Female soldiers invited to apply for Ranger School
Hondo sends us a link to the Army Times which announces that the Army is offering Ranger School slots to female soldiers while doing their research for allowing females to serve in combat units in combat positions;
If selected, female volunteers who successfully complete and graduate from Ranger school will receive a graduation certificate and be awarded and authorized to wear the Ranger tab. However, pending future decisions about whether women will be allowed to serve in combat arms MOSs, they will not receive the associated Ranger skill identifiers or be assigned to Ranger coded units or positions.
Second, female soldiers can volunteer to serve as observers and advisors to the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade. These slots are open to staff sergeants through master sergeants, chief warrant officers 2 and 3, and first lieutenants through majors.
These volunteers will not be Ranger instructors, and they won’t evaluate students in the course.
Yeah, well, they’re getting a little ahead of themselves there. First, you have to have females who graduate from the course at the current standards. The test will probably take place in the Spring, according to the article, so they have time to get in shape for it now. I wish them luck, all of the luck in the world.
Category: Military issues
Meanwhile, if selected, these women who won’t be able to serve in a Ranger unit, or instruct Rangers will be taking slots away from men who could.
I’m not against women in the slots, per se, but if they won’t be allowed to use those skills, then this is nothing more than another social-engineering program and we’ve got too many of those in the works as it is.
To be fair, Ranger School is not a part of getting into the Ranger Regiment and has nothing yo do with RASP.
As for women holding those spots in the ARTB, they wouldn’t be holding positions of instructors or graders. As with any combat arms unit, there are many many non-combat related support positions. Especially in a TRADOC combat arms unit, there is really no reason those slots should only be male. Just saying.
It has everything to do with it if you are an Officer.
And the race is on to get into the ‘last hard class’…
As I recall from talking to the people I served with, the first few days of Ranger school are all about the RIs cutting the class size down. I had a Lt that got cut the first day because there was no copy of his eyeglass prescription in his Med records. No really. I knew a SSG that got cut because they found a note in his med record of him being a heat casualty YEARS earlier. I had another friend who made it past all that only to be deliberately cut on the PT test, with the RIs making no attempt to hide the fact that they were trying to cut the class size down. I had a company XO that got cut from Ranger school not once, but twice. His second time through he almost made it through, but was peered out near the end. I ran into him years later when he was about to get his Major. Guess what? He still didn’t have his tab. What’s the point to all this? I want to know, will these female students face these arbitrary cuts from Ranger school? Will they find themselves facing the same prospect of being sent home the first day of Ranger school like so many of my peers did for some stupid minor reason? Will they get peered out because their fellow students can see they haven’t a clue? Or are we going to suddenly see retention and graduation rates at Ranger school magically shoot up? And isn’t going straight to Ranger school on Benning kind of like putting the cart before the horse? If they really want to know if women can hack it, start over on Sand Hill with Infantry or Armor/Scout OSUT. Or do like the Marines did and drop a few 2Lts into the Infantry Basic Officer Leaders course. THEN you move on to Ranger school. If DoD gets it’s way (read the liberal progs in congress) and they start pushing women through Ranger school, then I guarantee you that people in the Army will create their own demarcation line… Read more »
Andy…First thank you and all the Rangers here for serving and accomplishing what you did. Tough course, tough assignments.
I think this is some liberal in the government’s pet project to socially norm the military into ineffectiveness. Why waste the money to put them through the course if they don’t get the MOS or assignment? Makes no sense. It is a wasted slot someone else wants desperately and has worked hard for the opportunity to try, only to be told the class is full because we have ten females who were fast tracked simply because they said “I wanna be a Ranger too ya know”.
This is pointless. All the arguments for and against have been made and none of the for arguments overcome good, simple, common sense of how the world is and how men and women are built. It is simply political bull shit wasting yet more defense dollars. The only way this will happen is to lower the standards for women and then what do you say to the MANY able men who couldn’t cut it? If the standards are lowered, they pass, get tabbed and eventually the liberals say females in Infantry and in body bags is okay with us, what will they do? Intersperse them into male units or make an Amazon Ranger Company of all females? As I started and I will stop because I am getting upset, it is a fool’s game and a fool’s errand the Pentagon is on here. Nothing good will come of this.
Sparks, just so their is no confusion, I was never a Ranger, either scrolled or tabbed. I was Infantry, 11M first, then 11B for the second half of my time in. I did serve with more than a few officers/NCOs that had their tabs, or others who had their shot and didn’t make it through Ranger school, or who got punted from 1st Ranger Battalion to our unit on Ft Stewart.
Send them thru jump school first.
I assume these questions were rhetorical, Andy?
yea, I won’t be holding my breath.
Little Marky, do you have ANY Military Service time at all other than MAYBE some high school JROTC? The US Army Ranger Tab is EARNED through a lot of blood, sweat, and tears, it’s not handed out like candy at a Shriners’ parade. It has always been hard earned and coveted, but like many other Military Traditions and awards, it’s being degraded by B. Hussein 0bama & Company along with the other social engineering experiments inflicted on our Military and it’s Personnel. Is that all you can think of saying while you’re bawling for your Mommy to go get you some more Mountain Dew and Doritos?
Rather transparent attempt at changing the subject, Markie. Fairly pathetic, actually.
Why don’t you answer the man’s question regarding your military background?
Cause we know the answer. More importantly, he knows we know.
Markie-poo my little glitter-farting tinsel mouse, I mention that because you sound like some cream puff of a high school or college student who has led a very cushy life with little experience in reality. I myself have made it successfully in the outside world as well as in the Military with my fair share of overseas tours in places and situations that would very likely make you pee your underoos and faint!!
I find it a little troubling that you consider allowing women to attempt to earn a Ranger qualification to be degrading it. As you’ve said, you shed blood, sweat, and tears to earn the Ranger tab. Yes, the tab would be devalued if standards are lowered, but in no part of the article did I ever see anything that indicated that women will just get their tabs “handed out like candy”. And given that the Marines still haven’t lowered their standards despite the lack of females graduating their infantry officer’s course, I don’t really see the RIs making life easier either, but perhaps I’m just overly optimistic.
I was just bothered by the kneejerk reaction of “Women in Ranger School? Fuck that!” There’s no denying the physical differences between men and women and the many other issues that come up with allowing women into combat positions, but acting like women degrade readiness by virtue of being women is just idiotic. And I think that most of us would rather have a soldier with spirit, heart, and motivation – be that soldier male or female – than a brokedick or a shammer, any day of the week.
For reference, I am actually an enlisted infantryman in the Army, albeit not nearly as experienced as many of the people who frequent this blog. And while I can’t say that I personally support throwing women into the infantry the way they apparently are going to be, as it’s gonna get me and my brothers killed, it’s not constructive to react unprofessionally and mock and ridicule people whose views don’t align with.
tl;dr: Women won’t degrade shit unless standards are lowered, which I see no evidence indicating that will be the case, act like a damn professional, and put your fucking PT belt on.
I find it troubling an infantryman doesn’t acknowledge that for decades females entry into the military has lowered standards. Once that fact is acknowledged nobody can legitimately make the argument that, well, they’ll hold them to the same standard elsewhere when their entire entry was based upon a lower standard in which the military chose them over a higher standard if they went with a male.
Beyond the physical issues it’s a unnecessary burden socially and logistics wise for nothing of real gain but instead appearance.
It’s a catch 22 and it’s also why standards are eventually lowered more.
Back to the reeducation camp for you, my friend ….
OH, I am SO tired of the lack of effing common sense in the Dept of Dumbasses! I don’t think even ONE of them has a clue to what is going on in the real world.
The peshmerga has an entire combat training program for Kurdish women, who are ALL volunteers, and THOSE women tell reporters that the ISer men are bleating sheep when faced by women with guns. They are in combat positions now. I think they kind of know what they are talking about. That was in a Reuters article a few days ago.
In addition, ISIL/IS is recruiting and training women for combat. There are videos of them with weapons.
If the Dept. of Dimwitted Idiots can EVER crawl out from under their desks and absorb what is going on in the real world, someone please let me know.
I don’t give a crap about the politically correct stuff. I DO give a crap on how tax money (that’s MY money) is being wasted on the moronic ‘bright ideas’ and test programs coming out of the DoDs. The riverine school is putting women through the same training as the men. They either make it or they don’t, Master Guns. That is how Ranger school should be.
This asinine ‘test’ program is not going to prove a thing other than the PC crowd doesn’t know its butt from a hole in the ground, and you and I are paying for it.
Either take the effing military seriously and stop playing toy soldiers with it, or put people in charge who know what they hell they’re doing.
But what do I know?
I still wonder if getting a frontal lobotomy is a prerequisite for working in the Pentagon or any other Federal Government bureaucracy?
Considering that less than half of the females that have attended the School of Infantry have passed basic infantry training, I doubt any are going to pass Ranger School. The hikes are a killer, 15k seems to be the breaking point for most, and considering this is for entry level training, I am 100% positive Ranger School goes a lot further with a heavier pack load.
I have been involved in this study for about a year now, on the USMC side. All the data is pointing to it will not work. We are having a difficult time getting enough volunteers, young Marines are ending their careers before it even starts due to injuries, there is interference from people that should not have any say in training, and the study end date keeps getting extended. Like Ex-PH2 said, but what do I know.
Marine, I think and you know, this is all window dressing.
You think they would have that settled when you see who makes up the overwhelming majority of broke dicks over at MCT. It was immediately apparent to me when I first saw crutches battalion hobbling around base.
It’s not just that Rerun. Everyone I’ve ever known that went to Ranger school have told me it’s the greatest weight loss program in the world. I’ve known guys that have claimed to have lost 30-40 pounds during the course. Can you imagine a female clocking in at 110 to say 140 trying to get by on 1 to 1 and a half MREs a day? That’s almost 1/4 to 1/3 of their total body weight.
About 35 pounds here.
Here’s the dirty little secret from the CSA’s office. The ban on women in combat MOSs will be lifted in Jan 2016. I’ve heard it in a few of the higher level meetings where I was a back-seater.
My guess is that the Ranger school slots are to set the pool for female officers and NCOs in companies and platoons in 2016.
Great, and how long after that until we see half naked dead females being dragged through the streets of some Third World shithole, like TIME did back in 1993?
This is coming and common sense is not going to stop it. And whether our side is right or the liberal buffoon’s are right, we are only going to know for sure when the big equalizer, ground combat, tells us. And by then it is too late.
Not arguing the point, Master Guns, but as I said earlier, the peshmerga have a combat training group for Kurdish women who are now fighting the ISers alongside Kurdish men.
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/world/article/kurdish-female-fighters-face-jihadists-in-iraqs-north
The difference is that the Kurdish women have real motivation and follow up on it, knowing what they are facing.
In the US military, it’s politics, and the PC crap will make it fail.
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/2014/09/why-women-do-not-belong-us-infantry
Here is a link to an article written by a female Marine Captain. Captain Serrano is going to take face shots from politically correct numbnuts, (she takes some from an active duty male Marine Major in the comments section) but that does not lessen what she has written. We are crossing a line here that I don’t think we want to cross and I don’t think we can jump back if this goes to shit.
And the feminization of the military continues…
You used the wrong word. It’s ‘political correctiveness’, not ‘feminization’.
And whether you like us or not, BV, we’re here to stay.
Try reading The Weak link: The feminization of the Amerivan military, by Brian Mitchell. Oh yeah I don’t buy the Neanderthal, Male Chauvinist Pig, Out of touch name calling. It just muddies the REAL argument.
Yes, but you are mistaking a socio-political agenda for something it isn’t.
From my viewpoint, if this were the 1960s, when the whole ‘feminist’ thing started, I’d be jumping up and down and demanding to be part of it. But I was naive as hell back then about what really goes on in a combat zone. Now, I know better, based on having talked with nurses and combat photographers who WERE in combat zones, and I wouldn’t ask for that kind of assignment for the world.
But just because I have a better understanding now, it doesn’t mean that my personal opinion of it carries any weight with people whose agenda is awash in political correctness, or for that matter, those who view these things merely as opportunities to get ahead faster with no thought to the consequences.
Your disgruntlement is no different from mine, because I know how short-sighted this is and I know what the consequences will be just as well as you do.
Give them a shot? Hell let’s let them try out for the Baltimore Ravens as well.
Only time militaries choose to use women as fighters is out of desperation, not because it’s a superior choice. Derp peshmerga is no different, neither was Russia during WW2 where extermination was on the table, or Israel where once again necessity of being out numbered requires it.
The United States is different. We are able to pick and choose the best. Regardless of all the political correct bullshit society is infested with men and women are different. If we take policies that choose the less capable over the more capable to not hurt feelings and appease some myth that women are the same physically as males might as well open the floodgates and do away with standards.
Yes, but we aren’t the same physically and women don’t think the same way men do.
If this is seen simply as a means of advancing, with no thought to the consequences if training is not thorough and requirements are lowered all around just to pass people through, then the military fails in its mission.
Actually the cognitive process of females is another huge determent over males for this type of activity. Perhaps at the highest echelon it might be more effective, but it also may once again be a determent due to over prioritizing irrelevant factors which is central to the way females think. Whereas male are pretty much one track focused. For infantry where you take orders and focus on a mission having a women’s thought process factoring in isn’t a bonus. You mainly take orders and you don’t get to think about it to begin with.
Sorry but the physical aspect is the major factor at play and nothing will change that. Even when limited decision making is being done, the over whelming majority of taking orders and following them once again equate to males poor simple one track cognitive process being the superior choice over the alternative.
Deal with it PH2. The science either way isn’t favoring females and frankly it makes sense considering this is how civilization is designed. Women are important. They more important than men for civilization, but for different reasons and that is exactly why they are less attractive fighters and a last substitute over males for war fighting.
I’m not arguing with you, FC.
I’m simply saying that this specialized training is not viewed for its real purpose, which is combat.
It is being set up as a fast track for promotion for women, as if we are some sort of ethnic minority and have to have special opportunities.
This whole idea is pure political BS, and you and I both know it.
Its a promotion thing coming from female officers, not the enlisted ranks.
Once again, the good of a few outweigh the good of the many.
…but they should have the chance to try.
Really, why? Are there a limited number of slots available for this training? Shouldn’t those slots go to those who stand the best chance of completing the training? Is this the one area of military budgeting where you don’t mind throwing money away?
Ranger Assessment graduation rates have risen in preparation for the new era, from the pre-2012 rates of 30% to now as many as 80% graduating. Hurts no one but the ones that should truly be Rangers.
sofrep.com/9028
This is not your father’s Ranger School. The standards were “adapted” a while back.
As “for what can they do if they can’t serve in those roles?” Well think of it this way – does every officer or NCO who has earned the Tab serve in a Ranger position? No. Do they help to bring up the overall standards of the Army? I believe so. If we do end up having women who EARN the Tab, it would go along the lines of Abrams Charter and continue to raise the standards, albeit in a new segment of the Army.
But as someone mentioned earlier, I imagine there will be a lot of officer ass kissery and political deals for the first candidates. It will be a while before actual leaders get a chance to try.
RangerX: if I trusted the Army to do this right – e.g., to let women give Ranger school a try under historical standards and let the “chips fall where they may”, regardless of outcome – I’d agree with you.
In the current political climate, I do not believe that will happen. And, frankly, I don’t think you do either. You’ve already indicated your opinion that the Army has already lowered the standards.
Yeah, there’s a great idea. I get that Hoo-ah School is primarily a leadership school but the whole purpose of it usually involves eventually being in a Ranger unit if not already there.
Ass-backward logic once again.
This should be evaluated based on one question only: will this change make the military as a whole more effective and lethal? If not, it is a bad idea. If someone can persuade me it is, I’m all for it. (But I’m not holding my breath waiting for a cogent argument.)
“It is being set up as a fast track for promotion for women, as if we are some sort of ethnic minority and have to have special opportunities.
This whole idea is pure political BS, and you and I both know it.”
Concur, ex-PH2. After all, what else could be the point of this?
“Second, female soldiers can volunteer to serve as observers and advisors to the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade. These slots are open to staff sergeants through master sergeants, chief warrant officers 2 and 3, and first lieutenants through majors.
These volunteers will not be Ranger instructors, and they won’t evaluate students in the course.”
Of course they won’t evaluate the students. They’ll be there to evaluate the instructors.
http://www.cmrlink.org/data/sites/85/CMRDocuments/InterimCMRSpecRpt-100314.pdf
U. S. Marine Corps Research Findings: Where is the Case for Co-Ed Ground Combat? Interim CMR Special Report, October 2014