexual relations, unwanted incidents, and drama (again, disrupting the brotherhood and taking the focus off the mission), not to mention the spouses of those who are married who now have the added burden of worrying about their husband sleeping next to another woman throughout his deployment. Yes, good leadership, added training, and logistical planning can mitigate these concerns, but that effort is not worth the benefit.

Sexual Assault/Harassment
Sexual harassment and assault is a huge issue in the military today, and few things are more disruptive. Although already not immune to sexual assaults/harassment, without women amongst their ranks, there are simply fewer opportunities for infantry Marines to be involved in sexual assault/harassment cases. Incorporating women into infantry ranks will increase the number of cases in infantry units, subsequently taking time away from training, readiness, and unit morale.

As a victim of sexual assault, jury member on a special courts-martial, and investigating officer in several preliminary inquiries, I can personally attest to the harm sexual assault/harassment has on any unit. Every time there is a report of sexual assault/harassment, several Marines have to dedicate important man-hours to resolving the issue. The special courts-martial I sat on required approximately 15 Marine officers to dedicate an entire week to the court-martial, putting a hold to all matters pertaining to their primary job. In addition, many other Marines were required to sit in the witness room for days waiting to testify in court. The judge advocates obviously spent months preparing for the trial, and many high-ranking unit commanders sat in court at various times throughout the week to keep tabs on their Marines. Several Marines had to change their permanent change of station orders due to the trial. Overall, one sexual assault case ended up costing the Marine Corps an absurd amount of time and money. The opportunity cost for the Marines involved in the case was costly to the Marine Corps and hurt unit readiness. As the pinnacle fighting elements of the Marine Corps, it is in the best interest of the infantry units to mitigate the opportunities for sexual assault/harassment. If women are part of infantry units, it will be a matter of when, not if, more sexual assault cases will happen.

Some counterargue that good training and leadership will prevent sexual assault/harassment. The Corps already invests significant time and money on Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) annual training and hires full-time SAPR specialists. The issue persists. Incorporating women into the infantry would require more SAPR briefs to junior Marines, time that could have been spent at the range, doing land navigation, movement-to-contact training, etc. Furthermore, good leadership and discipline do not necessarily prevent sexual assault/harassment cases, and senior leaders are not immune. As the executive assistant to the Chief of Staff, I witnessed several EO and sexual assault/harassment cases against senior military officers—many of them substantiated. Neither any amount of SAPR training nor the best leaders can completely prevent sexual assault/harassment and EO cases. It is an issue that should be kept as far away from the infantry as possible.

Conclusion
Marine Corps infantry is not broken, so let’s not “fix” it. Women should be incorporated into the infantry if they can provide additional support to the infantry mission, thus filling a gap in the needs of the Marine Corps. Until that gap is identified, I do not believe it is in the Nation’s interest to allow women in the infantry. Most importantly, the incorporation of women takes time away from training, jeopardizes readiness, and puts undue strains and requirements on the unit. National leadership should be more concerned with ensuring the Marine Corps infantry units are as strong as possible to fight our Nation’s battles, not with avoiding a difficult EO debate, promoting a particular political agenda, or maintaining a certain public image. Above all, preserving national security should be the driving factor of infantry policy change.

Notes:

1. Bowman, Tom, “Looking for a few good (combat ready) women,” National Public Radio, 7 July 2014.
2. Santangelo, 2dLt Sage, “Fourteen women have tried, and failed, the Marine’s Infantry Officer Course. Here’s why.” The Washington Post, Washington, DC, 28 March 2014.
3. Petronio, Capt Katie, “Get Over It! We are not all created equal,” Marine Corps Gazette, March 2013.

- See more at: https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/2014/09/why-women-do-not-belong-us-infantry#sthash.WobMK7cU.dpuf

The important aspect that very few people realize is at play here is that it's not about the individual. Modern society has become very focused on this, probably as a result of most people only knowing what Hollywood teaches them about the military, rather than actually having been there, and serving in war, like in generations past.
In the military, and especially combat units, it is not about the individual. It's about the unit/team.

Another good article I read recently is here:
http://nation.time.com/2013/07/25/the-cowardly-push-to-get-women-into-combat/

Earlier this year, the Pentagon lifted the ban on women serving in U.S. combat units – including elite special-operations units like the Navy’s SEALs – if they can clear the physical and mental hurdles. While official Washington has saluted and moved on to other matters, there remains a rumble of opposition, especially evident when chatting with soldiers and Marines. Some argue that the existing standards – which already have kept several women from passing the Marines’ grueling infantry officers course – will basically act as a bar to women in the more demanding kinds of combat.

But Robert Maginnis, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and West Point graduate, fears that won’t happen. He spells out what he sees as the dangers of opening combat billets to women in his new book, Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat. His key concern is that, under political pressure, the military will ease its standards, resulting in a less-capable force. Battleland recently conducted this email chat with him.

What’s the key thing you learned in writing Deadly Consequences: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat?

Pentagon brass are kowtowing to their political masters and radical feminists to remove exemptions for women in ground combat in defiance of overwhelming scientific evidence and combat experience.

This craven behavior is terribly dangerous for our armed forces, our national security, and especially the young women who will be placed in harm’s way.

DeadlyConsequencesCover
Regnery
Pentagon officials insist they won’t lower standards to enable more women in combat units. Do you believe them?

I don’t believe them, and neither should the American people.

The Obama Administration and the Pentagon say they will maintain high standards “to ensure that the mission is met with the best-qualified and most capable people, regardless of gender,” in the words of former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta.

Personnel policy, however, is driven by the “diversity metrics” outlined in the 2011 Report of the Military Leadership Diversity Commission.

Diversity, not military readiness, is the highest priority.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has admitted as much. In the press conference announcing the rescission of the 1994 rule excluding women from ground combat units, he said, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high?”

The proper question is “Do we have the personnel we need to meet the current high standards for combat units?”

The answer right now is yes.

There is no shortage of able-bodied male volunteers who meet the existing, battle-tested standards for ground combat positions.

So why ask the services to consider changing the standards? Because this has become more about politics than fielding the most capable fighting force.

What do you see as the three biggest risks to letting women serve in the combat arms?

There are a multitude of risks—far more than most people realize, especially those without military experience. Among the many risks I discuss in “Deadly Consequences” are these three:

— First, standards will be lowered. As a practical matter, there has to be a certain minimum number of women in combat units for the policy to succeed. That can be accomplished only by “gender norming” the standards for combat service. Lower standards will inevitably degrade combat effectiveness, and the nation will be less secure. There is also good evidence that the policy will harm military recruitment and retention.
— Second, women who serve as ground combatants, whether by choice or under compulsion, will suffer disproportionate physical and psychological harm.
— Third, the already serious problem of sexual assault in the military will get worse. Notwithstanding the Administration’s wishful thinking, this prediction is borne out by the statistics.
What do you think will happen, given the push to let women serve in combat, if the nation ever needs to reinstitute the draft?

Lifting all combat exclusions for women virtually guarantees that the Supreme Court will declare male-only conscription unconstitutional.

And a return to the draft is far more likely than most people realize. The unsustainably high cost of the all-volunteer force, especially with $17 trillion in national debt, and the expected requirements of future military operations will probably lead to a resumption of the draft, however politically unpopular it might be.

When that happens, women will be drafted and forced into ground combat roles.

Screen Shot 2013-07-24 at 1.39.59 PM
Drawn to the Light Photography
Robert Maginnis

The Joint Chiefs of Staff endorse the idea of women serving in combat. Are they the “cowards” you refer to in your subtitle?

They demonstrate a cowardice of silence because they know better. The scientific evidence and the lessons of combat experience are utterly one-sided: women are unsuited for ground combat service.

Congress has the constitutional responsibility to set the rules and regulations governing the armed forces (Article I, Section 8).

Unfortunately, Congress is as cowardly as the Joint Chiefs.

Putting women in combat is as historic a change of military policy as anything I can think of, yet neither house has held full hearings on the question in over 20 years.

The politicians are running scared.

You said letting openly gay men and women serve in uniform would be a disaster, and likely lead to problems with recruiting and retention. None of that has come to pass. So why should we pay attention to your arguments about women in combat?

It is much too early to assess the effects of open homosexuality in the military.

The Pentagon has not released any external or internal surveys on recruiting and retention since “don’t ask, don’t tell” was repealed. The Pentagon survey conducted prior to the repeal demonstrated substantial opposition within the ranks, which continues today.

What we do have is the Pentagon-sponsored 2013 Sexual Assault Prevention & Response Office survey, which found a giant increase in unwanted male-on-male sexual contact since the repeal.

According to the New York Times, 13,900 active-duty men and 12,100 active duty women said they had experienced unwanted sexual contact in 2012, the first full year after repeal of the homosexual ban.

The proportion of female victims is much higher, of course, but the Pentagon obviously has a serious problem with male-on-male sexual assaults.

Is there cause and effect here or merely correlation?

It is too early to say, but there is certainly no basis for declaring the new policy on homosexuality a success.

To me the draft thing is pretty interesting.
The article also makes an interesting point about the standards. They will be lowered. No serious observers believe the drivel about the standards staying the same.

Even if you don't believe that this is an ideologically driven social engineering experiment, and an attempt to stick it to the omnipresent white male patriarchy, the plain truth is that this will not only weaken the US military (which is exactly what the aim is), but also hurt and kill women. This, in turn, will help the Progressives, because they will then blame the military for having put females, mothers, sisters, daughters (gasp) into harm's way by letting them into combat units to perpetuate violence against oppressed minorities on behalf of the white man.
I know how the Leftist mind operates. I know many of them well.

FromMyColdDeadHand

09-10-15, 23:56

We are heading towards AI robots and at the very least physically augmented body armour, or at least the Google-ites think so.

26 Inf

09-11-15, 08:53

Benito

09-13-15, 21:11

Benito - Those are good articles, and both point out issues that folks dance around.

Here iare a couple articles on the other side: http://warontherocks.com/2015/08/general-tear-down-that-wall-gender-and-the-infantry/

http://warontherocks.com/2015/09/35-years-two-rangers-and-the-end-of-the-brass-ceiling/

And some on the more reasonable, nuanced side: http://warontherocks.com/2015/09/what-tempers-the-steel-of-an-infantry-unit/

http://warontherocks.com/2015/04/why-integrate-women-into-ground-combat-units/

http://warontherocks.com/2015/04/women-in-ground-combat-units-wheres-the-data/

Thanks for posting those. Those were interesting articles, and I have been reading more of the website's other articles.
However, those articles all point out arguments that are certainly not on side with integrating females into front line infantry combat. They very specifically point out that while some women are stronger/tougher than some men, chemistry/synergy of a combat unit is going to be adversely affected by the presence of the opposite sex, as well as the horrifying prospect of how women will fare if captured (although catured men will no doubt fare horribly if captured as well).

The one thing that was useful from the links was an embedded link to this story straight from the horse's mouth:
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/05/26/diversifying-the-marine-corps/27606749/

I have yet to see any argument other than the surface a priori gender equality argument for putting women in front line combat units.

26 Inf

09-13-15, 22:10

Benito - this is an older book, it forewarned us about many of the issues we are facing today.

It's called Women In the Military: Flirting With Disaster by Brian Mitchell

Here is an excerpt including one of the best chapters in the book, Chapter 6, which tells us how we got to where we are:

https://books.google.com/books?id=KLmrGAVy7vgC&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=women+in+the+military+flirting+with+disaster+summary&source=bl&ots=f-A4_CQ632&sig=_95l5iSJYjRG-L0RZ5vfxIbQjj4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAmoVChMItYrPn8T1xwIVkoENCh1A8AqG#v=onepage&q=women%20in%20the%20military%20flirting%20with%20disaster%20summary&f=false