View Full Version : The "Last Hard Class" is coming
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/05/ap-army-leaders-mull-sending-women-ranger-school-051612/
Army brass mulls sending women to Ranger school
By Lolita C. Baldor - The Associated Press
Posted : Wednesday May 16, 2012 15:30:50 EDT
WASHINGTON — Army leaders have begun to study the prospect of sending female soldiers to the service’s prestigious Ranger school — another step in the effort to broaden opportunities for women in the military.
Gen. Raymond Odierno, Army chief of staff, said Wednesday that he’s asked senior commanders to provide him with recommendations and a plan this summer. And while he stressed that no decisions have been made, he suggested that Ranger school may be a logical next step for women as they move into more jobs closer to the combat lines.
“If we determine that we’re going to allow women to go in the infantry and be successful, they are probably at some time going to have to go through Ranger school,” Odierno told reporters. “If we decide to do this, we want the women to be successful.”
According to Odierno, about 90 percent of senior Army infantry officers have gone to the school and are qualified as Rangers. Allowing women to go to Ranger school, he said, would allow them to be competitive with their male counterparts as they move through the ranks.
Going to Ranger school, however, does not automatically mean women would be allowed to serve in one of the Army’s three elite Ranger battalions, which are Army special operations forces. In fact, many male soldiers who wear the coveted Ranger tab on their uniforms never actually serve in one of the three battalions.
Currently, women are not allowed to serve as special operations, infantry or armor forces, which are considered the most dangerous combat jobs. They are, however, allowed to serve in a number of support jobs such as medics, military police and intelligence officers that are sometimes attached to combat brigade units.
Odierno said his commanders are looking at whether the Army should open up infantry and armor jobs to women, and how that should be done.
As of this week, 200 women reported to nine different battalions around the country, as the Army implements plans to formally allow women to serve in smaller units that are closer to the front lines. New Pentagon rules allowing women to serve at the battalion level — rather than just the larger brigade — were unveiled earlier this year, opening up about 14,000 more jobs for women across all the military services. There are currently more than 250,000 positions that are closed to women.
A brigade is roughly 3,500 troops split into several battalions of about 800 soldiers each. Historically, brigades were based farther from the front lines and they often include top command and support staff, while battalions are usually in closer contact with the enemy.
Women make up about 16 percent of the Army.
Snaquebite
05-16-2012, 18:54
Do you have a comment/position or just posting a news article
(via WeaponsMan is a blog about weapons. Primarily ground combat weapons, primarily small arms and man-portable crew-served weapons. The site owner is a former Special Forces weapons man (MOS 18B))
http://weaponsman.com/?p=2814
"
[...]
The Ranger Training Brigade has been told to roll the welcome mat and the first class could be 03/13 but will definitely be 05/13 at the latest. Each class in the remainder of FY 13 will receive five to eight women, and the treatment, mentoring, nurturing and ultimate success of those female candidates will be intensively managed by the Chief of Staff and the Sergeant Major of the Army, not to mention civilian appointees. The male candidates in the same courses are not of interest to the command, as long as they don't interfere with or criticize the women. Even the timing of the feminized classes was established for political reasons: to ensure that a fait accompli of female Ranger attendees, if not graduates is presented to the incoming SecDef and Secretary of the Army if, as the current leaders think likely, their patron is defeated in November. They did not want to put women in class 1/13, which starts in October, to prevent Congress from intervening before the elections, but 2/13 is an outside possibility.
Current Ranger graduates, Ranger veterans, and the Ranger units and Ranger training establishment were never consulted about the decision. Officers who argued against it in Pentagon meetings have already been dismissed or shunted into career-ending punishment assignments.
[...]
The instructors and cadre have been advised that any public statement is a career ender, and those that have spoken to WeaponsMan.com have done so at considerable personal career risk. Their input wasn't sought beforehand, and it sure as hell isn't wanted now.
[...]
It's still unclear whether training evolutions that women would have difficulty with will be dropped or re-normed for all students or just for the women. The introduction of women to Airborne School in the 1970s resulted in a massive easing of the challenge to all troopers, with low levels of attrition coming from arbitrary mind-games replacing high levels of attrition from physical failure. But that could be done without consequence, because the main point of airborne school was simply learning to parachute, something that's possible for any healthy person.
In Ranger School, one possibility is sex-norming various standards, to prevent the credibility damage that the feminized jump school suffered. The command-preferred approach is to lower standards across the board now, before the classes containing the women. allowing the initial class of women to claim they met the same standards as the men. While those decisions haven't all been taken yet, they need to be made within days, because planning for next year's classes is already well underway."
(via WeaponsMan is a blog about weapons. Primarily ground combat weapons, primarily small arms and man-portable crew-served weapons. The site owner is a former Special Forces weapons man (MOS 18B))
I post rarely, but read often. That's a very good article and contained the details that were/are lacking in the other articles I've found online.
I'm just a former rear echelon vet...and I find this move to be the worst kind of political pandering.
Team Sergeant
05-17-2012, 07:28
I post rarely, but read often. That's a very good article and contained the details that were/are lacking in the other articles I've found online.
I'm just a former rear echelon vet...and I find this move to be the worst kind of political pandering.
I agree....
If I were planning to destroy the United States from "within" first I'd destroy capitalism (almost complete) and then I'd work on throwing United States military into total chaos.
As with women in Ranger school I'd come out and say the USA has women in all the federal agencies that do all the jobs men do, why not the US Military? Let's "redistribute" the genders across the military board. (we'll lower the standards too so everyone can pass)
Ranger school is a volunteer school. Want to guess how many men will volunteer for the class after the women graduate? (besides the transgenders). Want to guess how many Ranger Tabs find their way into the trash can?
In my opinion this single "political" decision could actually wipe out the US Army Rangers in very short order.
The Spartans are not amused.
I agree....
Ranger school is a volunteer school. Want to guess how many men will volunteer for the class after the women graduate? (besides the transgenders). Want to guess how many Ranger Tabs find their way into the trash can?
It's actually nauseating to me.
This whole idea probably makes perfect sense to a leg-@$$ CSA and leg-@$$ SMA sitting around the Starbucks giving each other 'Yes, sir...three bags full!' handjobs and sucking down their macchiato whatevers in that five-sided concrete squirrel cage on the Potomac.
And so it goes...
Richard
Dontcha just love it when these decisions are made by folks who never have to live it or be down there where its affects are felt???
Gotta love the "good ideas"...just to fall in with the current social climate.
Yup, the services have always been the "test bed" for social experiments...some good (desegregation), some bad (women in jump school, when the hell they gonna jump into combat??)
Just when you think you have heard it all. This is another good reason why the current occupant of the WH and his social engineers from within the military establishment have to go. There will be a helluva price to be paid some day for being in vogue or stylish. God help us all.
I agree....
If I were planning to destroy the United States from "within" first I'd destroy capitalism (almost complete) and then I'd work on throwing United States military into total chaos.
As with women in Ranger school I'd come out and say the USA has women in all the federal agencies that do all the jobs men do, why not the US Military? Let's "redistribute" the genders across the military board. (we'll lower the standards too so everyone can pass)
Ranger school is a volunteer school. Want to guess how many men will volunteer for the class after the women graduate? (besides the transgenders). Want to guess how many Ranger Tabs find their way into the trash can?
In my opinion this single "political" decision could actually wipe out the US Army Rangers in very short order.
The Spartans are not amused.
So are they going to call it a Ranger Pad then and change the color to pink? This is a Gwad awful decision.
This article says that they are just thinking about it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/army-beginning-study-on-sending-women-soldiers-to-infantry-units-ranger-school/2012/05/16/gIQAEKL1TU_story.html
This article says that they are just thinking about it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/army-beginning-study-on-sending-women-soldiers-to-infantry-units-ranger-school/2012/05/16/gIQAEKL1TU_story.html
Lib think = Lib feel, which means it will probably get done, which means Ranger School as we know it, is done :mad:
greenberetTFS
05-17-2012, 15:00
I agree....
If I were planning to destroy the United States from "within" first I'd destroy capitalism (almost complete) and then I'd work on throwing United States military into total chaos.
As with women in Ranger school I'd come out and say the USA has women in all the federal agencies that do all the jobs men do, why not the US Military? Let's "redistribute" the genders across the military board. (we'll lower the standards too so everyone can pass)
Ranger school is a volunteer school. Want to guess how many men will volunteer for the class after the women graduate? (besides the transgenders). Want to guess how many Ranger Tabs find their way into the trash can?
In my opinion this single "political" decision could actually wipe out the US Army Rangers in very short order.
The Spartans are not amused.
I wholeheartedly concur........:mad:
Big Teddy :munchin
Team Sergeant
05-17-2012, 15:05
This article says that they are just thinking about it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/army-beginning-study-on-sending-women-soldiers-to-infantry-units-ranger-school/2012/05/16/gIQAEKL1TU_story.html
That's not the information we currently have.......
But I'm sure the Washington Post knows much more about Army Special Operations than we do......:rolleyes:
Cake_14N
05-17-2012, 16:17
A very slim chance of a positive side, but, hear me out.
Only people that attend the Ranger School actually understand what is involved and how the training is beneficial to operations. If female soldiers are allowed to attend and get that insight and first-hand knowledge of what the course entails and what life would be like in an operational Ranger unit, they would be in a much better position to support those Ranger units.
I learned just how ineffective I was as an Intelligence Officer when I had my first flight in an F-16. The target photo I proudly handed to my pilot as we stepped to the aircraft was completely useless at 25K feet. I just didn't understand what he actually needed until I was in a position to actually experience how he operated.
Hopefully the Army will use this change in a positive way and not a political posture to try to get more support for a particular candidate.
A very slim chance of a positive side, but, hear me out.
Only people that attend the Ranger School actually understand what is involved and how the training is beneficial to operations. If female soldiers are allowed to attend and get that insight and first-hand knowledge of what the course entails and what life would be like in an operational Ranger unit, they would be in a much better position to support those Ranger units.
I learned just how ineffective I was as an Intelligence Officer when I had my first flight in an F-16. The target photo I proudly handed to my pilot as we stepped to the aircraft was completely useless at 25K feet. I just didn't understand what he actually needed until I was in a position to actually experience how he operated.
Hopefully the Army will use this change in a positive way and not a political posture to try to get more support for a particular candidate.
I respect that point of view...but that has to be the dumbest reason I have ever heard for destroying an institution like RS!
A very slim chance of a positive side, but, hear me out.
Only people that attend the Ranger School actually understand what is involved and how the training is beneficial to operations. If female soldiers are allowed to attend and get that insight and first-hand knowledge of what the course entails and what life would be like in an operational Ranger unit, they would be in a much better position to support those Ranger units. I learned just how ineffective I was as an Intelligence Officer when I had my first flight in an F-16. The target photo I proudly handed to my pilot as we stepped to the aircraft was completely useless at 25K feet. I just didn't understand what he actually needed until I was in a position to actually experience how he operated.
Hopefully the Army will use this change in a positive way and not a political posture to try to get more support for a particular candidate.
That all sounds well and good except for the fact that the course will have to be watered down in order for women to be able to complete it. If it was only about insight and knowledge we would all be Rangers, we could get our tabs from some on-line course. Special Operations Forces are just that "SPECIAL" and we need to keep it that way.
Badger52
05-17-2012, 17:58
Not a Ranger & don't play one on TV. Interesting linked article at the blog.
Question:
"peer" reviews?
Also, does the group believe, as mentioned, they'll see an operational unit, or is this just another ticket-punched to co-opt a whole demographic? What happens when some other subset comes along and says, "well, just 'cause I couldn't get through the RPFT, it's not fair... that she could and now I don't have the same opportunities in my career as her..."
ad nauseum
I want my standing Army lean, razor sharp, it's not managed like a damn Powerpoint profit-center, the collective will of the American people understands that it costs ALOT of money and, thus, the country WILL take pause before unsheathing it. I guess I'm missin' something; this don't look like that. [/rant]
Snaquebite
05-17-2012, 18:40
Interesting article...Not sure where the info comes from or how accurate.
http://weaponsman.com/?p=2814
As a non RS grad, this may be stepping from my lane but I am confused.
For a 17-21 year old female to max the APFT she is required to do 42 push ups, and run 2 miles in 15:36 which is a 7:48 pace (39min 5 mile at the same pace).
The published minimums for Ranger School are 49 push ups, and 5 miles in 40 minutes.
So a 17-21 year old female who maxes the APFT would, at the same time, fail to meet the Ranger School standard for push ups, and meet the running standard by a minute if they maintained their 2 mile pace for 5 miles. :confused:
The Army is also reported to have dropped pull ups from the upcoming new PT test because women will be unable to do enough to make it worthwhile. Yet Ranger School requires 6 pull ups as the minimum.
I think it will be interesting to see what the new Army PT test standards will be.
Two cents.
I've been by some "stellar" females who score 370 plus on their PT, run fast, et cetera. I have dated a USOEC wrestler, one of the top female athletes in the world- and had the chance to run around with some of the NCAA's fleet footed ladies. And every time, EVERY time, they have disappointed.
Supposedly they are some of the best in the nation at what they do- for their gender. I say that without apologies for genetic differences or political correctness. They just can't measure up to the performance measures.
I am well aware of my place, my lack of experience. I am also aware that for the last 4 years I have torn myself to pieces in order to get the opportunity to do these things. The last thing I want to see after finally getting there is one of these "specially selected females" to be there.
:munchin
DIYPatriot
05-17-2012, 21:56
My wife is an MP, a true hard ass that nailed a 280 APFT a few weeks ago. She chose MP so she could be closer to the front, etc. I asked her how she felt about this and her response was:
"What the hell are they thinking? If I was a Ranger, I would be so f****** pissed right now that I couldn't see straight. I'm sick of these political BS moves by our current chief and his office b/c that's undoubtedly where this came from. It's total BS. Why the f'k don't they just go ahead and issue a Ranger tab to everyone that makes it off the bus at Basic so they will never feel left out."
Her email went on to say other things and even dropped into the realm of FET, but you get the idea. I was just curious about a female's perspective and my wife never minces words, regardless of how she perceives my views.
Just wanted to share her thoughts and add to the thread.
Only people that attend the Ranger School actually understand what is involved and how the training is beneficial to operations. If female soldiers are allowed to attend and get that insight and first-hand knowledge of what the course entails and what life would be like in an operational Ranger unit, they would be in a much better position to support those Ranger units.
I doubt that any of the support types would benefit from Ranger School. Ranger School develops specific skills that a Ranger will need during a variety of missions. There's no value in teaching a truck driver to climb mountains, rappel, or execute detailed small unit actions. Neither will sleep deprivation or cold wet nights. Whether the mission is to deliver chow, put heavy rounds on target, or treat the wounded, the support side simply needs to do their part expertly. Sorta like falling in to secure a downed medevac crew. BTDT. Don't need to be a medic or a pilot, just good at doing what you do.
This whole idea probably makes perfect sense to a leg-@$$ CSA and leg-@$$ SMA sitting around the Starbucks......
Richard
I have never seen two legs close together benefit anyone.
:D
I have never seen two legs close together benefit anyone.
:D
Except when doing a PLF. :D
69harley
05-18-2012, 07:13
I doubt that any of the support types would benefit from Ranger School. Ranger School develops specific skills that a Ranger will need during a variety of missions. There's no value in teaching a truck driver to climb mountains, rappel, or execute detailed small unit actions. Neither will sleep deprivation or cold wet nights. Whether the mission is to deliver chow, put heavy rounds on target, or treat the wounded, the support side simply needs to do their part expertly. Sorta like falling in to secure a downed medevac crew. BTDT. Don't need to be a medic or a pilot, just good at doing what you do.
I disagree. Ranger school is a leadership school that uses small unit tactics as the medium. Everyone that graduates from Ranger School is a better leader. Period.
On a personnal note, I think it would be pretty cool to have a wife or girlfriend that had a tab (that she truly earned).
DIYPatriot
05-18-2012, 09:32
On a personnal note, I think it would be pretty cool to have a wife or girlfriend that had a tab (that she truly earned).
What do you mean by truly earned? And at what costs does cool transcend logical?
On a personnal note, I think it would be pretty cool to have a wife or girlfriend that had a tab.
Concur. I ran one broad's tab up to damn near a thousand bucks, once.
NoRoadtrippin
05-18-2012, 10:19
UNBELIEVABLE.
From the day I got my "Ranger School story" med drop, I have sought to go back. Maybe that's two months of my life I can find something else to do with now.
Buffalobob
05-18-2012, 10:29
Equality comes slowly and changes the status quo.
Equality comes slowly and changes the status quo.
Equality? Or normed equality?
As has been asked before - How many females are there on male pro sports teams?
Equality comes slowly and changes the status quo.
Yeah, well, it's gonna take a while yet before men and women are equal enough to the point that a chick wins the Heisman.
Why can't the standards stay the same? If female officers want such equal respect and competitiveness for promotion, one way to attain it would surely be to rise up to and overcome the same Ranger School standards that men must meet. Sure there would be less female graduates, but those that make it would be very good.
Why can't the standards stay the same? If female officers want such equal respect and competitiveness for promotion, one way to attain it would surely be to rise up to and overcome the same Ranger School standards that men must meet. Sure there would be less female graduates, but those that make it would be very good.
Ya know, kid, you should read your own sig line (or mine). Once you have been around the block a few times, you'll learn that there are somethings in the world that just are they way they are.
Buffalobob
05-18-2012, 14:00
Equality? Or normed equality?
Equality begins with who makes the rules. I am reminded of the recent statement by the Pope that women cannot talk to God and know his will and therefore he was sending a Bishop to America to tell the 77,000 nuns what God wanted them to do.
Equality begins with who makes the rules. I am reminded of the recent statement by the Pope that women cannot talk to God and know his will and therefore he was sending a Bishop to America to tell the 77,000 nuns what God wanted them to do.
lol Not to worry;, there'll be a female Pope soon enough.
69harley
05-18-2012, 15:03
What do you mean by truly earned? And at what costs does cool transcend logical?
Not even worth discussing in depth. It's a given that when this happens, tha standards for women attending Ranger School will be adjusted fromt he male standards, just like everything else in the Army. No news there.
The female soldiers that step up to the plate, and complete the course will have earned it.
An a different but similar note, some would argue that graduates of the current Ranger School POI have not earned it as they did not go through desert phase, or didn't run in jungle boots, or got more than one MRE a day, etc. I did all of those, but probably could not pass the current POI. Things evolve, change.
The females that go to and pass Ranger School will be better as a result. So will the Army.
By the way, some pretty big mukity muks in the Ranger community think this is a good idea.
Enough said about that.
greenberetTFS
05-18-2012, 15:35
Female Rangers.........:( :( :(
Big Teddy :munchin
ZonieDiver
05-18-2012, 16:18
Female Rangers.........:(
Big Teddy :munchin
But, wouldn't that reallly make them "Rangerettes"? :D
Not even worth discussing in depth. It's a given that when this happens, tha standards for women attending Ranger School will be adjusted fromt he male standards, just like everything else in the Army. No news there.
The female soldiers that step up to the plate, and complete the course will have earned it.
An a different but similar note, some would argue that graduates of the current Ranger School POI have not earned it as they did not go through desert phase, or didn't run in jungle boots, or got more than one MRE a day, etc. I did all of those, but probably could not pass the current POI. Things evolve, change.
The females that go to and pass Ranger School will be better as a result. So will the Army.
By the way, some pretty big mukity muks in the Ranger community think this is a good idea.
Enough said about that.
Have you been to RS? Have you been in a Ranger Bn or Regiment? Doesn't look like it by your profile. Name the "big mukity muks" (???) and what "ranger community" you are referring to. I am also a member of ArmyRanger.com and the consensus there is way worse than it is here. So, either enlighten us as to why your opinion counts with your bonafides or drink a tall cup of STFU
But, wouldn't that reallly make them "Rangerettes"? :D
Better photo, better presentation, Zonie. I like it! :D
aegisnavy
05-18-2012, 16:45
26 Years ago, I stood on the bridge out to the O-course on Hospital Point at the Boat School and looked at the "Wall". Half of the wall was one height, and the other half was shorter. Immediately I asked my squad leader "Sir, WTH is that for, Sir?"
"Shorter side is for the female midshipmen," came the reply.
Didn't make sense then, doesn't make sense now. Not the greatest analogy, I know, but it reminds me of that summer way back when. If that is the way it goes, which I suppose it will, it's a crime.
I agree with the BTDT's, it is all part of something nefariously bigger. :mad:
Buffalobob
05-18-2012, 18:23
ol Not to worry;, there'll be a female Pope soon enough.
It will be really interesting if she is wearing a ranger tab and a CIB! :D
In the German Armed Forces Women are allowed to enter every(!) career path including infantry, armour and sf. Does it work? not really...
There are some(!) really outstanding female soldiers who are great leaders and stuff - but we also learned that there is a certain line women just do not cross regularly... but have to if they want to be a good soldier, officer - military leader.
Career paths have been open since 2001/02 i believe and only 50-70 women attended our equivalent of the US Ranger School (we copied/adapted the programm for our Einzelkämpferlehrgang I&II - but downsized it a bit (no airborne and diving here)).
I witnessed a young female officer on the second Course, mostly small unit tactics and guerilla warfare. She failed... miserably - and most notably as a leader AND as a trooper. Regarding that she is one of the "high hopes" and is seriously considered to be on of the first women to work in DEU SF (KSK - Kommando Spezialkräfte - are establishing a female unit for recruiting their search girls) it was pathetic. She did not pass the course either.
And that´s the only hope I´ve got. Finally... we demanded our standards NOT to be lowered and women failed. So if we keep that up, I´ll be the first to shake the hands of the first woman to pass, ´cause then I´ll have a good feeling about her and what she is capable of. But lower the standards just to get some puppies the badge and I´ll rip mine of and burn it...
If Ranger School opens its doors for women, let them in and experience their limits. Then spit ´em out and spread the words
Finally... we demanded our standards NOT to be lowered and women failed. So if we keep that up, I´ll be the first to shake the hands of the first woman to pass, ´cause then I´ll have a good feeling about her and what she is capable of. But lower the standards just to get some puppies the badge and I´ll rip mine of and burn it...
Seems to be the consensus over here, as well.
I think the President should pass a law.
Since it is unfair that Pro Football Teams don't have any female running backs it will be required that all pro teams have at least one female running back - and that they must play at least 15 downs per game. To make it fair they will only be able to be tackled below the ankle(in other words - grab their foot). Any tackles above the ankle will result in a 25 yd penalty against the defense.
The game will remain the same - the standards were not lowered and everybody is equal. And the females will rack up a pretty good touchdown rate. Man, I didn't know they were that good at football.
"Equal - but different"
Yeah - I always wanted to be a WAC Company Commander - it was the only time I've ever been told my d**k was too big and those 'gender norming' requirements for the position made me rethink my dream...:eek:
So I stayed in SF! :D
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
greenberetTFS
05-19-2012, 10:20
I think the President should pass a law.
Since it is unfair that Pro Football Teams don't have any female running backs it will be required that all pro teams have at least one female running back - and that they must play at least 15 downs per game. To make it fair they will only be able to be tackled below the ankle(in other words - grab their foot). Any tackles above the ankle will result in a 25 yd penalty against the defense.
The game will remain the same - the standards were not lowered and everybody is equal. And the females will rack up a pretty good touchdown rate. Man, I didn't know they were that good at football.
"Equal - but different"
:D:D:D
Big Teddy :munchin
So is this going to happen for sure or just a good chance of it...?
I met a buddy for PT this morning. His platoon sergeant works in the NG pre-Ranger unit. Everyone up at RTB is acting with the expectation that it will happen, that is, all the actual planning and prep is being done to make it happen even as I type this. Moreover, the word is also that women _will_ pass the course when they report.
What will happen when one of the women has to change her pad or tampon in a PB that includes a Muslim exchange student I don't know, but I'm sure that they will come up with an SOP for that.
What will happen when one of the women has to change her pad or tampon in a PB that includes a Muslim exchange student I don't know, but I'm sure that they will come up with an SOP for that.
I was discussing this with a young employee of mine last week, although not with the level of detail in your post. Being a former rear echelon type, my soldiers were always made up of both males and females. If identifying latrine and personal hygiene options were an annoyance in my type of unit, I told him that it can be assumed that it would be exponentially more of a distraction at Ranger School.
I was discussing this with a young employee of mine last week, although not with the level of detail in your post. Being a former rear echelon type, my soldiers were always made up of both males and females. If identifying latrine and personal hygiene options were an annoyance in my type of unit, I told him that it can be assumed that it would be exponentially more of a distraction at Ranger School.
Easy. Make hysterectomies mandatory prior to training.
Dozer523
05-21-2012, 11:51
What will happen when one of the women has to change her pad or tampon in a PB that includes a Muslim exchange student I don't know, but I'm sure that they will come up with an SOP for that. That's what I'm talkin' 'bout! Worst Case scenario! Where IS my Composite Risk Managment Card? (Oh over by my reflective belt)
Surgicalcric
05-21-2012, 18:16
Found somewhere else that this topic is being discussed. Apparently there are some pissed off Rangers out there.
The Rangerette Creed
Recognizing that I volunteered as a Rangerette, fully knowing that I was ruining a time honored profession, I will always endeavor to lower the standards, discipline, and combat effectiveness of the Rangers.
Acknowledging the fact that a Rangerette is a weaker soldier who shivers at the sight of battle, I accept the fact that as a Rangerette my country knows I will move slower, do less, and cry louder than any other soldier.
Never shall I live up to my comrades. I will always keep myself well groomed, heavily perfumed and all around pretty, you know the important things in war, and I will shoulder less than my share of the task whatever it may be, let someone else do the hard stuff.
Gallantly will I show the world that I am a specially protected and equality based-trained soldier. My courtesy to those who help my cause, politeness with which I am treated and what happens to those who stand for the old Ranger standards shall set the example for others to follow in making this a sunshiny happy Army.
Energetically will I run from the enemies of my country. I shall not fight them on the field of battle for that is very dangerous and I might get hurt or killed. Surrender is not a Ranger word, but I’ll give in if things get rough. I will always leave fallen comrades to fall into the hands of the enemy because they are too heavy to carry and under no circumstances will I ever live up to what my country used to expect of Rangers.
Readily will I display the intestinal fortitude required to watch others fight on to the Ranger objective and complete the mission fighting down to the lone survivor, while I watch from a safe secure position.
Found somewhere else that this topic is being discussed. Apparently there are some pissed off Rangers out there.
I wish I could post that as my signature block... That is PRICELESS!!!
JoelBlack
05-21-2012, 23:49
Fine....first come, first serve on the life boats!
Found somewhere else that this topic is being discussed. Apparently there are some pissed off Rangers out there.
I am not for female Rangers, but the motto you posted is just wrong on so many levels. If you want to have a discussion about the physical capabilities of a woman, I say discuss away. But don't you dare demean my service simply for the reason that I have indoor plumbing vs outdoor plumbing.
Team Sergeant
05-22-2012, 09:20
I am not for female Rangers, but the motto you posted is just wrong on so many levels. If you want to have a discussion about the physical capabilities of a woman, I say discuss away. But don't you dare demean my service simply for the reason that I have indoor plumbing vs outdoor plumbing.
Surgicalcric posted what was found elsewhere, most likely by former or AD Rangers. His point was to illustrate what some think of the females attending the Ranger course. I can assure you we don't think this way and demeaning women is not what the point of that post.
To the man I'm sure you will find we believe women to be our equal in every way except in strength, period.
Nuff said.
TS
cornelyj
05-22-2012, 18:18
I was going to post something but decided not.
It is my opinion that this would be a bad decision and the women selected will be babied on the edge of the pipeline. the end.
Yes, I am a very recent Ranger Grad.
bailaviborita
05-23-2012, 22:08
As this is supposed to be a testing of the waters prior to "maybe" opening all MOSs and units to females, I thought the greater subject is the implications of adding females to combat arms units. I have been counseled by all of my mentors to stay away from this topic- as it is seen as a career-ender for guys. I was working on a paper with these 10 main points (bottom line: this is all turned political now...forget common sense):
1) It is dangerous to take our cues on a structural change like this from our experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq.
2) If the real issue is getting a woman promoted to the top spot- let's change the qualifications to getting there- not gut the force to do it.
3) Why are we prioritizing individual equality over needs of the service/nation? Is selfless-service just a bumper sticker? This will be a serious cultural change with potential disastrous consequences.
4) Is it possible that those behind this effort really don't want a woman in charge of the JCS- but really want us to have a military capability about as strong as the Dutch have- in order for us to be incapable of prosecuting war? (it seems interesting to me that the same people pushing for this also seem to be the ones protesting the military, war, and capitalism...)
5) There's a huge difference between being in a combat zone and closing with and killing the enemy. Why compare the two as if they are the same?
6) Putting young men and women together (think teens) in combat units will be disastrous for them and for the units they are in. The entire DoD is being sued for sexual harassment right now. They are also being sued for rape at the academies. When will we wake up and realize we can't put young, immature kids together in compromising situations and expect that leadership will keep them from doing stupid things? It's tragic when this happens at the academies or a high-level headquarters- but potentially catastrophic for a combat arms unit. That this is happening now with the Female Engagement Teams- and yet largely ignored due to politics- is sad.
7) This is an "equality that is hyper individualistic". It is not equal for men. Men can be forced into combat arms because at the end of the day we need combat arms to fight, therefore men serve at the discretion of the nation and the service. We aren't talking about doing the same to women- forcing them into combat arms if we have to in order to meet a national security requirement. We are only talking about allowing those who can pass some arbitrary minimum physical requirement to volunteer to go combat arms. I say "arbitrary"- because, again, at the end of the day- the standard has to be based on whatever will allow us to fill combat arms with enough people (read: men).
8) To compare this issue to integrating Blacks into the military is apples and oranges.
9) The way men and women interact with each other on average is very different than the way they interact with their own sex- and this presents huge challenges to small unit morale and effectiveness when you add women to the mix. Comparing the military to police and fire departments is, again, apples and oranges.
10) The issue is now political- and thus the other side does not care if the outcome is negative- they will blame the leadership as being sexist or not good enough and they'll look for someone else who will make the outcome positive (or at least spin it positively). Their view of the world is probably 180 degrees from the average army guy's. I wonder if, once our martial spirit is officially gutted and we are left only doing R2P missions in support of the UN- and our drones see all of the action- will the Chinese be troubled that we're at 100% on our SHARP training for the year?
4) Is it possible that those behind this effort really don't want a woman in charge of the JCS- but really want us to have a military capability about as strong as the Dutch have- in order for us to be incapable of prosecuting war? (it seems interesting to me that the same people pushing for this also seem to be the ones protesting the military, war, and capitalism...)
5) There's a huge difference between being in a combat zone and closing with and killing the enemy. Why compare the two as if they are the same?
6) Putting young men and women together (think teens) in combat units will be disastrous for them and for the units they are in. The entire DoD is being sued for sexual harassment right now. They are also being sued for rape at the academies. When will we wake up and realize we can't put young, immature kids together in compromising situations and expect that leadership will keep them from doing stupid things? It's tragic when this happens at the academies or a high-level headquarters- but potentially catastrophic for a combat arms unit. That this is happening now with the Female Engagement Teams- and yet largely ignored due to politics- is sad.
7) This is an "equality that is hyper individualistic". It is not equal for men. Men can be forced into combat arms because at the end of the day we need combat arms to fight, therefore men serve at the discretion of the nation and the service. We aren't talking about doing the same to women- forcing them into combat arms if we have to in order to meet a national security requirement. We are only talking about allowing those who can pass some arbitrary minimum physical requirement to volunteer to go combat arms. I say "arbitrary"- because, again, at the end of the day- the standard has to be based on whatever will allow us to fill combat arms with enough people (read: men).
8) To compare this issue to integrating Blacks into the military is apples and oranges.
9) The way men and women interact with each other on average is very different than the way they interact with their own sex- and this presents huge challenges to small unit morale and effectiveness when you add women to the mix. Comparing the military to police and fire departments is, again, apples and oranges.
10) The issue is now political- and thus the other side does not care if the outcome is negative- they will blame the leadership as being sexist or not good enough and they'll look for someone else who will make the outcome positive (or at least spin it positively). Their view of the world is probably 180 degrees from the average army guy's. I wonder if, once our martial spirit is officially gutted and we are left only doing R2P missions in support of the UN- and our drones see all of the action- will the Chinese be troubled that we're at 100% on our SHARP training for the year?
Outstanding. Especially:
5) There's a huge difference between being in a combat zone and closing with and killing the enemy. Why compare the two as if they are the same?
Surgicalcric
05-24-2012, 06:19
I am not for female Rangers, but the motto you posted is just wrong on so many levels. If you want to have a discussion about the physical capabilities of a woman, I say discuss away. But don't you dare demean my service simply for the reason that I have indoor plumbing vs outdoor plumbing.
No one has demeaned your service Ma'am.
As I said in my previous post and pointed out to you by TS the creed was found elsewhere. It was created and posted by RANGERS to express their contempt for the people who would weaken our nation by pandering to those who are solely interested in the perks of having the Tab...
Crip
1stindoor
05-24-2012, 06:36
4) Is it possible that those behind this effort really don't want a woman in charge of the JCS- but really want us to have a military capability about as strong as the Dutch have- in order for us to be incapable of prosecuting war? (it seems interesting to me that the same people pushing for this also seem to be the ones protesting the military, war, and capitalism...)
10) The issue is now political- and thus the other side does not care if the outcome is negative- they will blame the leadership as being sexist or not good enough and they'll look for someone else who will make the outcome positive (or at least spin it positively).
I have made both of those points as well; though you verbalized it much better.
No one has demeaned your service Ma'am.
As I said in my previous post and pointed out to you by TS the creed was found elsewhere. It was created and posted by RANGERS to express their contempt for the people who would weaken our nation by pandering to those who are solely interested in the perks of having the Tab...
Crip
I should have written my post better. My post was pointed at the guys that wrote the creed, not you. Sorry I didn't make that more clear. As TS pointed out, I know you guys on here are better men than that.:o
afchic gets the G-43 generator and folding seat! :D :D
Richard :munchin
As this is supposed to be a testing of the waters prior to "maybe" opening all MOSs and units to females, I thought the greater subject is the implications of adding females to combat arms units. I have been counseled by all of my mentors to stay away from this topic- as it is seen as a career-ender for guys. I was working on a paper with these 10 main points (bottom line: this is all turned political now...forget common sense):
9) The way men and women interact with each other on average is very different than the way they interact with their own sex- and this presents huge challenges to small unit morale and effectiveness when you add women to the mix. Comparing the military to police and fire departments is, again, apples and oranges.
10) The issue is now political- and thus the other side does not care if the outcome is negative- they will blame the leadership as being sexist or not good enough and they'll look for someone else who will make the outcome positive (or at least spin it positively). Their view of the world is probably 180 degrees from the average army guy's. I wonder if, once our martial spirit is officially gutted and we are left only doing R2P missions in support of the UN- and our drones see all of the action- will the Chinese be troubled that we're at 100% on our SHARP training for the year?
Some good points. My thoughts on the two above:
9) I agree with the fact that men and women in small unit will cause problems. I wonder if maybe they make all female teams if that would make a difference. As m ost of you all point out, a female is physically different from a man. Chances are they will not be able to carry a fully loaded down male to safety if need be. BUt what if the soldier they are trying to carry is a woman who is lighter?
I will be the first to admit a group of women together can be quite difficult. But if this is truly the way the Army/Marines are moving, then why not employ it in this manner, vs all the complications and safety issues that come with a mixed unit.
10) This is what happens when our civilian leadership has never served in the military. If they had, this wouldn't be an issue. I am willing to bet none of these ideas have come from the brass, but from a few levels of civilian leadership above them.
Surgicalcric
05-24-2012, 09:17
...10) This is what happens when our civilian leadership has never served in the military. If they had, this wouldn't be an issue. I am willing to bet none of these ideas have come from the brass, but from a few levels of civilian leadership above them.
Agree yet disagree as well. While non/prior service members of Congress IMO are responsible for to a certain degree I place more of the blame on weak military commanders who wont tell their boss what their boss doesn't want to hear, but needs to. There is no room in our military for the "career" minded - that crap belongs in corporate America not a war machine.
This telling the boss what he wants to hear instead of what he needs to hear is directly why Astan (lets not forget Iraq) is/was so messed up. For instance, I sat through a couple JFSOCC/USASOCOM CDR briefings where both SOTF and AOB CDRs briefed their piece then several team leaders briefed on their individual partner force. Of everyone in the room the only guy telling the truth was a Team Leader and afterwards he was told, "the CDR doesnt want to hear about issues, he wants to hear things are going great."
"Career" minded military leadership who are afraid of doing what is right for fear of their careers really aren't what we need.
Nope; sadly, that's what we get when things are relatively peaceful.
The Weaponsman blog has posted several informative and useful updates on this story. They can be found at the LINK (http://weaponsman.com/?cat=34).
Badger52
06-01-2012, 16:50
Agree yet disagree as well. While non/prior service members of Congress IMO are responsible for to a certain degree I place more of the blame on weak military commanders who wont tell their boss what their boss doesn't want to hear, but needs to. There is no room in our military for the "career" minded - that crap belongs in corporate America not a war machine.Speaking truth to power has often been a significant issue at pivotal moments in our history and lays a poor foundation for the future. Lotta that goin' around...
The Weaponsman blog has posted several informative and useful updates on this story. They can be found at the LINK (http://weaponsman.com/?cat=34).
lol Thanks. Good link, good stuff.
The Reaper
07-01-2012, 10:07
A female Marine officer's perspective.
Get Over It!
We are not all created equal
by Capt Katie Petronio
The Marine Corps Times recently published a handful of articles in regard to opening Infantry Officer Course (IOC) to females and the possibility of integrating women into the infantry community. In mid-April the Commandant directed the “integration” of the first wave of female officers into IOC this summer following completion of The Basic School (TBS). This action may or may not pave the way for female Marines to serve in the infantry as the results remain to be seen. However, before the Marine Corps moves forward with this concept, should we not ask the hard questions and gain opinions of combat-experienced Marines (male and female alike) as to the purpose, the impact, and the gains from such a move? As a combat-experienced Marine officer, and a female, I am here to tell you that we are not all created equal, and attempting to place females in the infantry will not improve the Marine Corps as the Nation’s force-in-readiness or improve our national security.
As a company grade 1302 combat engineer officer with 5 years of active service and two combat deployments, one to Iraq and the other to Afghanistan, I was able to participate in and lead numerous combat operations. In Iraq as the II MEF Director, Lioness Program, I served as a subject matter expert for II MEF, assisting regimental and battalion commanders on ways to integrate female Marines into combat operations. I primarily focused on expanding the mission of the Lioness Program from searching females to engaging local nationals and information gathering, broadening the ways females were being used in a wide variety of combat operations from census patrols to raids.
In Afghanistan I deployed as a 1302 and led a combat engineer platoon in direct support of Regimental Combat Team 8, specifically operating out of the Upper Sangin Valley. My platoon operated for months at a time, constructing patrol bases (PBs) in support of 3d Battalion, 5th Marines; 1st Battalion, 5th Marines; 2d Reconnaissance Battalion; and 3d Battalion, 4th Marines. This combat experience, in particular, compelled me to raise concern over the direction and overall reasoning behind opening the 03XX field.
Who is driving this agenda?
Who indeed?
Continued in the attachment.
Bear in mind that this is a very physically fit young female, properly conditioned and equipped, trying to function as an Engineer, not as an Infantryman.
If she thinks life sucks now, wait till she hits 50.
TR
She put it on the line and was brutally honest.
That was an interesting read for sure.
Unknownx
07-02-2012, 23:02
"The Ranger Training Brigade has been told to roll the welcome mat and the first class could be 03/13 but will definitely be 05/13 at the latest"
Wow that's perfect, I was planning on trying out for ranger school in that exact timeline, after I finish my degree.
frostfire
07-03-2012, 22:47
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/7926995/Inside-Afghanistan-Captain-Abi-Bradley-on-patrol.html
well, a lady CPT leading a gurkha patrol?!?!? :eek:
I might be missing something here and need to learn more about the Gurkha Rifle Company command structure...
bailaviborita
07-09-2012, 08:19
Just saw this in the NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/09/us/grueling-course-for-marine-officers-will-open-its-doors-to-women.html?_r=1
I am betting they were not told they had to graduate a certain percentage...