US Congressman First "Ranger Truther?"

18X's are given extra training in order to do better at SFAS, is it any surprise that women are given extra training to do well at Ranger School?

Apples to Oranges argument Brother.

First off, these two females are not coming in off the street and right into Ranger School after BCT/AIT and BAC. However, SOPC exists to provide 18X's, coming straight in off the streets, training to bring them up to the level that an in-service E4(P) could have attained through taking part in unit level training. It is a leveling of the playing field of sorts.

Secondly, why was the two female candidates attendance to the Pre-Ranger Course (PRC) not sufficient for them to be successful at Ranger School? After all, it is the only formal course available to male candidates to prepare them for Ranger School. And lastly, since there is a course available to prepare all Ranger candidates for Ranger School, why being equal, would the females need to attend yet another course?

If they are equals, why were they given preferential treatment, consisting of extra training opportunities (pre Pre-Ranger Course) not available to the male candidates, prior Ranger School?
 
Last edited:
Apples to Oranges argument Brother.

First off, these two females are not coming in off the street and right into Ranger School after BCT/AIT and BAC. However, SOPC exists to provide 18X's, coming straight in off the streets, training to bring them up to the level that an in-service E4(P) could have attained through taking part in unit level training. It is a leveling of the playing field of sorts.

Secondly, why was the two female candidates attendance to the Pre-Ranger Course (PRC) not sufficient for them to be successful at Ranger School? After all, it is the only formal course available to male candidates to prepare them for Ranger School. And lastly, since there is a course available to prepare all Ranger candidates for Ranger School, why being equal, would the females need to attend yet another course?

If they are equals, why were they given preferential treatment, consisting of extra training opportunities (pre Pre-Ranger Course) not available to the male candidates, prior Ranger School?

Because females training is not equal in the Army. That is a problem. They are not held to the same standards from enlistment. That is a problem. They should be. But they aren't. So saying, "we will hold you to the same standard, though you have never previously been expected to attain it" seems silly to me. A little PT and nutrition advice seems plenty fair to me.
 
One issue this highlights is the Army's poor A&S process for leaders. Take a green-as-grass 2LT. He/ She has gone through a commissioning process (ROTC, Academy, or OCS), then attends a basic course (also chock full of leadership), but still requires a pre-Ranger school before they can even make a run at their tab. Now we're saying women don't receive the same training opportunities as men (true and also equally damning) so they require at least one extra training process before going to the best leadership school in the Army?

The more the Army pushes and screams for equality the more it highlights its tragic inequality. The Army's trying to end inequality without leveling the playing field. It touts Ranger School while basically admitting it doesn't fully prepare leaders. You can send a thousand women through Ranger School but without meaningful change elsewhere they're just trophies, little statues to feel good about on your mantle.
 
Because females training is not equal in the Army. That is a problem. They are not held to the same standards from enlistment. That is a problem. They should be. But they aren't. So saying, "we will hold you to the same standard, though you have never previously been expected to attain it" seems silly to me. A little PT and nutrition advice seems plenty fair to me.

And who is to blame for the double standard...women.
 
And who is to blame for the double standard...women.

I think that's oversimplifying the answer. While women are definitely culpable in propagating the double standard, I'm more inclined to ascribe blame to senior leaders of either gender when they were first working to establish what the expectations should be of women who serve. Instead of telling Bomb Squad Barbie and her ilk to nut the fuck up and meet The Standard, they set a ridiculously low bar for females to rise above. Humans being humans, they're typically only going to do what is expected of them, and not one iota more, hence what some would call "the soft bigotry of low expectations."

The females who think "Fuck that shit with a busted football bat, I'mma do one better," are the ones with the right mentality for our respective lines of work, anyway. If all females were held to The Standard, the exceptional ones would still go one higher, although there would admittedly be fewer of them due to the physiological limitations of the female body. As it stands now, why in the hell would the average Jane stand up and say "Hey, I want to make my life a lot harder than it already is. Suuuuuure, I'll meet the male standard." Physical and ethical sloth is the fault of the females, because true equality didn't suit them.

Ultimately, this round of the blame game is more like "the chicken or the egg."
 
My personal (very limited) experience with female soldiers, were not the greatest. I do try to keep an open mind as my experiences was not in an lengthy day to day situations.

While teaching with SARG, most (as in high 90%) were terrible at basic level soldier skills. Example being zero/qualifying with a weapon, if I was on a range late it was generally b/c of a female soldier or an older officer (I'm talking NG-USAR old). Same level of training, more intensive coaching and a lot of calm down its not worth crying over motivational conversations. However, I've also had some really awesome female soldiers who took in the training and performed as well as some of the best males, again few and far between. Another example was integration of female instructor's, we had to train up a lot of them to take over for us. It was a chore and I did get butthurt on some of the bullshit. Like, its time to prep a range, all the sudden females soldier couldn't be found, never carrying their share of the equipment, constant getting out of work b/c they need to square something else away, pay, etc. At the time I was pretty bent about it, but didn't have the rank or position to change it.

Another was my last deployment, we had female soldiers and a lot of support soldier filling roles for the convoy security mission. A lot of the same stuff, can't meet the basic female standards for PT, getting out of PT b/c XYZ bullshit excuses, pretty much a complete lack of wanting to do the job. I can't even count the amount of time wasted b/c of it. That said there were a few, as in two, female soldiers who were locked on and I had no problem working with for that particular mission.

Finally I will state that my experiences with female SRNCO/OFFICERS has been a mixed bag. By the same could be said for the males. However, I cannot recall one single female NCO or Officer, that I said damn, i want to work for her, she has her shit together, good leader, etc.

Now my personal opinions are one standard, meet it, if you do you have the job, if not, see you later, and that's for male or female. As for having a infantry squad with 2-3 female soldiers in it, patrolling the badlands. Probably not based on my past dealing's, they would need to be exactly like the guys, at not bring a bag of issues or a get out of hard work attitude. They're out there, but from my experience, few and far between.

As for Ranger school, no dog in that fight. Outside of a congrats for earning their tab based on the standards RTB required them to meet, whatever they may have been. The dudes next to them would have flipped if they were getting special treatment, especially the ones getting dropped or recycled. So I think it's safe to say they met the same standards as the males in that class. I think the more important issue is the operational training and development of units, effectiveness the same, up or down? Unfortunately, the only way to find out at this point, is to test it and let the cards fall where they may.

My $.02
 
The Army's PAO, a general, is engaging in a public flame war with a female journalist who wrote an article in "People" questioning whether standards were altered for the female Rangers.

This probably won't end well for him.

Holy shit! I only have a few more weeks to report this to SHARP so I can get an ARCOM before I ETS!!! Screw you all! I called dibs first!!!
 
Back
Top