First women graduate Ranger School

[Airborne Rifles]

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/08/17/two-women-earn-ranger-tabs-first-army/31889239/

As a graduate of Ranger School myself, I have nothing but respect for these two women and their accomplishment (along with the 94 men graduating with them).

My greatest concern was that standards would be lowered to ensure a female graduate. The Ranger Training Brigade XO addressed these concerns (and accusations) very well:

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

I think these women have not only accomplished an incredible personal feat, but they have also helped to ensure the continued high standards of this school by proving that women can make it through without artificially lowering expectations.

My $.02.

RLTW!

[bayonetbrant]

They're tougher than I am.

[LongBlade]

Might bring an entirely new meaning to "Ranger the fuck up..."

[Cyrano]

Deeply divided on this one.

On one hand, they passed the only test I only thought worth mentioning, viz.: they did it without accommodation.  For this I acknowledge them as notably tougher than I've ever been on a good day and worthy of the tab.

On the other hand, as a society, we have not yet processed the consequences of women in combat and forward areas -- and I am not talking about fraternization.  This may be taken as a troglodyte view, but I think, until we rewire ourselves and the way we approach battle and war, we in the West are unprepared to bear the consequences this quest for equality between the sexes of which this is assuredly a part.

[Centurion40]

They're tougher than I am.

Me too.  Hat's off to the ladies for their accomplishment.  And hat's off to the Army for not cheating.

O0

[mirth]

Congratulations, Lts. Griest and Haver.

[Swatter]

I can see why people would be conflicted, especially when politics are becoming more intermeshed with roles and training standards. I think its great the women passed the course without lowering the standards and they should probably serve with in a Ranger unit (though I have never really studied what that might entail). The Soviets in WWII employed women in combat roles and some fought with great distinction.

As long as the politicians don't forget that the Army's main mission is to kill people and blow stuff up, then I would welcome women who can pass the normal training standards for combat roles. You simple cannot forget, though, that in the history of warfare hand-to-hand combat is an all to frequent occurrence in war. Politicians are not doing female soldiers serving in infantry combat roles any favors by lowering the standards. Infantry soldiers need to be able to grapple and prevail when an enemy soldier tries to kill them with a knife, bayonet, or their bare hands. History also shows that physical endurance is equally valuable for infantry soldiers. I am currently reading a book about the Pacific War and its truly cruel the conditions soldiers had to endure and amazing the endurance required of the average soldier.

I do think there is still too much banning women from traditionally male dominated activities. I would like to see women play MLB. I would bet there are many women who would be highly productive on a baseball diamond.

[bayonetbrant]

there's a difference between passing Ranger school and serving in a Ranger Battalion

I would like to see women play MLB. I would bet there are many women who would be highly productive on a baseball diamond.

back in the '90s, a friend of mine played for the post baseball team at Ft Irwin.  The Silver Bullets came through townfor an exhibition game, and the Ft Irwin guys clobbered them.  This was a bunch of amateur team of professional soldiers, most of whom had played in high school (and a few in college) and they beat the snot out of what was then the best women's baseball team out there.

[Cyrano]

Brant, your point borders on the self-evident, but this is clearly a part of a broader effort to expand the role of women in combat.  It wouldn't make news if it weren't seen that way.

[OJsDad]

Just to be clear on what Swatter is saying.  Do women not have to meet the same standards as men in basic training or after.  So two people doing the same job, one male and one female, they don't have to meet the same physical fitness standards.

[OJsDad]

They're tougher than I am.

Me too.  Hat's off to the ladies for their accomplishment.  And hat's off to the Army for not cheating.

O0

+1

[bayonetbrant]

Just to be clear on what Swatter is saying.  Do women not have to meet the same standards as men in basic training or after.  So two people doing the same job, one male and one female, they don't have to meet the same physical fitness standards.

Other than the PT test, all job requirements are the same.  You still have to shoot the same score to qualify with your weapon.  You still have to complete your skills tasks in the prescribed time.  You still have to fix the same engines, load the same missiles, drive the same trucks, fill out the same paperwork, etc.  The only differences are the PT test and the height/weight/body fat standards.

That said, as I understand it, the women at Ranger School were evaluated to the mens' standards, not the women's, for all the PT testing.

[Gusington]

Well done! Both the women and the Army. Proud moment for both.

[jomni]

I can see why people would be conflicted, especially when politics are becoming more intermeshed with roles and training standards. I think its great the women passed the course without lowering the standards and they should probably serve with in a Ranger unit (though I have never really studied what that might entail). The Soviets in WWII employed women in combat roles and some fought with great distinction.

Not to mention the IDF

[Airborne Rifles]

Press conference from the two newly minted (or tabbed) Rangers:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/08/20/433241833/first-female-army-rangers-say-they-thought-of-future-generations-of-women?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150820