PDA

View Full Version : Female RANGERS


Pages : [1] 2 3

Team Sergeant
01-07-2015, 09:43
Should not be long now.......

So when the female Rangers start taking over the leadership I fully expect to see many changes implemented:

No swearing while in uniform.

No dodge ball during recess/breaks.

No bullying.

Everyone is a winner.

"How to castrate an Army" by barack hussain obama

;)


You know every time I see a Hollywood action movie the women always fight better than the men, always. I'm sure they will make great warriors.


More than 30 women have been selected for a potential Ranger Course Assessment next spring, Fort Benning announced.

The Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade chose 20 NCOs and 11 officers as observers and advisers for the assessment, according to a Facebook post on Monday by the Maneuver Center of Excellence at the post in Georgia.

The female soldiers were put through a week of training to acclimate them to the rigorous physical and mental challenges for soldiers earning the Ranger tab.


http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2014/11/17/women-selected-ranger-course/19174007/

UWOA
01-07-2015, 09:52
Pretty soon you won't even need to do a short arms inspection to tell a female Ranger from a male Ranger. While I went through in the fall and therefore merit only the basic Ranger tab, winter Rangers sew their tabs on with white thread. I am sure that female Rangers will take note of this and have a lace fringe adorning their tabs to distinguish them from the run-of-the-mill Ranger.

.

Team Sergeant
01-07-2015, 09:55
Pretty soon you won't even need to do a short arms inspection to tell a female Ranger from a male Ranger. While I went through in the fall and therefore merit only the basic Ranger tab, winter Rangers sew their tabs on with white thread. I am sure that female Rangers will take note of this and have a lace fringe adorning their tabs to distinguish them from the run-of-the-mill Ranger.

.

:D

JimP
01-07-2015, 10:32
"The female soldiers were put through a week of training to acclimate them to the rigorous physical..."

A whole week?? :eek:

Wow - might as well give them the Trident as well. Heck - I mean a whole 7 days...?? Who could stand up to that level of punishment?

Combat Diver
01-07-2015, 10:44
"The female soldiers were put through a week of training to acclimate them to the rigorous physical..."

A whole week?? :eek:

Wow - might as well give them the Trident as well. Heck - I mean a whole 7 days...?? Who could stand up to that level of punishment?

That week was only Mon-Fri 0900-1700. :p


CD

JimP
01-07-2015, 11:35
OK - But still....that's MARSOC material right there!! Dang - don't mess with those wimmins!!

Snaquebite
01-07-2015, 11:52
WTF are "observers and advisers" ? What is their role in all this?

Hey, you're pushing the females too hard.

Hey, you can't call that female a dirtbag.

Hey she can't low crawl any lower...Her boobs are too big.

Hey, etc etc etc

Remington Raidr
01-07-2015, 11:58
WTF are "observers and advisers" ? What is their role in all this?

Hey, you're pushing the females too hard.

Hey, you can't call that female a dirtbag.

Hey she can't low crawl any lower...Her boobs are too big.

Hey, etc etc etc

"boob are too big"??? OK, you have my attention now.

Snaquebite
01-07-2015, 12:17
I forgot...

Hey, back off! She's a little sensitive this time of the month.

Team Sergeant
01-07-2015, 12:45
LOL, Army Leadership....

Next thing you know they will be placing a non-qualified general to take command of the Green Berets....

(oh shit, they already did that didn't they.....)

ChuckG
01-07-2015, 16:03
Leroy, who?

Joker
01-07-2015, 19:24
Pretty soon you won't even need to do a short arms inspection to tell a female Ranger from a male Ranger. While I went through in the fall and therefore merit only the basic Ranger tab, winter Rangers sew their tabs on with white thread. I am sure that female Rangers will take note of this and have a lace fringe adorning their tabs to distinguish them from the run-of-the-mill Ranger.

.

Red thread will be used for that time of the mon..., we'll you know why.

Peregrino
01-07-2015, 22:04
Don't get too excited about the women mentioned in this article. Based on the info we're tracking they are not and will not become Ranger Candidates. The women who will actually be attempting Ranger School have to pass the NG pre-Ranger Course at FBGA. 1st SFC(A)(P) started with 24 volunteers. We were given 11 slots to the pre-Ranger Course. We directed the CSUs to prioritize their candidates so we could develop an OML. All candidates were required to pass the same screening as males and the first LTC in their CofC had to sign their application (again - same criteria as males). When the counting was over we didn't have to worry about disappointing any qualified candidates; everyone who met standards has a slot in one of the three designated iterations of the NG pre-Ranger Course and IIRC a couple slots went back to USASOC. The first five female ARSOF volunteers will report for that course 16 JAN.

PRB
01-07-2015, 22:07
Don't get too excited about the women mentioned in this article. Based on the info we're tracking they are not and will not become Ranger Candidates. The women who will actually be attempting Ranger School have to pass the NG pre-Ranger Course at FBGA. 1st SFC(A)(P) started with 24 volunteers. We were given 11 slots to the pre-Ranger Course. We directed the CSUs to prioritize their candidates so we could develop an OML. All candidates were required to pass the same screening as males and the first LTC in their CofC had to sign their application (again - same criteria as males). When the counting was over we didn't have to worry about disappointing any qualified candidates; everyone who met standards has a slot in one of the three designated iterations of the NG pre-Ranger Course and IIRC a couple slots went back to USASOC. The first five female ARSOF volunteers will report for that course 16 JAN.

I'll be looking forward to your updates.

Peregrino
01-07-2015, 22:22
I'll be looking forward to your updates.

Not here you won't! :p

craigepo
01-07-2015, 22:48
Enjoy that slit trench, ladies.

Has that course changed a bunch since 1990? I went down there an in-shape 185 pounds, and weighed 140 just before leaving for Dugway. I could only do two pushups in Dugway.

Not to be chauvinist, but how the hell is a female's body going to handle and recover from that?

sinjefe
01-07-2015, 22:54
Don't get too excited about the women mentioned in this article. Based on the info we're tracking they are not and will not become Ranger Candidates. The women who will actually be attempting Ranger School have to pass the NG pre-Ranger Course at FBGA. 1st SFC(A)(P) started with 24 volunteers. We were given 11 slots to the pre-Ranger Course. We directed the CSUs to prioritize their candidates so we could develop an OML. All candidates were required to pass the same screening as males and the first LTC in their CofC had to sign their application (again - same criteria as males). When the counting was over we didn't have to worry about disappointing any qualified candidates; everyone who met standards has a slot in one of the three designated iterations of the NG pre-Ranger Course and IIRC a couple slots went back to USASOC. The first five female ARSOF volunteers will report for that course 16 JAN.

There is no putting a silk hat on a pig.

Peregrino
01-07-2015, 23:07
There is no putting a silk hat on a pig.

True - but lipstick seems to be awfully popular!

The Reaper
01-08-2015, 00:15
Not to be chauvinist, but how the hell is a female's body going to handle and recover from that?

Easy.

All standards will be waived for females, and it will be career suicide to fail one. Any female gets injured or sick, and the event and/or standard will be changed. Diplomas can be printed up for all female attendees prior to their arrival.

So much for a once outstanding leadership school.

If you saw females at Airborne school, you would see how it works. Men have to do pull-ups to demonstrate their ability to pull a slip riser. Females do not. Must be a magic parachute. :rolleyes:

TR

SF_BHT
01-08-2015, 06:43
Enjoy that slit trench, ladies.

Has that course changed a bunch since 1990? I went down there an in-shape 185 pounds, and weighed 140 just before leaving for Dugway. I could only do two pushups in Dugway.

Not to be chauvinist, but how the hell is a female's body going to handle and recover from that?

Patroling will be easier since they will have ports pots at every RP and PB so the female rangers will not have to be subjected to a harsh environment. Just navigate to the next blue reference point and go xx deg to the PB.

Five-O
01-08-2015, 07:56
Easy.

All standards will be waived for females, and it will be career suicide to fail one. Any female gets injured or sick, and the event and/or standard will be changed. Diplomas can be printed up for all female attendees prior to their arrival.

So much for a once outstanding leadership school.

If you saw females at Airborne school, you would see how it works. Men have to do pull-ups to demonstrate their ability to pull a slip riser. Females do not. Must be a magic parachute. :rolleyes:

TR

Well, maybe the standards are currently too high to begin with??:rolleyes:

Peregrino
01-08-2015, 08:48
Well, maybe the standards are currently too high to begin with??:rolleyes:

Maybe not. After all - I and a significant number of my peers managed to do it and I for one found the leadership lessons instilled as a result of learning to motivate myself and others to meet those standards in the face of physical and mental adversity to be invaluable later in my career. But then most Ranger School graduates eventually realize that was the point all along - small unit patrolling is just the vehicle used to set the conditions. Are you a graduate?

The Reaper
01-08-2015, 08:53
Maybe not. After all - I and a significant number of my peers managed to do it and I for one found the leadership lessons instilled as a result of learning to motivate myself and others to meet those standards in the face of physical and mental adversity to be invaluable later in my career. But then most Ranger School graduates eventually realize that was the point all along - small unit patrolling is just the vehicle used to set the conditions. Are you a graduate?

I think he forgot the pink font.

TR

koz
01-08-2015, 11:14
Testing the waters - A man, becomes a "female" but just doesn't have the reassignment surgery (i.e. Warrior Princess SEAL). Goes to Ranger school as a female with no standards. Doesn't pass - sues the gov't for discrimination. Passes, puts the tab on then decides against the surgery.

I guess we can just give every new soldier a Ranger tab with the black beret....

Five-O
01-08-2015, 11:22
I think he forgot the pink font.

TR

Indeed. I didn't think of the pink font and ASSumed the rolled eyes would convey my sarcasm. Apologies.

69harley
01-08-2015, 13:42
Don't get too excited about the women mentioned in this article. Based on the info we're tracking they are not and will not become Ranger Candidates. The women who will actually be attempting Ranger School have to pass the NG pre-Ranger Course at FBGA. 1st SFC(A)(P) started with 24 volunteers. We were given 11 slots to the pre-Ranger Course. We directed the CSUs to prioritize their candidates so we could develop an OML. All candidates were required to pass the same screening as males and the first LTC in their CofC had to sign their application (again - same criteria as males). When the counting was over we didn't have to worry about disappointing any qualified candidates; everyone who met standards has a slot in one of the three designated iterations of the NG pre-Ranger Course and IIRC a couple slots went back to USASOC. The first five female ARSOF volunteers will report for that course 16 JAN.

One of my best friends is currently dating one of the five females that has a slot in the 16 Jan PRC class. She is a beast. Does ultra marathons, ironman copetitions, heavy into cross fit and weight lifting, plays on a rugby team, competes in 3-gun and orientiering, is an avid mountain climber. She is very motivated about going to Ranger School. Hard to have a conversation without her mentioning what she is doing to to prepare. She can probably recite the entire Ranger Hanbokk from cover to cover.

I question her motives for wanting to go to Ranger School as I do not sense any desire in her to be a better soldier or leader. She seems more about just wanting to do it because of the challenge. Sort of funny hearing the Ranger Creed in female tone.

FWIW - A bunch of people have given her some stink about taking a slot from soem combat arms soldier that could use the training. Her reply is to quote an article in the Army times about Ranger School having difficulty filling their slots.

Anxious to see how this plays out.

The Reaper
01-08-2015, 15:22
One of my best friends is currently dating one of the five females that has a slot in the 16 Jan PRC class. She is a beast. Does ultra marathons, ironman copetitions, heavy into cross fit and weight lifting, plays on a rugby team, competes in 3-gun and orientiering, is an avid mountain climber. She is very motivated about going to Ranger School. Hard to have a conversation without her mentioning what she is doing to to prepare. She can probably recite the entire Ranger Hanbokk from cover to cover.

I question her motives for wanting to go to Ranger School as I do not sense any desire in her to be a better soldier or leader. She seems more about just wanting to do it because of the challenge. Sort of funny hearing the Ranger Creed in female tone.

FWIW - A bunch of people have given her some stink about taking a slot from soem combat arms soldier that could use the training. Her reply is to quote an article in the Army times about Ranger School having difficulty filling their slots.

Anxious to see how this plays out.

She may be a beast, but physiologically, she is inferior to the other Ranger students in upper body strength, endurance, bone density, etc., not to mention that her levels of testosterone, unless chemically enhanced, are almost guaranteed to be among the lowest in the class.

A female may be able to score well on the runs and the APFT.

She will not be able to ruck, climb, carry body weight, etc. as well as her classmates.

I would expect her to physically fold NLT Mountain Phase, unless someone has been told to put the fix in.

TR

PRB
01-08-2015, 15:31
We all know there are some women that can make the physical aspects of Ranger School.
They are in the 1% or so of females in service.
The time/money/BS spent on proving a point will not fill the ranks of the Ranger Batts or increase our capabilities.
The cheerleaders will declare success but they will not keep the physical standards in place as they realize that 1% is just not 'fair' enough.
Once 'success' is declared the changes come down the pipe.

Peregrino
01-08-2015, 16:57
We all know there are some women that can make the physical aspects of Ranger School.
They are in the 1% or so of females in service.
The time/money/BS spent on proving a point will not fill the ranks of the Ranger Batts or increase our capabilities.
The cheerleaders will declare success but they will not keep the physical standards in place as they realize that 1% is just not 'fair' enough.
Once 'success' is declared the changes come down the pipe.

Concur.

koz
01-08-2015, 19:34
Then the Regt./ conventional unit gets a Ranger qualified turd. :mad:

Duh - Which is why the standards must not be dropped or lowered. No different than a woman who passes with lower standards or without potential for failure.

MtnGoat
01-09-2015, 06:28
Enjoy that slit trench, ladies.

Has that course changed a bunch since 1990? I went down there an in-shape 185 pounds, and weighed 140 just before leaving for Dugway. I could only do two pushups in Dugway.

Not to be chauvinist, but how the hell is a female's body going to handle and recover from that?

YEAP SOUNDS like me.. 194 dropped to 149 in 1991.

MtnGoat
01-09-2015, 06:56
She may be a beast, but physiologically, she is inferior to the other Ranger students in upper body strength, endurance, bone density, etc., not to mention that her levels of testosterone, unless chemically enhanced, are almost guaranteed to be among the lowest in the class.

A female may be able to score well on the runs and the APFT.

She will not be able to ruck, climb, carry body weight, etc. as well as her classmates.

I would expect her to physically fold NLT Mountain Phase, unless someone has been told to put the fix in.

TR

I disagree.. I know some females (yes only count on one hand) that can out ruck, climb, shoot many SF guys. That would make it to the end of Range School. Would they recycle? Likely, but how many of us have recycles.

My biggest issue with this whole "program" is them dropping the standards. Yes they have dropped the standards. I know for a FACT that pull ups are no longer a requirement for entry testing (APFT) into Range School. From what I was told no one at Benning could give a good enough reason, combat related, to keep the pull ups. This whole "Program" start over three years ago on Benning, so don't think this was just thought of over night. I have also heard that only the Compnay Commander and 1SG will be the only ones that can grade the females.


We all know there are some women that can make the physical aspects of Ranger School.
They are in the 1% or so of females in service.
The time/money/BS spent on proving a point will not fill the ranks of the Ranger Batts or increase our capabilities.
The cheerleaders will declare success but they will not keep the physical standards in place as they realize that 1% is just not 'fair' enough.
Once 'success' is declared the changes come down the pipe.

Yes PBR this 1% will only be cheerleaders. The sad fact it will likely come out in the 2016 election to some degree.

Team Sergeant
01-09-2015, 09:22
We all know there are some women that can make the physical aspects of Ranger School.
They are in the 1% or so of females in service.
The time/money/BS spent on proving a point will not fill the ranks of the Ranger Batts or increase our capabilities.
The cheerleaders will declare success but they will not keep the physical standards in place as they realize that 1% is just not 'fair' enough.
Once 'success' is declared the changes come down the pipe.

Of that occurring I've no doubt.

The Army will lower the standards until the same percentage of woman that pass equals the percent of men that try and pass.

What I don't think the Army sees coming will be a hollow unit that used to be called the 75th Ranger Regiment.

I've nothing against women, I believe they are equal in brains, not brawn.

This is how the liberal left castrates Special Operations, it starts with the Rangers.

futureSOF
01-09-2015, 15:39
If any of these females make it through Ranger school, how long until they open up RASP/SFAS slots for women?

Dusty
01-09-2015, 15:42
If any of these females make it through Ranger school, how long until they open up RASP/SFAS slots for women?

Doesn't matter, 'cause it can't last. Just another lesson learned the hard way for the pencil necks.

Flagg
01-09-2015, 16:50
Two More Female Marines Dropped from Infantry Course

Twenty-nine attempts by female officers on the course, with none passing

http://freebeacon.com/blog/exclusive-two-more-female-marines-dropped-from-infantry-course/

-----

Have any studies been conducted on rates of injuries and their long term "sunk" costs to SOF?

By that I mean the "cost of trying" as well.

An example:

On top of the cost of paying, training, deploying, supporting, and retaining SOF soldiers you also have the harder to measure "cost of trying".

If 90 out of 100 candidates don't make it to operational status with SOF, what % of the 90 develop directly related injuries with an associated long-term healthcare and worldwide role reduction costs?

If the cost for males is say an arbitrary $1000 per failed male candidate attempt, then that cost, while not worn by the SOF community(nor am I suggesting it should be), is still worn by the military and tax payers as a whole.

That hypothetical would work out to $9000 in indirect costs per successful male candidate.

Part of the necessary cost of doing business.

I wonder what happens if you track it by gender?

If the cost for associated long-term healthcare and worldwide role reduction costs per female candidate were an arbitrary $2000(estimated higher due to physiological differences such as higher proportion of bodyweight carried on rucks, more ruck running to meet timings, and longer unnatural gait length to meet timings) and you combine it with an arbitrary pass rate of 1 out of 100, then you have an additional indirect cost per successful female candidate of $196,000, an increase of over 20X.

All just hypotheticals and I apologize for my random/biased "plucking of numbers", but I'm involved in an assessment program where we have made some reasonably significant changes to program activities(such as shaving a bit of pack work in exchange for adding pool work) to reduce joint injuries for long-term cost per successful candidate concerns, as well as the welfare of those who attempt it, but fail.

But I guess my point is that in terms of "shaping assessment/selection" from a hypothetical clinical/financial perspective, it seems to make no sense using an over simplistic "cocktail napkin economics approach".

How many additional black male candidates(and others, ever seen an Afghan swim? It's usually with a rope tied to them to pull them out) would benefit from that money being invested in swimming preparation programs?

Or better utilized for specialist private sector training?

Or just NOT spent?

The USMC Infantry Officers course experiment is interesting. It seems to me that they are getting in front of it and shaping it via complete but tactful and diplomatic transparency towards its inevitable(in a natural state) conclusion.

In our assessment program, females are so far 0 for 2(several also have attempted Unit Selection). Both of our female candidates finished, but neither achieved the standard. And our assessment program is NOT for posting to SOF units(although good numbers go on to climb the ladder with a good success rate), ours is about personal development and organizational change.

Team Sergeant
01-15-2015, 18:05
Armed Forces

Army opens grueling Ranger job to women
Published January 15, 2015
·Associated Press

The Army will allow as many as 60 women to participate in the next Ranger course, allowing women for the first time to compete in the grueling two-month combat school. It is considered one of the first steps into the military special operations field.

Army Secretary John McHugh approved the change that would allow women in the course beginning in late April.

While completing the leadership course would let women wear the coveted Ranger tab, it does not let them become members of the Ranger regiment. Currently only men can be in the 75th Ranger Regiment -- the special operations forces unit based at Fort Benning, Georgia.

Joining the regiment requires additional schooling that is physically, emotionally and mentally challenging.

Women and men preparing for the Ranger course will be able to participate in a 16-day training and assessment school that would train women on some of the infantry and combat skills that they would not already have.

By January 2016, the military must open all combat jobs to women or explain why any must remain closed.

The Pentagon lifted its ban on women in combat jobs in 2012, but gave the military services time to gradually and systematically integrate women into the male-only front-line positions.

Special operations jobs are some of the last to be addressed, as commanders review the qualifications needed and assess the impact of bringing women in.

Military leaders have made it clear that they will not reduce standards for any jobs in order to let women in.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/15/army-opens-grueling-ranger-job-to-women/?intcmp=latestnews



Sure they won't...... [cough, cough bullshit, cough]

PRB
01-15-2015, 18:36
It seems the Marines have maintained standards in spite of the pressures from above.
Let us hope that all of the Army elements follow suit.
If standards are maintained the social experiment will die.
The completion numbers will be so insignificant, if at all, as to render a continuance a waste of money and resources.
IF standards are maintained and not 'normed'...normed actually means success in a social experiment not success on the battlefield then maybe we can just concentrate on warfighting.

UWOA
01-16-2015, 01:51
The bottom line is that it has all become spectacle rather than purpose. Just another reality "TV" show that has nothing to do with what really goes on in the world. A complete waste of time.

.

Roguish Lawyer
01-16-2015, 08:06
Sexist pigs.

Snaquebite
01-16-2015, 08:40
With 40 slots scheduled for each class and figuring 11 classes per year, give them a decade and they'll form a new "female" Ranger Regiment....If they modify the standards...:eek:

69harley
01-16-2015, 09:15
Is it forty slots per class or forty slots in that class? If it is every class, that seems like a very high percentage of the class reserved for females.

Dusty
01-16-2015, 09:34
Is it forty slots per class or forty slots in that class? If it is every class, that seems like a very high percentage of the class reserved for females.

Well, at a washout rate of 100%, it's immaterial.

Snaquebite
01-16-2015, 10:17
Is it forty slots per class or forty slots in that class? If it is every class, that seems like a very high percentage of the class reserved for females.

Well at least for assessment....

From the Army Times:
Based on the number of volunteers interested in attending Ranger School, the Army has allocated 40 seats for female candidates in each iteration of the Ranger Training and Assessment Course

MtnGoat
01-16-2015, 10:41
With 40 slots scheduled for each class and figuring 11 classes per year, give them a decade and they'll form a new "female" Ranger Regiment....If they modify the standards...:eek:

But .. But.. But they have 60 volunteers for this class in April. So they are releasing to the news.

Five-O
01-16-2015, 11:01
But .. But.. But they have 60 volunteers for this class in April. So they are releasing to the news.

On top of the obvious physical deficiencies females have; are the female students who come from not combat arms backgrounds going to have the skill set in small unit tactics (collective and individual) to get go's on patrols???

Razor
01-16-2015, 11:13
Perhaps, rather than being concerned about lowering standards, the Ranger School leadership should do just that, at the extreme. Allow females to pass the initial APFT by just getting into the start position, waive the chin up, allow them to merely jump into the pool with no equipment and get out immediately. Set no time requirement for ruck marches, allow them to find no points in land nav and still pass. Give them an automatic 'go' for any patrol they lead. Exempt them from peer evals. In essence, graduate them for merely showing up, but continue to hold males to the current course standards.

In very short order, no one would respect any female Ranger School graduate, regardless of whether she could have met the male standards or not as everyone would know she was not held to any standard whatsoever. A female soldier with a Ranger Tab would be the biggest joke in the Army, and draw immediate scorn and ridicule by military members of any Service, and the general public.

Still want to volunteer?

Dusty
01-16-2015, 12:09
I don't know. I picture three straight days in Fla on 25 percent security, come up to a linear danger area, and the student PL comes up and blows all the air out before she whispers in the RI's ear: "I wanna go home."

frostfire
01-17-2015, 19:51
If you saw females at Airborne school, you would see how it works. Men have to do pull-ups to demonstrate their ability to pull a slip riser. Females do not. Must be a magic parachute. :rolleyes:

TR

Having graduated from the Airborne school in the last 20 months, that is no longer the case. Both male and female have to execute 10 dead-hang pull ups.
If one fails, the commander has to review the case personally i.e. combined performance for all other tasks in first two weeks, before the student is allowed to go to jump week. Not surprising, but the change took place after a female casualty, whose investigation pointed back to her inability to effectively pull the riser yet she was allowed to jump anyway.

My (and the Marines) stomach turned when we saw how many male students :rolleyes: could not execute the 10 dead hangs after the 'morning jog." Apparently the Marines have to pass prescuba (even if they're already scuba qualified) to go to Army Airborne school. Needless to say, their passing rate is 99.9999999999%. The Marines (including the female ones) and PJ students led in every PT event.

PSM
01-17-2015, 23:02
The Marines (including the female ones) and PJ students led in every PT event.

Why is it that the Marines have the hottest females? I first noticed this on Okinawa, in the late '60s, and just yesterday I was at Walmart and some female Marines were shopping there and they were, well, hot! :confused:

:D

Pat

frostfire
01-18-2015, 00:42
Wouldn't that disqualify most females in Airborne School? I remember at Airborne School, for the time I was there, that none of the females I saw could execute one chinup (they didn't require actual pullups, but chinups, where the palms face towards you).

Well, some failed but there were female officers, NCO's, and soldiers who came prepared (to include one cute female Marine LT who could have passed as my twin :eek: )and executed that check list with no problem. It's not an automatic DQ. Per the info above, the commander would review their performance in week 2 + remedial PT + chin up retest. Even with total failure (one 42yo female NCO couldn't do one chin up at the end of week 2) , most were allowed to jump and they did not get injured. Then again, the jumps at airborne school were so oriented for safety that one hardly ever had to pull the riser to slip. If those passing with inadequate skills (male and female) went to the 82nd, they would end up at WAMC ER after their first mass jump. I had seen it way too many times


Why is it that the Marines have the hottest females? I first noticed this on Okinawa, in the late '60s, and just yesterday I was at Walmart and some female Marines were shopping there and they were, well, hot! :confused:

:D

Pat

I disagree with this generalization (especially after working with Air Force nurse officers at BAMC), but cannot come up with proof....In fact, all the female Marines at airborne school (to include my 'twin') were, well...h...o....t

Perhaps it's because they got better uniform :p and less stuffed-sausage types that the army seems to retain

PSM
01-18-2015, 20:55
I disagree with this generalization (especially after working with Air Force nurse officers at BAMC), but cannot come up with proof....In fact, all the female Marines at airborne school (to include my 'twin') were, well...h...o....t



Clearly there needs to be a "Hottest Chicks in the Military" contest. Probably best to divide it into Officers and Enlisted, though. :D

Pat

Razor
01-19-2015, 01:54
So is the new Abn School requirement dead hang pull-ups or chin-ups. You said pull-ups at first, but then talk about remedial chin-up test and at least one NCO that failed to execute a chin-up. How many women (approx.) in the class had first time go's doing 10 dead hang pull-ups or chin-ups (without that CF kipping bullshit)? I seem to recall the USMC recently DXing the idea of having their women do chin-ups as part of their PFT because so many couldn't even do 3, Corps-wide.

frostfire
01-20-2015, 07:19
So is the new Abn School requirement dead hang pull-ups or chin-ups. You said pull-ups at first, but then talk about remedial chin-up test and at least one NCO that failed to execute a chin-up. How many women (approx.) in the class had first time go's doing 10 dead hang pull-ups or chin-ups (without that CF kipping bullshit)? I seem to recall the USMC recently DXing the idea of having their women do chin-ups as part of their PFT because so many couldn't even do 3, Corps-wide.

http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/rtb/1-507th/airborne/entrancereq.html

My mistake on the pull-up, I mixed the terminology with chin up. It shows flexed arm hang in the above requirement but after the "jog" we were tested 10x dead hang chin up. So yes, that one NCO failed the 20 seconds flexed arm hang the first day and at the end of 2nd week, but the commander reviewed her overall performance and she was a go to jump week.

I was a student and not observer so I can't give % wise, but while on the line waiting to do the chin ups (and doing the chin up and push up before entering and leaving training area each day), I saw 2 female Marines, 1 female private, and 1 female NCO executed 10 perfect dead hang chin ups. Now, comparing 1st day and graduation day I would say the majority of the females did drop out, recycled, etc. but there were plenty males too to include those from the 1st day APFT and APFT retest failures

Team Sergeant
01-22-2015, 08:43
More and more media coverage as it comes down to the wire.....;)


This Woman Wants to be the First Female to Complete Army Ranger Training
By Frank Kobola

Patricia Smith is one of the first 60 woman allowed into the elite training program.

Patricia Smith, 40, is one of the first women who will be going through the Army Ranger program [via Times Free Press]. An elite special forces branch, the Rangers are known for their grueling training process with only a 50 percent graduation rate. After completing the 62-day course, Rangers are qualified for specific leadership positions not otherwise available. Because the Army previously didn't allow women into the course, they weren't qualified for these leadership positions.

Smith herself didn't initially think women should be given the same opportunities as men in the armed forces. But after years as a personal trainer and time in the National Guard, she realized women can be just as strong as men. Smith doesn't see why women can't be given the same opportunities and be held to the same standards as men in the military. It's a position that more people are holding, despite the idea of women in special forces units still remaining controversial.

Even after completing the training course, Smith doesn't plan on actually becoming a Ranger. "I'm old. I'm going to retire in a few years," she said. "I'm never going to be in a Ranger regiment. But I want other women to have the opportunity."

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/news/a35469/patricia-smith-wants-to-be-the-first-woman-to-complete-army-ranger-training/

sinjefe
01-22-2015, 08:55
Even after completing the training course, Smith doesn't plan on actually becoming a Ranger. "I'm old. I'm going to retire in a few years," she said. "I'm never going to be in a Ranger regiment. But I want other women to have the opportunity."

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/news/a35469/patricia-smith-wants-to-be-the-first-woman-to-complete-army-ranger-training/

Pretty fucking sure of herself. And pretty fucking self centered based on her comments.

She'll fall by the wayside....I hope.

craigepo
01-22-2015, 10:49
Is there an SOP for disposal of feminine hygiene products in a patrol base? Might suck carrying those around in an MRE bag in a rucksack for a week or two

PedOncoDoc
01-22-2015, 10:55
Is there an SOP for disposal of feminine hygiene products in a patrol base? Might suck carrying those around in an MRE bag in a rucksack for a week or two

Wait'll they have to swim in shark infested waters.... :eek:

SF Hunter
01-22-2015, 11:52
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/news/a35469/patricia-smith-wants-to-be-the-first-woman-to-complete-army-ranger-training/


http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2015/jan/16/ranger-strong-chattanoogawomam-tries-blaze-trail/282988/


As usual, both articles spewed incorrect information and propaganda in regards to the whole situation and assessment process.

These women are NOT going through training for an "elite special forces branch" or actually attending Ranger School proper. Nor are they going to be assigned to serve as a Army Ranger/75th Ranger Regiment. Fricking clueless.

The people who wrote those articles are complete and total morons and obviously do not know how to conduct any type of credible research, as so-called journalists. But what can you expect, especially Cosmo?

Man, the whole thing gets my blood boiling. The day the first female actually "graduates" Ranger School, is the day the class prior can truly say: "Theirs Was The Last Hard Class".

MtnGoat
01-22-2015, 11:59
More and more media coverage as it comes down to the wire.....;)


This Woman Wants to be the First Female to Complete Army Ranger Training
By Frank Kobola

Patricia Smith is one of the first 60 woman allowed into the elite training program.

Patricia Smith, 40, is one of the first women who will be going through the Army Ranger program [via Times Free Press]. An elite special forces branch, the Rangers are known for their grueling training process with only a 50 percent graduation rate. After completing the 62-day course, Rangers are qualified for specific leadership positions not otherwise available. Because the Army previously didn't allow women into the course, they weren't qualified for these leadership positions.

Smith herself didn't initially think women should be given the same opportunities as men in the armed forces. But after years as a personal trainer and time in the National Guard, she realized women can be just as strong as men. Smith doesn't see why women can't be given the same opportunities and be held to the same standards as men in the military. It's a position that more people are holding, despite the idea of women in special forces units still remaining controversial.

Even after completing the training course, Smith doesn't plan on actually becoming a Ranger. "I'm old. I'm going to retire in a few years," she said. "I'm never going to be in a Ranger regiment. But I want other women to have the opportunity."

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/news/a35469/patricia-smith-wants-to-be-the-first-woman-to-complete-army-ranger-training/

My class (in my Platoon) had a 82nd 38y/o SSG going through. It was just after DS and he was in a some good, not great shape. It kicked his ass!! He pulled his weight as far as I remember. But a 40 y/o male or WOMEN going through. They best be in some top notch shape.

Because Patricia the Military and Civilian Leadership will never let it happen. DA HQ started changing the standards over three years ago when they started down this road behind closed doors.

MtnGoat
01-22-2015, 12:02
If these women want to be equal how about we hold them to the same standards as men all around including haircut, no dresses for them, no makeup or ear rings. Lets not forget the draft.

As I typed that the thought came that men will be allowed to were those things now so that we could accomidate them. :mad:

I feel women should have to requester for Selective Service. Why shouldn't they? There is an women's rights and equality. Heck don't we have some Equal Rights Amendment or something? I think 19th maybe??!!

MtnGoat
01-22-2015, 12:04
Is there an SOP for disposal of feminine hygiene products in a patrol base? Might suck carrying those around in an MRE bag in a rucksack for a week or two

DOC could answer this better, but the would likely stop having a female menstrual cycle. But Birth control shot would be easier, but damn those mood swings!! :eek:

PedOncoDoc
01-22-2015, 12:36
DOC could answer this better, but the would likely stop having a female menstrual cycle. But Birth control shot would be easier, but damn those mood swings!! :eek:

Low enough body fat composition would stop menstruation - this is common in elite female athletes (competitive triathletes, marathon runners, olympic-level gymnasts, etc.).

Shots and birth control pills are not without side effects. Both can be administered in such a fashion to stop menstruation as well - the shot is administered once every 3 months, but runs the risk of breakthrough/irregular bleeding. The pills are taken daily, so a woman would need to pack tampons versus pill packs in their kit - no need for disposal for the pills, but if the pills were lost, bleeding would start within a couple days of stopping them and then there would be a mess to deal with...

SF Hunter
01-22-2015, 13:18
I feel women should have to requester for Selective Service. Why shouldn't they?

That for starters.

How about instead of first using the military for this social experiment. They open and allow women to compete and play in all collegiate and professional MALE sports. See how that works out. If successful, THEN open up all military positions. :boohoo
But of course, that's not within the control of the liberal/socialist elite.

Chairborne64
01-23-2015, 12:49
So I wonder what the status is of those female Ranger candidates that are going through the Ranger Training and Assessment Course? Its funny, if you go to there Facebook page they have all sorts of posts about Rappel Master and Air Assault but not a word on this. My understanding is that they have to have a successful completion here to be able to go to the April Ranger
course.

Team Sergeant
01-23-2015, 13:08
Those Friday night beer get togethers will be a little awkward after April.....



Frank: "I failed Ranger training, but I'm going to try again soon. "

Wendy: "Yeah, me too."


And when one does pass...... Pandora's box.........

MR2
01-23-2015, 15:21
And when one does pass...... Pandora's box.........

Was that a double entendre?

MtnGoat
01-23-2015, 15:29
Those Friday night beer get togethers will be a little awkward after April.....



Frank: "I failed Ranger training, but I'm going to try again soon. "

Wendy: "Yeah, me too."


And when one does pass...... Pandora's box.........

When ONE PASSES.. Heck I say out of these 30 (or 60) more than Half will PASS. I can bet you that Ms. Patricia Smith will be one of them that PASSES!!

Team Sergeant
02-04-2015, 15:59
Almost there......:rolleyes:



US Army Fort Benning
4 hrs ·

First-ever gender integrated Ranger Training Assessment Course completed here
FORT BENNING, Georgia – Fifty-eight Soldiers completed the Ranger Training Assessment Course (RTAC) Jan. 30 at the Army National Guard’s Warrior Training Center here, including 5 women who will potentially be among the first to attend the U.S. Army Ranger Course in the spring.

The Army’s decision to go forward with an assessment of the Ranger Course was announced Jan. 15, and units across the Army are now sending qualified female Soldiers to RTAC here in preparation for the first Ranger course with male and female Soldiers.

“This first iteration of an integrated RTAC has provided significant lessons learned as we conduct a deliberate and professional way forward to the integrated assessment in April,” said Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence, Fort Benning.

RTAC assesses eligible Army Active Duty, National Guard and foreign military soldiers, on their ability to meet the challenges of Ranger Course. Historically, more than half of the Soldiers who complete RTAC will successfully complete the Ranger Course.

RTAC was designated a pre-requisite for all women who wish to be part of the Ranger Course Assessment. The course is designed to improve the combat arms functional skills of officer and enlisted volunteers.

“The cadre was impressed with the level of physical fitness and dedication of the majority of female volunteers,” said Lt. Col. Edmund "Beau" Riely, commander, ARNG Warrior Training Center. The most common reaction among the cadre was appreciation that there were no changes to the standards, he said.

RTAC is two weeks long and consists of two phases. The first phase, assessment, mirrors the assessment phase at Ranger School, and is designed to assess a Soldier's physical and mental abilities. During this phase, a student conducts a PT test, a swim test, land navigation, and a 6-mile foot march.

The second phase of RTAC, the field training exercise, is designed to assess and train Soldiers on troop leading procedures and patrolling, skills which will be used extensively during the Ranger Course.

A Soldier who completes RTAC should be able to demonstrate physical and mental preparedness for the U.S. Army Ranger Course as well as apply troop leading procedures; navigate various terrain while dismounted, and develop and carry out combat orders for combat patrols to the same standard as the U.S. Army Ranger Course.

This is the first of four consecutive iterations of RTAC prior to the Ranger Course Assessment, which begins April 20. The final three RTAC courses with male and female students will be conducted Feb. 6-21, March 6-21 and April 3-18.


https://www.facebook.com/fortbenningfans/posts/10153079911779184?fref=nf

mark46th
02-04-2015, 16:27
“The cadre was impressed with the level of physical fitness and dedication of the majority of female volunteers,” said Lt. Col. Edmund "Beau" Riely, commander, ARNG Warrior Training Center.

This is what the European soccer players say about American soccer players. It is an insult, indicating that Americans are fit but don't have a clue about what it really takes to win ...

mojaveman
02-04-2015, 18:46
In my mind I'm trying to picture a female soldier squatting over a cat hole in the middle of a patrol base that is ringed by male soldiers. :confused:

Any ideas?

MR2
02-04-2015, 18:57
I'm trying to picture in my mind a female soldier and male soldier both squatting over cat holes in the patrol base. :confused:

Any ideas?

Is it really all that hard to imagine? Are either gender going to do things any different than the other? It's not they are going to have to fight over the seat being up or down.

We can certainly argue psychological, physical, emotional differences between genders in field/combat environments. Even physiological differences, but you need to pick a better one to really make your point.

As for picture ideas - I'm sure there is a XXX web site for that.

Box
02-04-2015, 20:00
...squatting aint so bad compared to the event that is forever burned into my memory

I saw a female 1LT pee standing up during a MEDCAP in Afghanistan a few years ago. She was using using a contraption that caught me completely off guard and I stared in disbelief when I realized that she had walked around the other side of the vehicle and actually pissed on the tire of the truck. She stood like she had a cramp in her leg which is understandable since I'm sure she didnt grow up pissing from a standing position with her pants on. She chuckled as she shook it out, put it in a plastic ziploc bag and stuck it back in her cargo pocket. Then she made the off-hand comment, "what do you think of my penis Master Sergeant". She was entertained by my stunned reaction and thought it was hilarious that I had never seen one of these gadgets before. Peeing on the tire seemed like something for her to be proud of.
She could do some pretty hard PT as well, but I still wouldn't want her on my ODA.

One of the most unbelievable damn things I have seen in my entire Army career.
...some things you just cannot un-seen.


Like I always say, welcome to the new normal folks.

PSM
02-04-2015, 20:46
...squatting aint so bad compared to the event that is forever burned into my memory

I saw a female 1LT pee standing up during a MEDCAP in Afghanistan a few years ago. She was using using a contraption that caught me completely off guard and I stared in disbelief

<snip>

One of the most unbelievable damn things I have seen in my entire Army career.
...some things you just cannot un-seen.

Like I always say, welcome to the new normal folks.

Those have been around for decades. Living in L.A. we carried these in our vehicles since there was always the chance of getting stuck in an hours long traffic jam: http://www.amazon.com/Travel-John-66911-TravelJohn-Disposable-Urinal/dp/B000NV878S They are unisex, but I'm the only one that had to use one. My young son needed it one day, but we hadn't learned about them yet. I thought he was going to pop! :D

Pat

mojaveman
02-04-2015, 20:50
...squatting aint so bad compared to the event that is forever burned into my memory

I saw a female 1LT pee standing up during a MEDCAP in Afghanistan a few years ago. She was using using a contraption that caught me completely off guard and I stared in disbelief when I realized that she had walked around the other side of the vehicle and actually pissed on the tire of the truck. She stood like she had a cramp in her leg which is understandable since I'm sure she didnt grow up pissing from a standing position with her pants on. She chuckled as she shook it out, put it in a plastic ziploc bag and stuck it back in her cargo pocket. Then she made the off-hand comment, "what do you think of my penis Master Sergeant". She was entertained by my stunned reaction and thought it was hilarious that I had never seen one of these gadgets before. Peeing on the tire seemed like something for her to be proud of.
She could do some pretty hard PT as well, but I still wouldn't want her on my ODA.

One of the most unbelievable damn things I have seen in my entire Army career.
...some things you just cannot un-seen.


Like I always say, welcome to the new normal folks.

Good story Billy.

Golf1echo
02-04-2015, 22:06
Get up early and first :D

gits
02-04-2015, 22:42
Anyone notice that a 6 mile road march was done and not the standard 12?

Team Sergeant
02-05-2015, 10:03
Anyone notice that a 6 mile road march was done and not the standard 12?

SOLDIER, WHAT PART OF "FEMALE" RANGER DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND!!!!!

THE US ARMY WILL HAVE FEMALE RANGERS IN THEIR RANKS EVEN IF WE HAVE TO LOWER THE STANDARDS, ARMY AIRBORNE SCHOOL IS A FINE EXAMPLE!


;)

Team Sergeant
02-05-2015, 10:29
The Army "hopes" that 40 women will pass? To serve what end? :confused:

Yours is NOT to question "why", yours is to do or die.......



;)

Snaquebite
02-05-2015, 12:36
The U.S. Army’s preparatory course for the next Ranger School cycle ended with 5 out of 26 women completing the course. All were officers....

The female pictured is the daughter of a SF qualified guy. She is already Sapper qualified.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/4/army-ranger-prep-course-passed-5-out-26-women/

Peregrino
02-05-2015, 12:49
Interesting. I'm seeing a slightly different set of stats.

Class General Information:

- Class population: 122 total (male and female)
- Female population: 25
- Number of females that met all of the physical standards: 5
- Number of females allowed to continue even though they did not meet some of the physical standards: 11
- The biggest physical discriminator: Push-up event during the RPFT; 17 of the 25 females failed the push-up event
- 3 females failed the RTAC 6 mile ruck march in 90 minutes or less (Ranger school 12 mile ruck march in 3 hrs or less standard)
- 83% of the females passed the Land Navigation test

- Total female med drops: 8
- Total female LOM drops: 1
- Total female SOR drops: 1

For some reason the math doesn't quite add up but the picture is still acceptably accurate and certainly "stark".

sinjefe
02-05-2015, 12:50
So, 11 continued even though 6 of them didn't really pass? That's maintaining the standards all right. :rolleyes:

Box
02-05-2015, 13:03
How many males were allowed to continue even though they did not meet some of the physical standards ?

Did the enlisted troops fail to meet physical standards by a larger margin than the officer students that failed to meet standards or was it only officer students that failed to meet standards that were allowed to continue anyway ?

Them enlisted gals ought to be fucking ashamed of themselves. They not only let down their sisters in arms, but they let down the enlisted ranks as well.

sinjefe
02-05-2015, 13:07
How many males were allowed to continue even though they did not meet some of the physical standards ?

I'm guessing 0

Peregrino
02-05-2015, 13:42
So, 11 continued even though 6 of them didn't really pass? That's maintaining the standards all right. :rolleyes:

My source said they had to have a minimum number to conduct the patrolling phase. I'm guessing so the successful ones would have a "rangerette buddy" and the cadre would have enough female buddy pairs to spread the load across all the student patrols. Just a guess though.

XavierR
02-05-2015, 13:57
When I went through RTAC in October, the standard for the ruck march was 6 miles. Covering the first half of the Ranger School course. We had somewhere around 50% attrition. Many were med drops. Some of those med drops should have been LOMs, IMO. We had one LOM, and two SOR drops (land navigation).

Students who failed the water confidence, push ups or sit ups during the RPFT at the end of the first week were given the option to stick around for the rest of the course, but would still be given a standards drop. These were a mix of foreign officers, and AD guys coming from units that do not require that they graduate RTAC to attend Ranger School. National Guard guys or those coming from units who require RTAC were sent home.

I don't know if the amount of PT was reduced, there was more time to sleep, or if any other standards changed, but the numbers seem consistent with my class.

The Reaper
02-05-2015, 14:50
My source said they had to have a minimum number to conduct the patrolling phase. I'm guessing so the successful ones would have a "rangerette buddy" and the cadre would have enough female buddy pairs to spread the load across all the student patrols. Just a guess though.

They may have also considered the effects of peer reports on non-performers in small groups and tried to even the odds.

Or will they drop that as well?

Standards like Gumby. :rolleyes:

TR

Sdiver
02-05-2015, 16:46
"The U.S. Army’s preparatory course for the next Ranger School cycle ended with 5 out of 26 women completing the course. All were officers.

Fear not. I don't think they'll make it.
They'll wash out during the land nav portion.

:D

1stindoor
02-06-2015, 07:19
Fear not. I don't think they'll make it.
They'll wash out during the land nav portion.

:D

Doubtful...they'll probably stop and ask for directions.:D

SF_BHT
02-06-2015, 07:53
Doubtful...they'll probably stop and ask for directions.:D

News Flash......

Bass Pro just sold out of pink strobes to the RTB. They will be using them on land nav and OBJs buring RANGER training. Every one knows that women can only see pink so the men will not be assisted.

Sdiver
02-06-2015, 09:25
Doubtful...they'll probably stop and ask for directions.:D

Duh !!!!!
You're probably right.

Talk about a lowering of standards. :rolleyes:

MtnGoat
02-06-2015, 13:29
News Flash......

Bass Pro just sold out of pink strobes to the RTB. They will be using them on land nav and OBJs buring RANGER training. Every one knows that women can only see pink so the men will not be assisted.

I think this will serve as a dual propose.

Chairborne64
02-20-2015, 11:20
So I wonder how the second class did at RAC? I read that 21 Females attended the course. First class had a 19% pass rate so using that ratio maybe 2 passed in the second course that ended yesterday. I don't think they will get their 40 females they want for the April Ranger Course at this rate unless they totally scrap all standards.

Box
02-20-2015, 11:26
My source said they had to have a minimum number to conduct the patrolling phase. I'm guessing so the successful ones would have a "rangerette buddy" and the cadre would have enough female buddy pairs to spread the load across all the student patrols. Just a guess though.


...its odd that in the new era of full equality, the program cant go forward with an odd number of female troops.
There must be some super secret reason why a XX chromosome ranger can't have an XY chromosome ranger buddy.

I guess it must be true; "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

bubba
02-20-2015, 17:18
This all goes the theory of fair vs equal.

See, the left uses the terms interchangabley, but we all know, that equal has a mathmatical definition meaning exactaly the same. Fair on the other hand is what we are experiencing. Fair aint always right, and right aint always fair, but equal is always equal. Females don't want, can't have, and will never be equal. That is just not possible, at all, ever. So, they (the loony left) use fair instead. It's kind of like living in a Republic that every one, to include a Constitutional Professor, calls a Democracy.... Same thing right?

joshua20
02-21-2015, 12:36
Im just excited to see what ranger panties will evolve to....

UWOA
02-21-2015, 19:44
Im just excited to see what ranger panties will evolve to....

'Evolve to' ... are you implying that I wear them now? That's real cheeky! Unless you wear the tab, I don't think you want to say that ....

.

bailaviborita
02-21-2015, 20:01
A few thoughts on all this:

1) There is a concerted effort to fundamentally change this country
2) As part of that there is a coordinated effort to change male culture
3) Two main targets: the military and the universities
4) In the military we have: SHARP and women in combat arms (homosexuals serving openly was another effort, but hasn't resulted in many in combat arms coming out so...)
5) The SHARP program is busy attempting to eradicate any and all trust within units between anyone- since any kind of language that can potentially offend should be reported. In addition, male behavior is being molded to fit what gender study academics think it should be. In short- only women should be celebrated for their toughness, men should be neutered and subservient (under social justice theory- men doing great things is to be expected, since they were privileged from the get-go; women, however, doing anything remotely average are to be celebrated as heroines- since they have had to overcome so much sexism and discrimination).
6) The combat arms integration isn't meant to make units more effective, get more women generals, or to really provide equality for the 1% (equality is only a means to an end). This integration is a vehicle to both change traditional macho male culture and to weaken our military. Most of the interest groups who support these changes are anti-military and/or aim to change what it means to be a red-blooded American male. Integrating women into combat arms, having them in SF, having them get Ranger tabs, having them make it through Marine Infantry Basic, getting them into SEALs- all of these will undermine the attractiveness for many traditional red-blooded American men to go through those experiences. Those who do go through it will be more "enlightened" and progressive - able to interact with women on a co-"equal" level and ignore their physiological, mental, and physical differences (there are men who are not as attracted to women as most men are-- although they are still heterosexual). The theory is that the military will thus be both weakened (which will please many of the interest groups pushing for the change) and changed in terms of its traditional macho male culture- which will assist in changing the overall male culture of the country and further assist in fundamentally changing the country (away from traditional free market capitalism/freedom/nuclear families and towards socialism/social justice-equality of outcome/alternative family relationships... one supposes).

Some have said this is conspiracy theory-sounding. I guess if the interest groups supporting these changes in the military weren't so open with their anti-war/anti-military/anti-male/anti-tradition stances then maybe I'd agree...

I told a female academic advising DoD on getting women into SF that putting women on SF teams would kill those teams and that sexual harassment incidents would spike in SF. She asked why I thought teams would be killed. I replied that instead of being able to take females on missions if the teams thought they were needed, having them assigned to teams would mean that no matter the mission parameters- the team would have to take them. Additionally the teams I've been on had a dynamic that was largely built around the common bond that only men can share. She then told me that she didn't think that sexual harassment incidents spiking was a bad thing- because once crude men were weeded out of SF then those who were left would be able to get along with women.

As far as Ranger School goes- the few who get through zero week will pass because it will be impossible to fail them for patrolling. The female observers/overseers are there to make sure the RIs aren't allowed to fail anyone in the field. And that's just the test batch- there are many more interest groups within and outside of DoD trying to get all physical standards at Ranger School waiverable- since, after all, it is "only" a leadership course...

Hacksaw
02-22-2015, 08:47
Anyone that would allow themselves to be passed along when they have obviously failed something should be removed from the military across the board. What kind of scumbag would accept being allowed to continue? How would you even look at your fellow students? SF command has already shown their bellies by promoting men incapable of being leaders based upon race, how bad will it get when we have females? I'd rather see SF be disbanded then watch it go the way of the rest of the military.

glebo
02-22-2015, 09:19
Anyone that would allow themselves to be passed along when they have obviously failed something should be removed from the military across the board. What kind of scumbag would accept being allowed to continue? How would you even look at your fellow students? SF command has already shown their bellies by promoting men incapable of being leaders based upon race, how bad will it get when we have females? I'd rather see SF be disbanded then watch it go the way of the rest of the military.

If you get right down to the weeds...especially if it's an "O", they should be booted on an ethics/conduct non becoming of an officer if they "knowingly" pass without meeting standards...same thing as cheating, IMO anyway..

Think that'll happen....nahhh, fughetaboutit...

MtnGoat
02-22-2015, 09:51
A few thoughts on all this:

Great Post!!...

Females on SF Team, should never happen. Look at what AFO does and how it has worked there. The SHARP will go crazy, there are only a hand full of females that would fit in. I see and many of us that there is a need for females in support of SF missions. But being on a SFODA in the Team Room, no sorry.

The CST Program is a example of the failure of what poor training, assessments and leaders. The same thing is going on with this whole Females in Ranger School. I know two CST females that were/are shit hot and could pull there wieght on an ODA. I also know of a awesom Female EOD Tech that did her job 110% and then some. So that's 3 out of ...ummm I say 12 or 13 females over 4 years and 4 trips.

Then you have the CA and MISO issues and their females on ODAs. Both of those units think and want to believe they are SF or have a better Selection program than SFAS. Yet they can't do their job CONUS or OCONUS.

This Ranger School Female intergration has been going on for over 3 years and nothing was being said about it. So Hacksaw and Glebo, yes you are both right. But as many have seen with the report out this week over the military standard and the Officers that lead troops are lying over maintaining compliance with training requirments. Gee I wonder if any were found within this females into Ranger School and RTB?

Razor
02-22-2015, 20:59
As far as Ranger School goes- the few who get through zero week will pass because it will be impossible to fail them for patrolling.

Brother, that narrative has already been established:
(http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/2015/01/15/women-ranger-school-assessment/21708147/)

"On average, about 45 percent of Ranger School students will graduate, Fivecoat said. As many as 60 percent of all Ranger School failures will occur in the first four days. Many get disqualified during the physical fitness test on the first day, Fivecoat said. The test gives candidates two minutes to do 49 push-ups and two minutes to do 59 sit-ups, and they also must run five miles in 40 minutes and do six chin-ups.

In fiscal 2014, PT test failures made up the largest number of Ranger School failures, Fivecoat said."

So, you get a handful that are physical beasts, nod-nod/wink-wink any that are "close enough" to the APFT standard on Day 1, and they will make it through, since statistically more than half that pass the APFT pass the course.

Chairborne64
02-24-2015, 13:55
Well,

This does not look like it is working out the way the DACOWITS folks wanted. Latest RTAC had 1 female pass out of 17. By my rough math that brings the total female pass rate for RAC to 13% out of 2 courses. With only 2 more RTAC courses to go I don't see any way for the powers to be to get their 30 desired females to start the April Ranger class.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/02/24/ranger-school-women-army/23930153/

Pete
02-24-2015, 14:05
Excuse me while I think the "Studs" were in the first couple of classes. The ones chomping on the bit so to say.

I'm thinking the pass rate - low as it is - might start dropping when the "might as well give it a shot"s start showing up.

Chairborne64
02-24-2015, 14:09
I would have to agree with you. I would assume the top female's on the OML list would have been in the first class. I would imagine that the pass rate will continue to be low.

koz
02-24-2015, 16:59
A buddy of mine had one of his females LT's go. Apparently she was a triathelete, runner, cross-fit studette.... BUT he says she's can't ruck with any real weight. She's can do 45lbs rucks but any more hurts her pretty badly, never mind the 70-90lbs she may see in Ranger school....

Oh he also said she really likes her low-carb high protein meals and eats a lot she's she's pretty active. She also likes her sleep..

sinjefe
02-24-2015, 17:20
.....really likes her low-carb high protein meals and eats a lot she's she's pretty active. She also likes her sleep..

What's wrong with that?:D

The Reaper
02-24-2015, 17:23
Well,

This does not look like it is working out the way the DACOWITS folks wanted. Latest RTAC had 1 female pass out of 17. By my rough math that brings the total female pass rate for RAC to 13% out of 2 courses. With only 2 more RTAC courses to go I don't see any way for the powers to be to get their 30 desired females to start the April Ranger class.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/02/24/ranger-school-women-army/23930153/

Somehow, I am pretty certain that they will find some females to pin Tabs on.

Hell the plane reservations are probably already made.

The Ranger School leadership is probably about to get another lecture.

TR

Box
02-25-2015, 08:29
...by the time the "might as well give it a shot" crowds show up, the standards will have had a subtle, transparent adjustment made to them so that the pass rate stabilizes.

Just my prediction. The process MUST be broken for so many able bodied, quality troops to keep missing the bar.


Don't worry ladies, give it time and the standard will become attainable.


...edited to read:
"...will become EASILY attainable BY FEMALE SOLDIERS"


(I suspect the male standard will remain unchanged)

Peregrino
02-25-2015, 10:01
I think we'll see a higher pass rate in the last two pre-RANGER classes. The smart ones (or their sponsors) are gaming the system realizing that weather and additional training time will have an impact on pass rates. Units with promising candidates have gotten their Soldiers the later class dates hoping to capitalize on those factors (more training time and favorable weather conditions) to up the odds. Bets? :munchin

gits
04-01-2015, 22:01
Latest numbers are out 6 out 34 with a 15% pass rate in the latest RTAC class.:munchin


http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/04/01/6-women-qualify-attend-ranger-school-assessment-march-update/70487230/

miclo18d
04-02-2015, 05:52
Gender normalization started years ago with the APFT lowering the standard slightly. That is just three push ups different for the Ranger PFT. Not a lot but it dipped the bar down.

I just read there is not a 2 mile run either. We did a full APFT at 60% for the 18-21 y/o bracket THEN a 5 mile run.

The old standard, to my recollection was 52/62/14:54 then a 5 miler in 40 mins at 8 mins a mile +/- 30 secs per mile (usually -30, brings you in at 47:30) more than an arms length from the guy in front of you, and you got yanked too!

And doing 52 push ups was not like just doing 52 push ups almost anyone can do that in under a minute. At Ranger School you did more like 70 push ups just to get 53!

Get ready for it gents!

BMT (RIP)
04-16-2015, 05:01
http://www.defenseone.com/management/2015/04/army-shows-women-no-slack-elite-army-ranger-qualifiers/110230/?oref=defenseone_today_nl

BMT

The Reaper
04-16-2015, 08:36
Blah, blah, blah, girl power.

Blah, blah, blah, standards haven't changed.

Why are the haircuts not all the same, for starters? I thought it was a hygiene issue?

Look for the rucks to get lighter, the distances to get shorter, and the times to get longer. Females may even be allowed to fail the APFT requirement and still continue.

Watch. The fix is in.

TR

Jakedeep
04-16-2015, 08:44
\Look for the rucks to get lighter, the distances to get shorter, and the times to get longer. Females may even be allowed to fail the APFT requirement and still continue.


And soon after that, the men who cannot meet the requirements will start masquerading as women to go to the school because it's 2015 and you can't tell someone what gender they are anymore.

Box
04-16-2015, 08:46
So much hate in this thread...
...some of you angry old coots need Jesus.

MR2
04-16-2015, 08:50
So much hate in this thread...
...some of you angry old coots need Jesus.

Yeah, we are and we do, but did Jesus die for a lower standard?

How many of our brothers will when they are.

Jakedeep
04-16-2015, 09:52
...some of you angry old coots need Jesus.

...but did Jesus die for a lower standard?

How many of our brothers will when they are.

I am not qualified to offer an opinion, but here is a more relaxed article from former Navy Seal Ray Care. I do not think he articulates some his points in the best manner but highlighted below is what seems to be one of the main concerns across all SOF groups about letting women into their ranks.

http://warrior.scout.com/story/1500270-should-women-be-navy-seals

But I do not think the SEAL teams should allow women. BUD/S, which stands for Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training, is the most physically and psychologically grueling schooling a man can go through. My class began with over 120 men. Of that, 16 originals graduated, with some additional guys who were in from other classes who were delayed due to injuries. There's an 80% attrition rate at BUD/S, and that is rounding down.

Put bluntly, the shit you have to do in training and as a SEAL is nearly impossible. I can't give you specifics, but trust me ladies, think of the most hellish situation you can imagine, then double it, triple it—hell, times it by 100. It's that physically brutal.

My fear is that the standards would drop to allow for a higher graduation rate and that is not what the SEAL teams are about. BUD/S is about producing the best warriors on the planet—they don’t lower the standards for anyone. It might not be PC to say, but there would be no other way to graduate enough women to justify the expense of new facilities without lowering the standards. And lower standards would lead to utter disaster.

Not to ride the Seal train in this post, but here is another more coherent clip from former Seal and State Senator Ryan Zinke. BTW - does anyone else think the intro music needs to be changed ASAP?

https://www.*******.com/watch?v=PzTYyQK-X_Y

There are unintended consequences [by putting women in front-line combat]. War is very serious and often times it can a be face-to-face, hand-to-hand, breathe-to-breath close-quarter battle and anything that jeopardizes the capability of conducting the mission...I think is wrong.

It isn't about that females can't contribute...they can. And there're instances where females are effectively used in counter-terrorist operations, as [well as] males. But unilaterally across the board, there is an unintended consequence; I think it provides a distraction and it weakens the force [whose mission] is to defend the country.

Jake

Streck-Fu
04-16-2015, 10:13
I found this to be an excellent assessment of women in combat units. It was posted to SOCNET so if it has no place here, feel free to pull it.

LINK (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/389575/20141218_WGCC_Findings_Paper_Final.pdf)

18. Physiological differences.
The review has achieved a considerably better understanding of the physiological differences between men and women in the military. This is due to significant improvements in the accuracy of data available and the fact that the female cohort is both larger and more representative than that available to previous studies. In general, women have smaller hearts, about 30% less muscle, slighter skeletal structure and wider pelvic bones, resulting in less explosive power and upper body strength. The review concluded that the position of transgender service personnel who are in transition will need to be considered on an individual basis in order to meet both equality and duty of care requirements. The Review has been conducted in a short time frame and has therefore not been able to commission new research. As a result, the data used has been based on the current population of women in CS and CSS roles. This data includes a sample based on a cohort that is wider rather than the few women in the physical elite, who would be able to pass the ground close combat tests. Experts believe this approach to be valid, in that the trends will be similar; however, there will a requirement to commission physiological research to gain a data set that is truly representative. Key findings are below:

a. Physical capability. The physiological differences between the sexes disadvantage women in strength-based and aerobic fitness tests by 20 to 40%; so for the same output women have to work harder than men. Despite the differences, there will be some women, amongst the physical elite who will achieve the entry tests for GCC roles. But these women will be more susceptible to acute short term injury than men: in the Army’s current predominantly single sex initial military training, women have a twofold higher risk of musculoskeletal (MSK) injury. The roles that require individuals to carry weight for prolonged periods are likely to be the most damaging. Screening and testing may identify those women who, with the right pre-conditioning and continuation training, would be less prone to this acute short term injury. The current physical training regime for ground close combat roles is optimised for a male cohort; the training has been proven to be effective in the most demanding of operational environments. Research will need to be conducted to identify the most effective methods of achieving the same output from a female cohort whilst continuing to foster team cohesion.

koz
04-16-2015, 11:34
So when can WE (males) apply to join the CST teams? I'm actually quite excited about it even though I'm sure my wife will be a bit ticked. I'm hoping I'll be the in the new CST selection group so I can make sure men aren't unfairly discriminated against. :lifter

The Reaper
04-16-2015, 12:07
Will trannies be able to join CSTs?

Can't wait till our Muslim allies find out about that.

What PT test gender scale will they be evaluated on?

TR

Box
04-16-2015, 12:19
So when can WE (males) apply to join the CST teams? I'm actually quite excited about it even though I'm sure my wife will be a bit ticked. I'm hoping I'll be the in the new CST selection group so I can make sure men aren't unfairly discriminated against. :lifter



I'd rather have a sister in a whore house than a brother on a CST

Razor
04-16-2015, 18:15
Reduced physical standards should be the least of our worries:

http://warontherocks.com/2014/11/heres-why-women-in-combat-units-is-a-bad-idea/

bailaviborita
04-17-2015, 04:52
CSTs no longer exist. As soon as the political pressure went away to use them, miraculously the operational needs statements requesting them did too.

The guy working project Diane told me that one idea that was floated down at ranger school was to make men use the FUD to pee with too- since just whipping it out during a halt might offend some of the females... Plus, and he was serious, allowing men to just pee wherever they want is not equal treatment and might give men an advantage during patrolling...

glebo
04-17-2015, 06:06
CSTs no longer exist. As soon as the political pressure went away to use them, miraculously the operational needs statements requesting them did too.

The guy working project Diane told me that one idea that was floated down at ranger school was to make men use the FUD to pee with too- since just whipping it out during a halt might offend some of the females... Plus, and he was serious, allowing men to just pee wherever they want is not equal treatment and might give men an advantage during patrolling...

This my friends...is getting quite sickening....my God.... PLEASE let common sense prevail, and hopefully the study and questionnaires when reviewed...(as far as the Q course anyway)

Guy
04-17-2015, 07:43
The guy working project Diane told me that one idea that was floated down at ranger school was to make men use the FUD to pee with too- since just whipping it out during a halt might offend some of the females... Plus, and he was serious, allowing men to just pee wherever they want is not equal treatment and might give men an advantage during patrolling...I would quit right on the spot!!!!

Box
04-17-2015, 09:07
I would quit right on the spot!!!!


Hell...
That could be part of the plan; make all of the knuckle dragging apes that don't want to get on board so uncomfortable and discontent that they just leave.
Victory through attrition.

MR2
04-17-2015, 09:09
Hell...
That could be part of the plan; make all of the knuckle dragging apes that don't want to get on board so uncomfortable and discontent that they just leave.
Victory through attrition.

We won't use UW against a clear enemy, but we will use it against ourselves...

Guy
04-17-2015, 10:02
Hell...
That could be part of the plan; make all of the knuckle dragging apes that don't want to get on board so uncomfortable and discontent that they just leave.
Victory through attrition.Evidently, whomever came up with the idea of males using a FUD has never, seen an African woman on patrol...:eek::confused::munchin

MtnGoat
04-17-2015, 10:16
Blah, blah, blah, girl power.

Blah, blah, blah, standards haven't changed.

Why are the haircuts not all the same, for starters? I thought it was a hygiene issue?

Look for the rucks to get lighter, the distances to get shorter, and the times to get longer. Females may even be allowed to fail the APFT requirement and still continue.

Watch. The fix is in.

TR

Gee lets look at SWC and 1st Bn. SFAS PT events, which ones have gone away in the 2 years? Gee I wonder why.. :munchin


So much hate in this thread...
...some of you angry old coots need Jesus.

Billy you're so hateful.. why OH WHY!! :D

CSTs no longer exist. As soon as the political pressure went away to use them, miraculously the operational needs statements requesting them did too.

The guy working project Diane told me that one idea that was floated down at ranger school was to make men use the FUD to pee with too- since just whipping it out during a halt might offend some of the females... Plus, and he was serious, allowing men to just pee wherever they want is not equal treatment and might give men an advantage during patrolling...

Good on the CST program. We had great females in CA doing the same damn thing.

I can totally see this as the reason for males using the FUD.

not equal treatment and might give men an advantage during patrolling

Those men just need to leave our Military. You my Soldier are not a fighter.

PSM
04-17-2015, 10:25
Rangers Lead the Way! (https://www.*******.com/watch?v=ol5Dfs7jqFI) :D

Pat

Guy
04-17-2015, 10:44
In front of a woman; just wait until someone on patrol and develops "explosive" diarrhea!:eek:

Peregrino
04-17-2015, 11:03
In front of a woman; just wait until someone on patrol and develops "explosive" diarrhea!:eek:

Better yet - wait until she's the one with explosive diarrhea. Especially when it's trapped in her panties and she has to keep going for hours or days. Any medics want to "opine" on the probable outcomes?

Won't happen. They will give them stress cards and among the team gear you will have to share will be feminine hygiene items, bath supplies, and changes of clothes.

Look for females to be given regular hot shower breaks as well.

TR

Guy
04-17-2015, 11:21
Better yet - wait until she's the one with explosive diarrhea. Especially when it's trapped in her panties and she has to keep going for hours or days. Any medics want to "opine" on the probable outcomes?In males we call it having, Monkey-Ass!:munchin

In females, the vaginal complications from not wiping/cleaning thoroughly is going to be a problem...:munchin

Javadrinker
04-17-2015, 13:43
Rangers Lead the Way! (https://www.*******.com/watch?v=ol5Dfs7jqFI) :D

Pat

my oh my, tell us how you really feel.

LOL

Flagg
04-17-2015, 17:47
Better yet - wait until she's the one with explosive diarrhea. Especially when it's trapped in her panties and she has to keep going for hours or days. Any medics want to "opine" on the probable outcomes?

Won't happen. They will give then stress cards and among the team gear you will have to share will be feminine hygiene items, bath supplies, and changes of clothes.

Look for females to be given regular hot shower breaks as well.

TR

We run a programme with similar-ish cold/wet/hungry/tired(dirty) stressors.

We are running one now with 3 female candidates on it.

Previous iterations have had 2 total females attempt and complete the programme, but neither was "Tabbed".

It is a personal development programme to inculcate an "SF-like" mindset in candidates(with further opportunities for some), it is not a unit selection. It is more about deep individual assessment.

No shaving for males, no feminine hygiene products, showers, change of clothes/ etc are provided. They finish looking/smelling like homeless people after what we call "Green Mile" activity which is a 60-80km individual effort pack march.

I've been popping in/out due to competing workload and only saw them for a week out of the 33 day length. Waiting to see how it finishes in 6 days.

We're very interested in seeing how Ranger School changes(or doesn't), and how female candidates perform. Just as we were interested in the results of female test subjects in the USMC Infantry Officer training program.

I'm strongly of the belief that there is a need for females to conduct enabler tasks, and even some more kinetic tasks in grey roles if mission needs really dictate it, but that's pretty rare esoteric stuff where all we can talk about is open source WWII wartime UW narrow slices. But in terms of straight up light infantry donkey work tasks(Ranger School, USMC IOC), I'd be of agreement that it's unnecessarily, and very expensively, breaking good women who are needed elsewhere.

You can't defy the laws of physics or gender difference physiology, but it seems like some would like to try.

Cheers for the information for us to hopefully learn from as well.

Razor
04-17-2015, 20:50
We run a programme with similar-ish cold/wet/hungry/tired(dirty) stressors...It is a personal development programme to inculcate an "SF-like" mindset in candidates(with further opportunities for some), it is not a unit selection. It is more about deep individual assessment.

Flagg, out of curiosity, what are the similarities (to the best of your knowledge) between your course and Ranger School? Weight of loads carried and for what distances? Circumstances of movement (stroll through the woods, or tactical movement)? Lots of team work or an individual focus? Feeding plan/frequency? Tasks participants are required to complete? Consequence of failing?

Flagg
04-18-2015, 05:25
Flagg, out of curiosity, what are the similarities (to the best of your knowledge) between your course and Ranger School? Weight of loads carried and for what distances? Circumstances of movement (stroll through the woods, or tactical movement)? Lots of team work or an individual focus? Feeding plan/frequency? Tasks participants are required to complete? Consequence of failing?

I try to be careful in comparing/contrasting, as my hands on experience is based on this end.

And my understanding of Ranger School is based on open source material combined with in depth discussions with graduates.

Our programme is 33 days long including in/out processing.

Our candidates have had average weight loss of 11-13kg in the first 10 days over a number of iterations.

Weights carried are FSMO(Full Sevice Marching Order) with rifle. That sits between 32-38kg without additional activity related stores.

Distances traveled can easily reach in excess of 200km on measured distances under pack over the program, in small bites up to 20km. Not including a final 60-80km individual effort activity in one hit that is unknown time or distance to candidates.

Mix of tac and non tac movement under pack/ruck. Mix of terrain from extremely rugged close country sub tropical rain forest to open rolling undulating terrain, to flat gravel track.

We've been shifting to a bit lower Km and longer more strenuous pool sessions/activities for physical stressors to reduce joint injury problems.

We have a mix of individual effort and patrol(5-6 member) activities. Trying to keep team based activities to a det/patrol size, which is more akin to our SOF fellas than traditional section(squad) sized teams our candidates would be more used to.

Feeding is very strictly controlled. Candidates can go multiple days without a meal(basic bush survival/forraging/traps/snares are covered) in some phases.

A single small sandwich and piece of fruit would be a typical entire days ration(possibly short per man for a patrol). While burning calories due to very high tempo.

When higher level cognitive and physical skills are really needed we will throw in one very brief and massive meal for both energy and to expand their stomachs to reboot the hunger pangs down the track.

Then nothing for a day plus.

When it gets cold and/or raining, we will adjust up the calories. When warm and dry like recently, they go without.

Water is unlimited.

Activities are a mix of leaderless and Staff dictated(performance expectations differ from rank to rank, and corps to corps).

We used to accept voluntary withdraws immediately following confirmation and brief discussion with senior Staff. The only way off now is medical withdraw or at the discretion of Programme Manager(long serving Unit Training Wing).

Now patrols have to carry quitters to the end. There's no way out like the Hotel California. Results are you suffer, your patrol suffers on team activities, you don't get Tabbed and may not be accepted as a Day 1 recycle to redeem yourself, and your career may suffer quite considerably from the in depth individual assessment received at the end.

I think where we would differ(1 of possibly many ways) is that getting a "go/no go" for patrols occurs in our seperate high tempo infantry section commanders and platoon commanders courses.

We also don't jump. We're poor. Instead, for example, we will have candidate patrols build boats out of scavenged materials capable of floating the entire patrol and their kit. Then have them portage their boats up the nastiest bit of dense vertical bush for two days straight to see who blows, to see who pretends, to see who leads, and to see who solves the problem.

Our programme is the most granular Tri-service assessment(outside of SOF Selection) of a soldier's physical, mental, emotional, and social capabilities while under high levels of stress that we have.

I'm certainly not trying to put what we're doing in a favourable light compared to Ranger School. That's not my intent, and I apologise if it came out that way.

Just trying to learn from the experiences of others and to share ours/mine.

With this cohort coming thru it will be a total of 5 females completing the programme.

As stated, the first 2 females completed but didn't get tabbed(deemed "not yet ready" or "not suitable for further tier 2 type training") the jury is out on our current 3 under assessment.

On a slightly related note, SOF Selection has been open to females for quite some time here. Several have attempted.

Personally, I've worked with a few very capable and motivated female soldiers, including 1 on low level SASO operations. Great soldiers in their roles.

But where I'm conflicted is wanting to see them have AN opportunity to push themselves to approach the edge of their own point of personal failure where some great learning can occur and wisdom can be gained.

But I don't want to see them broken, possibly permanently, for very little return on investment. Nor do I want to see stronger candidates having their own opportunity to approach the edge of their own personal point of failure taken from them.

I hope I'm not stepping in uninvited or inappropriately on the topic.

It's a topic I'm quite interested in as well as personally invested in trying to do the best I can for all of my candidates.

The Reaper
04-18-2015, 07:29
Sounds vaguely SAS like.

I would be interested in the number of females who are med drops, compared to the males.

TR

Guy
04-18-2015, 07:34
After working in both the SOF community and the construction field for sometime...

Combat is not an individual activity, so the strength or skills of any individual are meaningless to combat effectiveness. We fight as a team, like the Rangers. Anything that makes the team fight better is a good idea, and anything that weakens the team is a bad idea. The US military has one mission, to defend our national interests in combat.

Social engineering, career progression, and making someone feel good about themselves is not part of that equation. The combat team works and fights together because of something called male bonding, or in military parlance esprit-de-corps.

The introduction of sexuality into this experience would alter the dynamic, and cause the relationships to go from Philia to Eros, and that is the problem.:munchin This alteration in interpersonal dynamics can be seen everywhere that women are introduced into previously all-male enclaves. However, since few of these non-combat activities require people to kill other people on a daily basis and risk their lives in the process, the failure of men to bond in this atmosphere is not a threat to our national security. It is impossible beforehand to show that sexuality or any other interpersonal dynamic is a causative of any specific group outcome, let alone a combat failure. It can, however, be demonstrated that sexuality reduces esprit-de-corps and hampers combat effectiveness.

Since the US and most western nations eschew the feminist desire to place women in Combat Arms units there are few examples of actual combat failure with a direct cause and effect relationship to the inclusion of women in modern combat.

Everyone states the standards should not be reduced, but then why are they? Why were the physical standards for Airborne School reduced? How does the US military demonstrate with sufficient confidence that any standard is connected to mission accomplishment? The US military used MEPCATs until it was determined that over 80% of the jobs women already held were in the heavy to extreme heavy lifting standard, and they would have been disqualified. What standard would hold up to this type of inquiry? Almost every standard for modern ground combat is based on subjective determinations of historical incidents or the combat experiences of experts in the field.

There are undoubtedly some few women capable of making it through Ranger School, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Flagg
04-18-2015, 12:50
Sounds vaguely SAS like.

I would be interested in the number of females who are med drops, compared to the males.

TR
Designed/Created by a long serving Training Wing SSGT :)

There's a number of activities that would be similar/reminiscent of their assessment/selection.

BUT our standards would of course be lower. We are only assessing for personal development and not selecting for service in a SOF unit. One incidental output(not our primary intent) is the group of successful candidates who do choose to progress onto Selection have been having statistically relevant success.

Due to our very small female sample size so far, it might be pretty hard to derive any gender based value in the data.

So far, no health/hygiene issues. Physically, the female candidates are holding up. Mentally, they are displaying the qualities we are looking for. Socially, they have integrated into patrols well.

But it's really just anecdotals at this stage for us, rather than statistically significant data points.

It's strange eh.

On the one hand, as mentioned in my last post, I don't want to see candidates injured unnecessarily and nor do I want to see other candidates' assessment opportunity to be diluted.

On the other hand, I don't want to see fiddling with standards/minimum outputs as I think it would devalue the programme's mana(maori word for status/prestige) and I don't want to patronize the female candidates by expecting less of them in displaying the personal qualities we are looking for.

We debated on whether to integrate or consider going with a female only cohort. We binned the idea of a female only programme as there is no other female only course in the tri-service military down here.

Very keen to hear about progress/outputs/learning points as gender integrated Ranger School courses begin.

This forum provides some great insight and a window into US experiences.

Cheers for that fellas!

sinjefe
04-18-2015, 16:08
^^^^^Either females in NZ are just more bad asses than every where else in the world...... or your course ain't all that.;)

The Reaper
04-18-2015, 18:33
IMHO, if you put a heavy ruck on a female and have her walk under it for long periods and distances, you are physically breaking her down for life, in a disproportionately large number of cases.

The VA is full of female service members who tried to run with the big dogs and wound up broken after one tour. That is before they were allowed in the combat arms units.

There are lots of good female professional basketball players. How many are in the NBA?

There are legitimate reasons for that.

The purpose of the United States military is to fight and win the nation's wars. Providing a forum for social experimentation is pretty far down the METL.

TR

bailaviborita
04-19-2015, 04:59
But the number 1 priority of the U.S. Army according to the CSA is ending all sexual assault...

Unfortunately the politicians can ignore what our purpose is and make us do things wholly unrelated to winning wars. It is akin to telling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to give poor people loans... Wups---

There was a Clinton era effort to pay attention to academics who wanted to change male culture. One way proposed was to change the culture of the military. Women needed to be viewed as tough and warrior like - and not objects of sexual conquest- and men needed to be hamstrung by making the traditional macho image something that wasn't tolerated. If gays and women could be put into the combat arms and traditional male culture changed in the military, then it was thought that the male culture in the US as a whole would change as well. Women would then be thought of as equal and men would stop raping them.

A few weeks ago I sat through a SHARPs mandatory class. The instructor- a male soldier- told us all to close our eyes and remember the first time we had sex, what the temperature was like, what the smell was like, what you felt. He then asked if someone would like to come up and describe their thoughts- to make the point that it is hard to talk about sex in general much less being raped. He then showed us a slide that said- "sexual innuendo leads to sex harassment and then rape and finally to murder. I guess if I watch Seinfeld I'm more likely to rape and murder a woman...

The final point of the SHARP class was that men needed to change the way they talk and view women and that men needed to protect women and if they drink too much or are socializing with a predator we should step in and save them.

I then went to a meeting on incorporating women into combat arms. The point of that meeting was to get the males in the room to understand two things: that women are equal to men and that our physical standards are arbitrary and should be changed.

When things become contradictory like that, you can rest assured a political agenda- an extreme one- is ruling the day... Which is it- women are equal or women needed to be protected from predators by men?? Oh, they want to eat the cake and have it...

Flagg
04-19-2015, 14:47
^^^^^Either females in NZ are just more bad asses than every where else in the world...... or your course ain't all that.;)

Our organization is pretty small, and I think we do a pretty good job of recruiting talent and developing performance(although I've seen my share of unmotivated fat bodies hiding in the shadows).

Yesterday we had drill practice for ANZAC Day and I ran some concurrent compliance training that included RFL(Required Fitness Level) for those about to time expire and a BET(Battle Efficiency Test).

We do have different gender and age standards for the RFL(yes...agreed....should be one standard). G1 is the highest minimum standard and the only minimum passing standard for young males. 1.5 mile run in <10minutes, >32 pressups, >130 situps. Only 1 of the 2 females attending yesterday had to run an RFL and she smoked the minimum G1 male standard.

It's not the same as 5 miles in under 40 minutes for a RASP minimum requirement tick in the box, but decent short distance run time.

Both females conducted the BET(8km in pack/webbing/rifle in <72 minutes, 150m fireman's carry in webbing/rifle, and 6 foot wall in webbing/rifle). Good passes by both females in under 64 minutes.

It's not the same as 12 miles in <3 hours for a RASP minimum requirement tick in the box, but our weight might be heavier

Nothing too hard, but pretty good performance for females.

-----

Without anyone having conducted or validated/observed both our programme and the Ranger Course it's hard to compare/contrast with good accuracy.

But I'm certainly not discounting the possibility ours could certainly be easier. After all, ours is only half as long as yours. I would imagine that counting down the days from 2 months would be a "bit" more soul destroying than counting down from 1 month.

We're hopeful to get some foreign candidates/observers for 2016, hopefully that includes folks from the US. If anyone's interested, let me know. I can include a free guided Harley tour of the best roads and scenery in the world.

-----

IMHO, if you put a heavy ruck on a female and have her walk under it for long periods and distances, you are physically breaking her down for life, in a disproportionately large number of cases.

Agreed. Same as with males....but disproportionately higher for females.

Looking at it wearing an accountant's/actuary's hat....the risk/reward and cost/benefit(when you include long term health costs) seems to be missing at first glance, especially when I look at the Ranger School preparation course pass rates.

It could actually be quite silly from a clinical, apolitical beancounter perspective.

The VA is full of female service members who tried to run with the big dogs and wound up broken after one tour. That is before they were allowed in the combat arms units.

There are lots of good female professional basketball players. How many are in the NBA?

There are legitimate reasons for that.

I've always found it odd, even funny, that there's never a push for gender integrated sporting events say starting with the Olympics. If they tried it with the national religion of Rugby down here, there's be a riot. But in reality all it would do is eliminate women's rugby and we might see a single female player every generation or so.

The purpose of the United States military is to fight and win the nation's wars. Providing a forum for social experimentation is pretty far down the METL.

TR

Our Army has had combat roles open to women for quite some time.

In that time there's been a very small number who've had a go at both the soldier and platoon commander level.

Making it thru Infantry Corps training and then Section Commander's is donkey work, particularly for the Regular Force full-timers.

Making it thru Platoon Commanders is even higher physical and mental intensity to get the tick in the box.

Not many have tried, a tiny fraction have made it, no one has really stayed around long to my knowledge.

Infantry standards are a different beast from minimum gender/age adjusted physical standards.

-----

I think I would be largely in alignment with consensus from the SMEs here.

I don't want to see capability compromised.

I don't want to disproportionally break female soldiers.

One questions I would have is:

How can females better achieve their self leadership and soldier leadership performance potential, in a hypothetical environment that excludes political interference, but where physiological differences can create excessively larger gaps in candidate physical capability ranges and risk of damage to candidate/course and perception/integrity?

Thanks for the questions/commentary.

Sorry for the sideline, happy to continue via PM, as I don't want to divert the discussion from the main discussion effort. I just wanted to share the state of affairs from a tiny slice of the "Five Eyes".

Cheers.

miclo18d
04-20-2015, 02:44
The solution has been there for a long long time. Branches. You compete for promotion within your branch. Women in a certain branch only need compete in their perspective branch. They complain that not having the ability to go to Ranger School holds them back from promotion.

Why not make a school within their own branch that infantry cannot go to that gives them the same or similar points. Or don't give points for Ranger School. I'm sure there are many schools in SF that are not point producing. How is it an advantage if I go to those schools?

the squid
04-20-2015, 08:22
The solution has been there for a long long time. Branches. You compete for promotion within your branch. Women in a certain branch only need compete in their perspective branch. They complain that not having the ability to go to Ranger School holds them back from promotion.

Why not make a school within their own branch that infantry cannot go to that gives them the same or similar points. Or don't give points for Ranger School. I'm sure there are many schools in SF that are not point producing. How is it an advantage if I go to those schools?

That whole "Ranger School holds them back from promotion" argument doesn't wash for me. In my branch, the only limiting factor for promotion is poor performance in a KD assignment, beyond misconduct or being fat.

I can't imagine anywhere beyond infantry, where not having a short tab limits your command potential, would matter for promotion. Unless we're talking about the general officer ranks. But my opinion is that if you're worried about making General, you're missing the point.

PSM
04-20-2015, 10:17
The solution has been there for a long long time. Branches.

In WW1, the Brits had the Bantam Battalions composed of men 4'10" to 5' 3". That allowed them to recruit the tough, determined, men who worked in the coal mines.

Pat

bubba
04-20-2015, 11:54
Well, today was supposed to be the start of RAP week, what's the over under on the number of PT failures / how many are still enrolled in the course? My guess is 3 still in with an over under of 1. Of that, one will make it past the buddy run and none past the 12 miler.

ETA: RUMINT is reporting 16 / 19 passed the PT test (3 failures)

BKKMAN
04-20-2015, 14:50
...When things become contradictory like that, you can rest assured a political agenda- an extreme one- is ruling the day... Which is it- women are equal or women needed to be protected from predators by men?? Oh, they want to eat the cake and have it...

The cognitive dissonance of our "adult supervision" is positively deafening...

MtnGoat
04-20-2015, 15:38
I was told today was the first day of the 20 Females starting Ranger School. Stories to come Gents!!

frostfire
04-20-2015, 21:44
, >130 situps.

We're hopeful to get some foreign candidates/observers for 2016, hopefully that includes folks from the US. If anyone's interested, let me know. I can include a free guided Harley tour of the best roads and scenery in the world.


whoa :eek: what is the time limit and form regulation for that >130 situps?!!?
Most I did was barely 100 in 2 min

oh, pick me! pick me:D A CPT in my unit is actually an observer at this first try out to ensure no "impartial" assessment of the rangerettes. I'm sure I can get plenty pointers from her and use them to assess your course. Any long distance shooting at NZ?



A few weeks ago I sat through a SHARPs mandatory class. The instructor- a male soldier- told us all to close our eyes and remember the first time we had sex, what the temperature was like, what the smell was like, what you felt. He then asked if someone would like to come up and describe their thoughts- to make the point that it is hard to talk about sex in general much less being raped. He then showed us a slide that said- "sexual innuendo leads to sex harassment and then rape and finally to murder. I guess if I watch Seinfeld I'm more likely to rape and murder a woman...

The final point of the SHARP class was that men needed to change the way they talk and view women and that men needed to protect women and if they drink too much or are socializing with a predator we should step in and save them.

I then went to a meeting on incorporating women into combat arms. The point of that meeting was to get the males in the room to understand two things: that women are equal to men and that our physical standards are arbitrary and should be changed.

When things become contradictory like that, you can rest assured a political agenda- an extreme one- is ruling the day... Which is it- women are equal or women needed to be protected from predators by men?? Oh, they want to eat the cake and have it...

I must have gone through the exact briefing since I remember that part. Did my best to keep my mouth shut when the ant- victim-blaming turns into let's have no personal accountability/responsibility and everyone-else-blaming campaign. Hey, it's sexual assault awareness month...how fitting to have the first class during the same month. Any alleged mistreatment can easily be linked to SHARP

IMHOO, the intent is to have them as equal and yet to be protected just like how a male soldier would protect his brothers/battle buddy....aka. view her as a sister in arms

Flagg
04-20-2015, 22:08
whoa :eek: what is the time limit and form regulation for that >130 situps?!!?
Most I did was barely 100 in 2 min

oh, pick me! pick me:D A CPT in my unit is actually an observer at this first try out to ensure no "impartial" assessment of the rangerettes. I'm sure I can get plenty pointers from her and use them to assess your course. Any long distance shooting at NZ?



Check PM

BMT (RIP)
04-21-2015, 05:01
The weeding-out process began early, with 81 soldiers failing the physical assessment test and being released from the class. Of the 81 who failed, three were women, making the early failure rate 21 percent

Read more here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2015/04/20/3679606_first-ranger-school-class-to-admit.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy

BMT

Streck-Fu
04-21-2015, 05:44
There were 113 women who went through the pre-Ranger course, taking up 138 slots because some of the women went through the course multiple times.
One woman who began Ranger School on Monday went through the course three times.

Do men get multiple tries at the pre-Ranger course? What is the success rate for men in Ranger school that have need multiple tries at pre-Ranger?

MtnGoat
04-21-2015, 09:16
Do men get multiple tries at the pre-Ranger course? What is the success rate for men in Ranger school that have need multiple tries at pre-Ranger?

Last time I knew of Pre-Ranger, the answer is yes. As a male you don't have to PASS Pre-Ranger Course. A Bn CSM can still send "Their" NCO to Ranger School if he wants him to go. Pre-Ranger is not a requirement to attend Ranger School.

gits
04-23-2015, 16:02
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/04/23/integrated-ranger-school-rap-week-update/26260827/


8 remaining...

Razor
04-23-2015, 22:21
Pretty neat how the percentages of failures for both men and women are so close thus far, huh?

the squid
04-24-2015, 06:21
Pretty neat how the percentages of failures for both men and women are so close thus far, huh?

Not being a Ranger school grad, I'm interested to see how many females are left after one or two phases of not enough sleep and chow and having to bear loads approaching 3/4 of their bodyweight. Or are they not going to make the women carry the radios, tripod, or guns?

sinjefe
04-24-2015, 06:23
Pretty neat how the percentages of failures for both men and women are so close thus far, huh?

Exactly what I was thinking. In fact, the women, percentage wise, actually did better than men on the PT test.

Fits the narrative.

the squid
04-24-2015, 06:27
Exactly what I was thinking. In fact, the women, percentage wise, actually did better than men on the PT test.

Fits the narrative.

The women represent a much smaller sample size and likely the very top percentage of females performance wise.

They were also very likely sequestered and did nothing but pt and classes for the months preceding the school.

Most, if not all of the men, I would imagine, were responsible for their own preparation on their own time and represent a much broader population.

sinjefe
04-24-2015, 06:40
They were also very likely sequestered and did nothing but pt and classes for the months preceding the school.
.

You reinforced my point for me.

the squid
04-24-2015, 06:54
You reinforced my point for me.

I wasn't disagreeing with you.

A bunch of dudes graduating Ranger School is nothing. A handful of females graduating Ranger School somehow changes our national narrative on the suitability of women in combat arms. For that reason, Big Army is likely very invested in their success.


For those of us who have served in maneuver units, the reality is far different. I was just a tabless garrison Mech PL, but introducing a woman to the equation would have had a very large effect on unit cohesion.

abc_123
04-24-2015, 07:04
The women represent a much smaller sample size and likely the very top percentage of females performance wise.

They were also very likely sequestered and did nothing but pt and classes for the months preceding the school.

Most, if not all of the men, I would imagine, were responsible for their own preparation on their own time and represent a much broader population.

That is a fact.

The Reaper
04-24-2015, 08:04
Now all females who will be leaving in this course are med drops and VWs.

Woe be unto the RI who NO GOs a female student.

TR

69harley
04-24-2015, 09:24
What about the peer reports, whats to prevent male students from peering out a female? Is that even possible right now?

Seriously, the Army could do almost anything to pressure RTB to put tabs on women. But it cannot control the student peer reports?

I sure would hate to be an RI or part of the RTB chain of command right now.

The Reaper
04-24-2015, 09:27
What about the peer reports, whats to prevent male students from peering out a female? Is that even possible right now?

Seriously, the Army could do almost anything to pressure RTB to put tabs on women. But it cannot control the student peer reports?

I sure would hate to be an RI or part of the RTB chain of command right now.

Sure.

Any patrol that peers the females, or appears to be doing so, will spend 4 hours of their phase break in SHARP and EO refresher training.

TR

69harley
04-24-2015, 10:53
Yea, re-education centers, SHARP training in the middle ofRanger School are all funny to joke about but seriously, what about the peer reports, can anyone currently assinged to the RTB elaborate on what is the current status of the peer reporting system?

bubba
04-24-2015, 12:05
Who said Peers mattered? I saw plenty of forign studs pass with horrible peers, and I would bet dimes to dollars that the females will be treated the same way. And as previously stated, there aint an RI in RTB that will no-go a female on a patrol or give enough major minuses to drop one. The fix is in and the standards are lowered. What a joke!

bailaviborita
04-25-2015, 05:46
Rumint from semi trusted parties:

- all females still there are on antibiotics due to urinary tract infections
- RIs have been told they will keep failure rates very close to the male failure rates
- Ranger School is a leadership school, therefore paradoxically, if too many women can't make the physical standards the Maneuver Center will be under considerable pressure to lower the standards or prove why leadership takes - for example- 6 chin-ups.
- the female OCs are either there to protect the women (no trust in the RIs) or to protect the RIs from spurious sex assault/harassment charges or both depending on who you ask. If it is to protect RIs, then one has to assume some or all of that effort is CYA for colonels and generals...
- if none pass look for tremendous political pressure that asserts all infantry physical standards are arbitrary- forcing the Army to have to attempt to prove every certain one with metrics
- if one passes, combat arms will be opened and SF will be too

bubba
04-25-2015, 07:07
Next comes the mountains...... Just wait till Sally and Melissa get to walk up the TVD after climbing Yohna...... Maybe that "6 chin ups" thing that they so dreaded on day one, with a good night's sleep and a full tank will seem like nothing when elevation takes it's toll. They will be broken in half. After that, let them rot in the swamps on a cyprus stump for a few days with 2 MREs a day eaten one hour appart and living in a Ranger Grave of wet sand all night, all while trying to get a bunch of tired, pissed off, brain dead males to do anything. Ladies, just think about getting hubby to do anything with a hang-over after an all weekend bender and football is on...... Fuck em', let them have it!

sinjefe
04-25-2015, 07:17
Rumint from semi trusted parties:

- all females still there are on antibiotics due to urinary tract infections
- RIs have been told they will keep failure rates very close to the male failure rates
- Ranger School is a leadership school, therefore paradoxically, if too many women can't make the physical standards the Maneuver Center will be under considerable pressure to lower the standards or prove why leadership takes - for example- 6 chin-ups.
- the female OCs are either there to protect the women (no trust in the RIs) or to protect the RIs from spurious sex assault/harassment charges or both depending on who you ask. If it is to protect RIs, then one has to assume some or all of that effort is CYA for colonels and generals...
- if none pass look for tremendous political pressure that asserts all infantry physical standards are arbitrary- forcing the Army to have to attempt to prove every certain one with metrics
- if one passes, combat arms will be opened and SF will be too

Most of those are, IMO, completely unlawful orders. If I was an RI and I was told, in any way, anything like the above, there would be no doubt what I would say and would be more inclined, rather than less, to be strict.

Five-O
04-25-2015, 07:37
Rumint from semi trusted parties:

- all females still there are on antibiotics due to urinary tract infections
- RIs have been told they will keep failure rates very close to the male failure rates
- Ranger School is a leadership school, therefore paradoxically, if too many women can't make the physical standards the Maneuver Center will be under considerable pressure to lower the standards or prove why leadership takes - for example- 6 chin-ups.
- the female OCs are either there to protect the women (no trust in the RIs) or to protect the RIs from spurious sex assault/harassment charges or both depending on who you ask. If it is to protect RIs, then one has to assume some or all of that effort is CYA for colonels and generals...
- if none pass look for tremendous political pressure that asserts all infantry physical standards are arbitrary- forcing the Army to have to attempt to prove every certain one with metrics
- if one passes, combat arms will be opened and SF will be too

I do not question your source but all females that attempted Marine Officer Infantry school failed. Why would things be different for the Army and Ranger School?

sinjefe
04-25-2015, 08:58
For those that refuse to compromise their integrity, they will just replace you with one who will (probably already had before the start of the course). People w/o integrity are legion.

The Reaper
04-25-2015, 09:14
I do not question your source but all females that attempted Marine Officer Infantry school failed. Why would things be different for the Army and Ranger School?

Because the Marine leadership has balls and integrity.

There, I said it.

Semper Fidelis.

TR

abc_123
04-25-2015, 10:12
Rumint from semi trusted parties:


- if none pass look for tremendous political pressure that asserts all infantry physical standards are arbitrary- forcing the Army to have to attempt to prove every certain one with metrics


And this is what the Marines are facing. So, prove why climbing a rope with a rucksack weighing "xxlbs" is required in combat?

I agree with TR the Marine leaders have more balls than the Army... however when the fix is in, the fix is in. The outcome is certain, it just may take a little longer while those with integrity, common sense, etc. are either broken, removed, or simply waited out.

abc_123
04-25-2015, 10:20
Rumint from semi trusted parties:
...
- if none pass look for tremendous political pressure that asserts all infantry physical standards are arbitrary- forcing the Army to have to attempt to prove every certain one with metrics
- if one passes, combat arms will be opened and SF will be too

We've been moving down that path for a while now. Infantry Battalions lost their support companies....became FSCs as part of a BSB. Not in the infantry battalion any more so now can have women.

Latest MTOE change.. IN BN's have now lost their Fire Support Element. No longer part of the Infanty... part of the FA that will get sliced back to the BN as needed. Hey, FA is open to women. All positions. So, Infantry Company Commanders, say hello to your new female FOs.

Good stuff, huh?

the squid
04-25-2015, 10:45
Just thinking out loud here:

What if the powers that be are playing this bullshit game to preserve the integrity of the course for the males that attend? As in, if they let a predetermined amount of women through there will be no pressure to lower the standards or justify each and every metric?

It seems the Marines may have shot themselves in the foot. The decision was made when Panetta lifted the ban. If they are now forced to lower or justify every standard, it follows that they will eventually have a course which produces a much less capable infantry platoon leader.

If they put the fix in with Ranger School, it would follow that they would subject themselves to less scrutiny initially, and when this all goes away as a nice political football, they can go back to business as usual and not worry so fucking much about managing female attrition.

If this is the case, it may be politically smart. Or maybe I'm just being optimistic.

the squid
04-25-2015, 10:49
Latest MTOE change.. IN BN's have now lost their Fire Support Element. No longer part of the Infanty... part of the FA that will get sliced back to the BN as needed. Hey, FA is open to women. All positions. So, Infantry Company Commanders, say hello to your new female FOs.

Good stuff, huh?

From talking to my FA buddies, this was done because FA collective training has suffered during the GWOT, and with the 4th BCTs going away they can now play a shell game with brigade level commands and bring back the Divarties. Divisions lose a brigade but add another, FA Officers get more 06 commands, and field artillery training management at the brigade level is done by artillery officers again. Everyone wins.

The Reaper
04-25-2015, 11:41
Research the Katie Wilder saga.

TR

the squid
04-25-2015, 11:50
Research the Katie Wilder saga.

TR

I don't have the depth of experience to really have an informed opinion on this, but it seems to me the Army's treatment of this by MCOE and RTB leadership is due to one of three reasons:

1). They're all sycophants who care only about their OERs and their next jobs and they know how damaging this will be to readiness in combat arms units, but they don't care.

2). Despite their own experience at the company level and below, they really believe this is a good thing and integrated infantry units will not damage readiness or unit cohesion.

3). They don't want to do this but realize the decision is made. They're massaging the outcome so as to minimize involvement from their soft, doughy civilian masters who have no idea that this will have negative consequences. They understand that an unmanipulated outcome will bring scrutiny they don't need. They're trying to preserve the integrity of the course as much as possible and mitigate the damage that political involvement in POI would bring.

I would like to think its the third. Maybe not.

I am somewhat familiar with Katie Wilder. She was that star chasing fuck of an MI officer who exploited a loophole to be granted a spot in the q-course. She got caught breaking the rules (caching her ruck?) And was booted. She sued. Maybe they're trying to prevent another instance of this?

Perhaps some of you could provide sent insight, how off base am I with my assumptions?

Box
04-25-2015, 15:38
Because the Marine leadership has balls and integrity.

There, I said it.

Semper Fidelis.

TR


...ouch

Razor
04-25-2015, 17:53
Not being a Ranger school grad, I'm interested to see how many females are left after one or two phases of not enough sleep and chow and having to bear loads approaching 3/4 of their bodyweight. Or are they not going to make the women carry the radios, tripod, or guns?

I want to believe that the ARTB CoC is being 100% above board and not cutting anyone any slack, but the fact that the following has been posted on the home page of the official Ranger School website since at least last fall is not, IMO, mere coincidence (emphasis below is mine):


60% of all Ranger School failures occur in the first 4 days (“RAP Week”): RPA, Land Nav, Footmarch, CWSA.
30% of all Ranger School failures occur due to Personal Reasons: Admin, Lack of Motivation, Special Circumstances.
10% of all Ranger School failures occur due to Academics: Patrols, Peers, Serious Observation Report, Medical Issues.
Only 2.2% of all Ranger School failures are due to Patrols (Academic).
Only 5% of all Ranger School failures are due to Patrols, Patrols/Peers, Patrols/Peers/Spots (Academic).
50.13% Overall Graduation Rate last 6 years (FY 06-FY 11) 37.2% Ranger Graduates Recycle at least 1x Phase of Ranger School
75% of those who complete RAP week will eventually pass the Darby Phase and move on to the Mountain Phase. Darby Recycle Rate is approximately 15%.
94% of those who start the Mountain Phase will eventually pass and move on to the Florida Phase. Mountain Recycle Rate is approximately 18%.
98% of those who start Florida Phase will eventually pass and graduate Ranger School. Florida Recycle Rate is approximately 18%.

Razor
04-25-2015, 17:57
Y...but seriously, what about the peer reports, can anyone currently assinged (sic) to the RTB elaborate on what is the current status of the peer reporting system?

Let me ask you this as food for thought--who sees the collected reports for each student?

blacksmoke
04-25-2015, 18:38
And this is what the Marines are facing. So, prove why climbing a rope with a rucksack weighing "xxlbs" is required in combat?

I agree with TR the Marine leaders have more balls than the Army... however when the fix is in, the fix is in. The outcome is certain, it just may take a little longer while those with integrity, common sense, etc. are either broken, removed, or simply waited out.

D-day invasion already forgotten? For f&*k sake?! How about those steep mountain camps full of sheep f$%#ers? Don't think you'll ever have to carry heavy gear up there? Or do it moving fast? Damn, I'm not special ops, but this really sucks.

abc_123
04-25-2015, 21:21
From talking to my FA buddies, this was done because FA collective training has suffered during the GWOT, and with the 4th BCTs going away they can now play a shell game with brigade level commands and bring back the Divarties. Divisions lose a brigade but add another, FA Officers get more 06 commands, and field artillery training management at the brigade level is done by artillery officers again. Everyone wins.

"Everyone" does not win. I don't see women FO's at the company or even the bn level as a "Win". I see the liberal agenda as winning, but that's all.

abc_123
04-25-2015, 21:28
D-day invasion already forgotten? For f&*k sake?! How about those steep mountain camps full of sheep f$%#ers? Don't think you'll ever have to carry heavy gear up there? Or do it moving fast? Damn, I'm not special ops, but this really sucks.

None of that matters. It's not about the military or what is best for defending the nation. it is about social justice and fairness. Once you let go of your erroneous thinking that there is any difference between men and women you will feel better.

the squid
04-25-2015, 22:04
"Everyone" does not win. I don't see women FO's at the company or even the bn level as a "Win". I see the liberal agenda as winning, but that's all.

Should have been more specific. I was talking about the reorganization of divarties and how it benefits fires training management.

I don't see any benefit from having females at the pointy end of the spear. None. At all.

abc_123
04-27-2015, 07:08
Should have been more specific. I was talking about the reorganization of divarties and how it benefits fires training management.



Roger.

Beef
04-27-2015, 10:45
Because the Marine leadership has balls and integrity.

There, I said it.

Semper Fidelis.

TR

Nothing new here, TR. The one thing I missed about the Corps when I switched to SF, at least as far as the very top leadership was concerned.

This article illustrates the point well. And shows what a motivated male Marine will do to meet the standard. Note the reference to 1993. It was "here's the standard, here's the documentation. Have a nice day!"

http://archive.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20080612/NEWS/806120315/Racist-recruiting-Ad-draws-fire

Semper Fidelis!

BMT (RIP)
04-27-2015, 13:06
Having stomped around Harmon Church area .
What are these gals going to when they find a head full of ticks.:eek:
Or better still ticks attached to various other body parts.
WAit until the Red bugs come out in force

BMT

Flagg
04-27-2015, 23:32
60% of all Ranger School failures occur in the first 4 days (“RAP Week”): RPA, Land Nav, Footmarch, CWSA.
30% of all Ranger School failures occur due to Personal Reasons: Admin, Lack of Motivation, Special Circumstances.
10% of all Ranger School failures occur due to Academics: Patrols, Peers, Serious Observation Report, Medical Issues.
Only 2.2% of all Ranger School failures are due to Patrols (Academic).
Only 5% of all Ranger School failures are due to Patrols, Patrols/Peers, Patrols/Peers/Spots (Academic).
50.13% Overall Graduation Rate last 6 years (FY 06-FY 11) 37.2% Ranger Graduates Recycle at least 1x Phase of Ranger School
75% of those who complete RAP week will eventually pass the Darby Phase and move on to the Mountain Phase. Darby Recycle Rate is approximately 15%.
94% of those who start the Mountain Phase will eventually pass and move on to the Florida Phase. Mountain Recycle Rate is approximately 18%.
98% of those who start Florida Phase will eventually pass and graduate Ranger School. Florida Recycle Rate is approximately 18%.


IF you were to remove the 90% of failures due to failing to meet the physical standard in the first 4 days as well as personal/special circumstances and lack of motivation.

Does that not mean that once you get thru the self-weeding out process(effectively starting there) then doesn't "5% of all Ranger School failures are due to Patrols, Patrols/Peers, Patrols/Peers/Spots (Academic)" actually become 50%(5%/10% remaining)?

Just curious to see how it would be viewed from a Ranger School Instructor's perspective. Does it REALLY start Day 1? Or does that just remove the less motivated until you achieve a far better instructor to candidate ratio for more comprehensive instructor assessment?

-----

Also, is it common to have vast differences between instructors/assessors perspectives and candidate peer reviews for candidates?

In what we do, I've seen a fair number of small differences(we aren't omniscient) that are mostly complementary indicators of candidate performance, rather than contradictory.

But we've had the rare big and contradictory difference which we then place great emphasis on fairly validating.

I would hazard a guess that poor peer evaluations(especially if swapped into a different patrol with the same result) for 99+% would likely be complemented by equally poor instructor observations/reports.

-----

It will be interesting to hear if there are any protests to failing to meet subjective standards(360 degree, multiple instructor subjective rubric, complemented by independent candidate peer evaluation rankings/averages).

I wonder where the female observers will fit into any potential challenge to robust subjective but complementary performance expectation rubrics?

How much weight, if any, will be given to female observer observations/opinions?

If their observations have ANY weight, how is THAT determined?

Remington Raidr
04-28-2015, 10:27
Nothing new here, TR. The one thing I missed about the Corps when I switched to SF, at least as far as the very top leadership was concerned.

This article illustrates the point well. And shows what a motivated male Marine will do to meet the standard. Note the reference to 1993. It was "here's the standard, here's the documentation. Have a nice day!"

http://archive.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20080612/NEWS/806120315/Racist-recruiting-Ad-draws-fire

Semper Fidelis!

"The Marines do not have a race problem. They treat everybody like [blacks].

Gen. Daniel "Chappie" James, Jr., USAF, 1920-1987

underarmhornet
04-28-2015, 11:35
Latest MTOE change.. IN BN's have now lost their Fire Support Element. No longer part of the Infanty... part of the FA that will get sliced back to the BN as needed. Hey, FA is open to women. All positions. So, Infantry Company Commanders, say hello to your new female FOs.

Good stuff, huh?

abc,

I am currently in a FA BN and we only have two females at HHB so far. One is a 13A, and the other is the BN S1 NCOIC. The only other 13 series MOS's open to females are 131A, 13M, 13P, 13T and 13R. 13B/F/D are still closed to females. The medics were trying to get two females from the BSB to come to HHB, but I'm not sure yet if they're going to come or not.

As far as the MTOE change, Squid is right. The whole idea of pulling the FISTER's back to the FA BN's and bringing back DIVARTY is to place the FA in charge of training instead of the infantry not knowing what to do with us. Thankfully 13F (FO's) hasn't been opened to females yet, but I'm sure it will happen somewhere down the road... :rolleyes: Hope this helps.

abc_123
04-28-2015, 11:42
As far as the MTOE change, Squid is right. The whole idea of pulling the FISTER's back to the FA BN's and bringing back DIVARTY is to place the FA in charge of training instead of the infantry not knowing what to do with us. .

Makes sense.

the squid
04-28-2015, 11:52
abc,

I am currently in a FA BN and we only have two females at HHB so far. One is a 13A, and the other is the BN S1 NCOIC. The only other 13 series MOS's open to females are 131A, 13M, 13P, 13T and 13R. 13B/F/D are still closed to females. The medics were trying to get two females from the BSB to come to HHB, but I'm not sure yet if they're going to come or not.

As far as the MTOE change, Squid is right. The whole idea of pulling the FISTER's back to the FA BN's and bringing back DIVARTY is to place the FA in charge of training instead of the infantry not knowing what to do with us. Thankfully 13F (FO's) hasn't been opened to females yet, but I'm sure it will happen somewhere down the road... :rolleyes: Hope this helps.

Right on. From my time at the maneuver tactical level, it seemed to me that the BN FSO/NCO were in charge of training management for the fisters - often that was hard to do considering the competing priorities of running the Battalion fires cell and ensuring your 13F individual/collective training didn't interfere with the rifle and tanker company commanders training calender.

i would imagine that the BC/S3/CDRs didn't have the depth of knowledge ensure that the FST training plan was vertically nested within the Battalion/Company METLs. So that really left the BN FSO to his own devices if the artillery Battalion Commander didn't take an interest in what his fisters were doing at the Maneuver Battalions.

This may or may not be reality - I'm just making assumptions based on what I've seen.

underarmhornet
04-29-2015, 08:45
Right on. From my time at the maneuver tactical level, it seemed to me that the BN FSO/NCO were in charge of training management for the fisters - often that was hard to do considering the competing priorities of running the Battalion fires cell and ensuring your 13F individual/collective training didn't interfere with the rifle and tanker company commanders training calender.

i would imagine that the BC/S3/CDRs didn't have the depth of knowledge ensure that the FST training plan was vertically nested within the Battalion/Company METLs. So that really left the BN FSO to his own devices if the artillery Battalion Commander didn't take an interest in what his fisters were doing at the Maneuver Battalions.

This may or may not be reality - I'm just making assumptions based on what I've seen.

You're on point, quality of training for us fister is largely dependant on our fsnco and the relationship that we have with the command, the better the relationship the better the training. It is also dependant on whether or not the commander understands our job and role. In my case, the BN and HHB commanders let us do our own thing and we spend a lot of time out of sight and out of mind completing our training without much oversight and micromanagement. We still have to do certain things with the unit, like IWQ, otherwise we distance ourselves as much as we can from everyone else.

Tying everything back into the thread though, I am not looking forward to when females are allowed to come in to our MOS. Our job is both physically and mentally demanding and I highly doubt a female FO would be effective, unless she's a superstar and is able to pull her own weight. I agree with abc_123 that there is no "win" having female FO's. If females want to work on and fire MLRS and other rocket systems (or whatever) in the rear, that's fine, but I wouldn't want a female out with an infantry platoon calling for fire or coordinating air assets in a TIC. We bear a lot of responsibility, and I wouldn't want more soldiers to die because of an incompetent FO. All this to say, I do realize in the past there have been instances where friendly forces had munitions dropped on them, but IMHO it could get worse if we let females be FO's. Just my .02

the squid
04-29-2015, 09:12
You're on point, quality of training for us fister is largely dependant on our fsnco and the relationship that we have with the command, the better the relationship the better the training. It is also dependant on whether or not the commander understands our job and role. In my case, the BN and HHB commanders let us do our own thing and we spend a lot of time out of sight and out of mind completing our training without much oversight and micromanagement. We still have to do certain things with the unit, like IWQ, otherwise we distance ourselves as much as we can from everyone else.

Tying everything back into the thread though, I am not looking forward to when females are allowed to come in to our MOS. Our job is both physically and mentally demanding and I highly doubt a female FO would be effective, unless she's a superstar and is able to pull her own weight. I agree with abc_123 that there is no "win" having female FO's. If females want to work on and fire MLRS and other rocket systems (or whatever) in the rear, that's fine, but I wouldn't want a female out with an infantry platoon calling for fire or coordinating air assets in a TIC. We bear a lot of responsibility, and I wouldn't want more soldiers to die because of an incompetent FO. All this to say, I do realize in the past there have been instances where friendly forces had munitions dropped on them, but IMHO it could get worse if we let females be FO's. Just my .02

I don't think it's an issue of competence.

I just imagine some tiny 120 pound female Fister or FSO having rouble keeping up with her PL or Commander. Putting a 120 pound female in 70 pounds of kit and telling her to keep up with a 180lb pipe hitting rifle company commander with a square jaw and a Ranger tab is just asking for trouble. No, wait, it's stupid.

When a male FSO/Fister/RTO can't keep up, you tell him he's fucking fat and he needs to get unfat. Can't do that with a female. She'll get offended. I would hope that since the decision's already been made, that the only ones drawn to that line of work would be the a-type tom boys who don't mind crass humor and have intrinstic motivation to keep up with the boys, but who knows.

the squid
04-29-2015, 09:57
The motivation to keep up and the actual ability to do so can be very different things, IME.

I've fired an otherwise competent 25C for this very reason. 150M into a 300M open area movement under direct fire onto an OBJ in battle rattle + radio smoked him.

Relaying the lift/ cease fire to a gun crew enroute became impossible; I'd come unscrewed on a troop in a similar state trying to control arty.

Fair enough.

This whole thing will completely fuck over unit culture. Women are different. Period. They bring a certain dynamic to units that soften their mentality. I see it now being an Air Defender - trying to explain to a 14A SGI that unit culture in rifle companies is neccesarily different from the rest of the Army, and then hearing him say with a straight face that it shouldn't be because there's one standard - "The Army Standard" is really frustrating.

The pink bellies. The hazing. The crass humor. It's all juvenile humor but I absolutely believe it builds cohesion and bonds that really pay off when things get horrible later on.

Box
04-29-2015, 10:05
I just imagine some tiny 120 pound female Fister or FSO having rouble keeping up with her PL or Commander. Putting a 120 pound female in 70 pounds of kit and telling her to keep up with a 180lb pipe hitting rifle company commander with a square jaw and a Ranger tab is just asking for trouble.

...that is assuming that the PL or commander isn't also a 120 pound female.

The Reaper
04-29-2015, 11:39
I have seen many more 180 pound than 120 pound females in the Army in my career.

They are not held to the same physical fitness or height weight standards as males.

TR

Box
04-29-2015, 11:47
I have seen many more 180 pound than 120 pound females in the Army in my career.


...now that you mention it, a lot of them gals have square jaws to boot.

Mills
04-29-2015, 18:25
...that is assuming that the PL or commander isn't also a 120 pound female.

You mean like my future team leader?

Because obviously.........the O's will have to be the first ones to break through the "glass ceiling".

bailaviborita
04-30-2015, 19:42
So, in debates/conversations with field grades from around the force, I am surprised at how many infantry officers are actually in favor- if not outright advocates- for women in combat arms. Many of them are saying that the younger generation is different- that they don't see women as different than men or don't have problems having them on their teams with them.

I have opined that the last people to get ground truth from this "younger generation" are the field grades in positions of authority (one in particular is an ROTC senior military officer). From the male cadets I talk to there seems to be a lot of disgruntlement towards the double standards, the SHARPS stuff, and the perception of a social agenda that does not favor honest opinions or feedback on these types of issues. It butts right up against the Army value of honesty- if not integrity and honor as well. If you don't agree with the current pop-culture/politically correct stance, then you are expected to change or keep your thoughts to yourself.

Anyway, was just wondering if there were any out there who were young who had some thoughts on this or any older folks who disagreed that the younger generation are a bunch of androgynous Starship Troopers who can take showers with each other and not think anything of it...

Beef
04-30-2015, 20:14
So, in debates/conversations with field grades from around the force, I am surprised at how many infantry officers are actually in favor- if not outright advocates- for women in combat arms. Many of them are saying that the younger generation is different- that they don't see women as different than men or don't have problems having them on their teams with them.

I have opined that the last people to get ground truth from this "younger generation" are the field grades in positions of authority (one in particular is an ROTC senior military officer). From the male cadets I talk to there seems to be a lot of disgruntlement towards the double standards, the SHARPS stuff, and the perception of a social agenda that does not favor honest opinions or feedback on these types of issues. It butts right up against the Army value of honesty- if not integrity and honor as well. If you don't agree with the current pop-culture/politically correct stance, then you are expected to change or keep your thoughts to yourself.

Anyway, was just wondering if there were any out there who were young who had some thoughts on this or any older folks who disagreed that the younger generation are a bunch of androgynous Starship Troopers who can take showers with each other and not think anything of it...

The NG field grade officers in our state's SF Bn and infantry brigade all feel that women in combat arms is a crime against nature and humanity. The infantry bde had some experience with women in support roles during multiple Iraq deployments and on the whole found the experience very disappointing, to be diplomatic. They don't mind stating it among each other, being outside the AD orbit and on different career progression paths to a degree. The NG here is much less PC than the AD and although it has its own good ole boy network, it is a parallel but different universe.


The young enlisted NG SF troops are already deriding women in Ranger school and women (crack troops) in Ranger Bns. are the butt of jokes. When I told them "The Legend of Katie Wilder," they were stunned and didn't all really believe it. They don't want any more Katie Wilders or GI Janes.

PSM
04-30-2015, 20:40
The NG field grade officers in our state's SF Bn and infantry brigade all feel that women in combat arms is a crime against nature and humanity.

Interesting. My son is an NG 13F SGT who just got transferred back to BDE from an INF BN. He told me the same thing and I was surprised. I had thought that the NG would cave faster than the Big Army. The rest of his FIST section will move to BDE by September. I hope they stay the course.

Pat

frostfire
04-30-2015, 21:05
Many of them are saying that the younger generation is different- that they don't see women as different than men or don't have problems having them on their teams with them.

Anyway, was just wondering if there were any out there who were young who had some thoughts on this or any older folks who disagreed that the younger generation are a bunch of androgynous Starship Troopers who can take showers with each other and not think anything of it...

There's a new private in my unit who fits your description. He told everyone during SHARP session that he saw females as 100% as capable as males, hardworking, and deserving nothing but respect. He was very sincere though. He also admitted he had only female figures raising him his entire life.

abc_123
04-30-2015, 22:53
So, in debates/conversations with field grades from around the force, I am surprised at how many infantry officers are actually in favor- if not outright advocates- for women in combat arms.

YGBSM!

WarriorDiplomat
05-04-2015, 17:44
http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/gillibrand-releases-new-military-sexual-assault-report-new-data-revels-high-prevalence-of-assault-among-civilian-women-and-military-spouses-widening-true-scope-of-problem-underreporting-and-distrust-of-military-justice-system-persist-

bailaviborita
05-05-2015, 04:34
So...if a civilian woman is allegedly sexually assaulted off post and does not call the police or doesn't pursue legal solutions- how is that the fault of the military justice system? And, if it was the fault of the military justice system- why does Gillibrand want to transfer responsibility to JAG for sexual assault???

WarriorDiplomat
05-05-2015, 07:43
So...if a civilian woman is allegedly sexually assaulted off post and does not call the police or doesn't pursue legal solutions- how is that the fault of the military justice system? And, if it was the fault of the military justice system- why does Gillibrand want to transfer responsibility to JAG for sexual assault???

The article discusses the incidents mentioned as examples the support the belief that most are never reported because of the culture. The command climate is not conducive to solving the problem meaning the soldiers don't have faith in the military dispensing justice. This tells me that we have a senator who realizes the reporting they know if is but the tip of the iceberg which leads too..............they are getting inaccurate information that may have led to the change in policy of allowing women in combat arms. In other words the decision to open closed positions to women and the belief that the Army culture has effectively conducted AFO ISO the policy.

Jakedeep
05-05-2015, 10:50
Thought I'd share this clip in the thread.

Congratulations to her for having the resilience to finish, but I think the implications of the way she finished are clear.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/online/clip-of-captain-sarah-cudd-completing-gruelling-12-mile-foot-march-goes-viral/story-fnjwnhzf-1227337738578

In what has been described as a great example of “heart, guts and determination”, the recruit from Public Health Command, Fort Knox managed to finish the 12-Mile Foot March in two hours and 46 minutes.

Capt Cudd’s inspiring achievement was posted on Facebook last month and has been watched more than 1.2 million times.

In the 1.03 minute ******* clip, Capt Cudd is seen collapsing to the ground several times just metres from the finish line.

Despite her obvious agony, she rises to her feet thanks to the encouragement of her fellow soldiers who can be heard yelling out in the clip “C’mon, don’t stop, you’re right there” and “You got this”, “Get up”, “You got it baby”.

Box
05-05-2015, 11:24
meh

Pericles
05-05-2015, 12:11
meh

I wasn't inspired either. Didn't even look like a combat load. It must have been the power of the reflective belt that enabled the finish.

Jakedeep
05-05-2015, 12:29
meh

I did not want to make any conclusions myself because I am not quite yet qualified to do so. :lifter :D:D

1stindoor
05-05-2015, 12:37
she rises to her feet thanks to the encouragement of her fellow soldiers who can be heard yelling out in the clip “C’mon, don’t stop, you’re right there” and “You got this”, “Get up”, “You got it baby”.

Our unit's SHARP rep needs the name and rank of the Soldier that called her "baby.":D

The Reaper
05-08-2015, 12:11
Let's see how many pass during the recycle phases.

TR


All 8 Women Fail To Advance To Next Phase of Ranger School

http://www.defenseone.com/management/2015/05/all-8-women-fail-to-advance-ranger-school/112270/

But all, along with 101 male soldiers, earned the right to restart the first training phase on May 14.

All eight of the women trying to move into the second phase of the Army's elite Ranger school failed to move ahead to the school's second, or mountain, phase. However, all qualified to restart the initial, or Darby, phase on May 14, Army officials said Friday.

Just under half of the soldiers vying to move ahead did so, Army officials said. Starting the mountain phase tomorrow will be 115 soldiers, all male. Joining the eight women restarting the Darby phase at Fort Benning, Ga., will be 101 men. Thirty-five more soldiers, all men, washed out completely and will return to their units, officials said

Roguish Lawyer
05-08-2015, 15:39
Let's see how many pass during the recycle phases.

TR


All 8 Women Fail To Advance To Next Phase of Ranger School

http://www.defenseone.com/management/2015/05/all-8-women-fail-to-advance-ranger-school/112270/

But all, along with 101 male soldiers, earned the right to restart the first training phase on May 14.

All eight of the women trying to move into the second phase of the Army's elite Ranger school failed to move ahead to the school's second, or mountain, phase. However, all qualified to restart the initial, or Darby, phase on May 14, Army officials said Friday.

Just under half of the soldiers vying to move ahead did so, Army officials said. Starting the mountain phase tomorrow will be 115 soldiers, all male. Joining the eight women restarting the Darby phase at Fort Benning, Ga., will be 101 men. Thirty-five more soldiers, all men, washed out completely and will return to their units, officials said

Surely they will have lowered the standards by then, no? :munchin

Roguish Lawyer
05-08-2015, 15:55
BREAKING NEWS: The Darby Queen has been reconfigured, and renamed the Darby Princess.

CDRODA396
05-08-2015, 16:51
I would hate to be in the upcoming class....RAS is going to need to make room for quite a few returning patrons! :D

MtnGoat
05-08-2015, 17:02
BREAKING NEWS: The Darby Queen has been reconfigured, and renamed the Darby Princess.

I'm stealing the Counselor! ! ROTFLMAO!!

MtnGoat
05-08-2015, 17:04
I would hate to be in the upcoming class....RAS is going to need to make room for quite a few returning patrons! :D

Only 2 of them, as far as I've heard will be a "Day One" restart. The rest are Darby Inserts. Meaning no RAPS.

CDRODA396
05-08-2015, 17:18
Only 2 of them, as far as I've heard will be a "Day One" restart. The rest are Darby Inserts. Meaning no RAPS.

Roger, I was referring to the fact that along with the chicks, 101 men recycled, almost all of which will reinsert after RAP...according to someone within the RTB, the normal recycle rate for Darby is about 15%, it was 41% for class 6-15...sooooo, I would imagine they will be looking to make some room in 7-15 for the unusually large number of recycles from 6-15...thus the I would hate to be just starting 7-15 comments.

Sdiver
05-08-2015, 17:37
Surely they will have lowered the standards by then, no? :munchin

TR's REAL name is Shirley ?!?! :confused:

Who knew ... :munchin

Peregrino
05-08-2015, 19:24
Roger, I was referring to the fact that along with the chicks, 101 men recycled, almost all of which will reinsert after RAP...according to someone within the RTB, the normal recycle rate for Darby is about 15%, it was 41% for class 6-15...sooooo, I would imagine they will be looking to make some room in 7-15 for the unusually large number of recycles from 6-15...thus the I would hate to be just starting 7-15 comments.

Hmmmm - looks like an indicator. As in - we must continue the experiment and if we recycle the women, we must also recycle a proportionate number of men. Hence the "unusually large number of recycles from 6-15". Anybody have a more plausible hypothesis? :munchin

sinjefe
05-08-2015, 19:50
Actually 184 men and 8 women went on to Darby. All 8 women failed and all 8 women were allowed to recycle, a 100% recycle rate. 69 men failed Darby. 35 were allowed to recycle and 34 were sent home, a 50% recycle rate.

There is no explanation for that except favoritism.

gits
05-08-2015, 20:38
Anyone curious to how much muscle and weight these women have lost? I bet it took them months of good nutrition and train up to attend this course. Probably all gone by now. Anyone care to wager how much longer they'll last in the training?:munchin

bubba
05-08-2015, 20:52
Couple of points.

1) There should be 34 shiney new EO complaints filed at RTB by the 34/69 drops. The 8/8 that didn't get dropped is more than enough ammo for that.

2) I hope that all 8 get to meet my good friend, Mr. Elevation. Mr. E doesn't care what you are, where you come from, how much that lil-ole machine gun weighs, or that you didn't get a good hot stack of blue-berry pancakes this morning. Mr. E's wife, Mrs TVD will eat their lunches, crush their dreams, and recycle them to only meet the same results.

3) Final thought of the evening, GOOD ON WHOMEVER those poor nameless MEN that "squared away" their Ranger Buddies out here, if you ever run into me at a bar, I'm buying!

bailaviborita
05-09-2015, 07:07
Conversation overheard at high level SOF HQ yesterday:

"Hey, (deputy commander of said HQ), did you hear the rumors that all 8 females recycled Darby?"

Deputy commander, very loudly: "All-right!"

Conversation then turned to the female military veterinarian who has inspired so many by falling her way across the 12 mile finish line...

Looking at the first female to attend- under court order- The Citadel, the way Jessica Lynch was hailed as a hero for getting captured, that vet, the CSTs and other women "warriors" lauded by the media-- we are not only lying to ourselves (recycle rates higher for females - come on...), but we are changing what our society defines as worthy of the moniker "heroic". I think this is just further evidence of the counter culture winning the culture wars. why are so many so hell bent on convincing women - and men- that women are the same as men...

Answer: the universities pumping out tons of unemployable diversity and gender studies folks who know nothing except how to get everyone to be hyper offended and immerse themselves in "gender identity" exercises. SHARPs is now a growth industry- and the only area DoD is allowed to grow in...

Last hard class
05-09-2015, 10:50
Actually 184 men and 8 women went on to Darby. All 8 women failed and all 8 women were allowed to recycle, a 100% recycle rate. 69 men failed Darby. 35 were allowed to recycle and 34 were sent home, a 50% recycle rate.

There is no explanation for that except favoritism.

Question:

Of the 69 men who failed, what is the general criteria that determines if they are in the group of 35 recycles or the 34 sent packing?

And:

Can the argument be made that the 8 women who were determined deserving of a second chance were judged using the same criteria? It is a small sample after all.


LHC

Team Sergeant
05-09-2015, 10:55
Doesn't really matter. Once they all fail the standards will be reviewed, evaluated recommendations made and then the standards will be lowered.

Got to be done cause we all know watching Hollywood shows that most women can fight better then men.

sinjefe
05-09-2015, 11:28
Question:

Of the 69 men who failed, what is the general criteria that determines if they are in the group of 35 recycles or the 34 sent packing?

And:

Can the argument be made that the 8 women who were determined deserving of a second chance were judged using the same criteria? It is a small sample after all.


LHC

Doesn't matter. The laws of probability dictate at least some would be sent home. None were.

frostfire
05-09-2015, 23:53
Answer: the universities pumping out tons of unemployable diversity and gender studies folks who know nothing except how to get everyone to be hyper offended and immerse themselves in "gender identity" exercises. SHARPs is now a growth industry- and the only area DoD is allowed to grow in...

Sir,

I haven't done the works to verify your hypothesis, but if that is even 90% true then that is scarier that ISIS and China combined *shudder:eek:*

bailaviborita
05-10-2015, 07:15
Sir,

I haven't done the works to verify your hypothesis, but if that is even 90% true then that is scarier that ISIS and China combined *shudder:eek:*

Actually it's worse. We are cutting authorizations for operators and combat soldiers and we are growing sexual harassment specialists... Conventional side and SOF...

Mills
05-10-2015, 07:15
Doesn't really matter. Once they all fail the standards will be reviewed, evaluated recommendations made and then the standards will be lowered.

Got to be done cause we all know watching Hollywood shows that most women can fight better then men.

You mean like the movie that they are making after this book?

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ashleys-war-gayle-tzemach-lemmon/1120794364?ean=9780062333834

Once again, no argument that some women have done extrordinary things in extraordinary situations................However continuting to indoctrinate everyone with the ideology that men and women are interchangable is inaccurate at best.

Similar to the CPT that collapsed trying to finish a 12 miler. People are now putting her on a pedastal for doing nothing more that having a little bit of personal courage and reaching deep down in order to complete the mission. I personally feel that is the standard..........not the exception.

bailaviborita
05-10-2015, 07:25
You mean like the movie that they are making after this book?

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/ashleys-war-gayle-tzemach-lemmon/1120794364?ean=9780062333834

Once again, no argument that some women have done extrordinary things in extraordinary situations................However continuting to indoctrinate everyone with the ideology that men and women are interchangable is inaccurate at best.

Similar to the CPT that collapsed trying to finish a 12 miler. People are now putting her on a pedastal for doing nothing more that having a little bit of personal courage and reaching deep down in order to complete the mission. I personally feel that is the standard..........not the exception.

The problem is that our society is beginning to conflate effort with results. If a woman shows courage and barely passes a male standard then she is treated as a hero. Being personally inspired is all well and good but we should never use individual anecdotes of relative courage that resulted in something that if a male had done it would get a shrug and a yawn or worse- as justification for integrating combat arms. Unfortunately this is tied to politics and thus reason has already left the building.

As one female major who was doing an alleged objective report on CSTs in Afghanistan said, "the decision has already been made to make combat arms coed- we should stop arguing about "if" and start discussing "how"..."...

Razor
05-10-2015, 13:45
If a woman shows courage and barely passes a male standard then she is treated as a hero.

You mean like SGT Leigh Hester earning a Silver Star for following her squad leader's directions in conducting standard 'react to contact' and 'clear a trench line' battle drills after a convoy ambush?

Box
05-10-2015, 15:55
haters

bailaviborita
05-11-2015, 04:54
From the NYT today:

The first openly gay officer at the agency, a computer expert named Tracey Ballard, came out in 1988, when openly gay Americans were barred from holding security clearances. The C.I.A.’s entrenched culture of homophobia didn’t start easing until that rule was repealed in 1995. Ms. Ballard’s admission led to a lengthy investigation and for years made her an outcast.

Today, she leads the agency’s gay, lesbian and transgender group, which is one of the most active employee organizations wi

So even as they struggle to get visibility and assets overseas, they still prioritize hiring a bunch of people to help those who can't or don't want to confirm to norms...

tom kelly
05-11-2015, 10:45
Conversation overheard at high level SOF HQ yesterday:

"Hey, (deputy commander of said HQ), did you hear the rumors that all 8 females recycled Darby?"

Deputy commander, very loudly: "All-right!"

Conversation then turned to the female military veterinarian who has inspired so many by falling her way across the 12 mile finish line...

Looking at the first female to attend- under court order- The Citadel, the way Jessica Lynch was hailed as a hero for getting captured, that vet, the CSTs and other women "warriors" lauded by the media-- we are not only lying to ourselves (recycle rates higher for females - come on...), but we are changing what our society defines as worthy of the moniker "heroic". I think this is just further evidence of the counter culture winning the culture wars. why are so many so hell bent on convincing women - and men- that women are the same as men...

Answer: the universities pumping out tons of unemployable diversity and gender studies folks who know nothing except how to get everyone to be hyper offended and immerse themselves in "gender identity" exercises. SHARPs is now a growth industry- and the only area DoD is allowed to grow in...

2 WORDS "BRUCE JENNER."

Joker
05-11-2015, 16:05
2 WORDS "BRUCE JENNER."

He died years ago. Right about the time when Babs Jenner appeared. :D

bailaviborita
05-12-2015, 04:51
From the NYT this morning:

. EVERAL years ago, West Point cadets initiated first-year students, including young women, by teaching them to sing the following chant while marching: “I wish that all the ladies were holes in the road and I was a dump truck. I’d fill ’em with my load.” Years before that, Air Force Academy cadets sang similar refrains marching to and from training events. One chant described taking a “chain saw” to cut a woman “in two” so that they could keep “the bottom half and give the top to you.” Two years ago, a West Point investigation revealed that a cadet on the rugby team had instructed a teammate to “get your girl on a leash.”

These incidents expose the entrenched sexism that is tolerated at the three military services academies overseen by the Department of Defense — West Point, the Naval Academy and the Air Force Academy. They also help explain repeated reports that the academies have not taken complaints of sexual assault and harassment seriously. The pattern is familiar: Each revelation incites an outcry, the academies announce reforms and the schools’ efforts prove ineffective. What endures are the chants, and the institutional misogyny they reveal.

We are student members of a legal clinic at Yale Law School representing a nonprofit group that aims to eradicate gender discrimination in the military. The Service Women’s Action Network, founded in 2007 by female veterans of the Marine Corps and the New York Army National Guard, has long objected to the way apathetic administrators at the service academies have let students get away with harassment and assault.

Part of the problem is that the military service academies are not subject to the laws that have helped students at civilian schools force their colleges to shape up. Title IX requires almost all American schools that receive federal money to eliminate sex discrimination, including sexual violence. Students can file complaints with the Department of Education to allege discriminatory policies or practices on their campuses, including the mishandling of sexual assault and harassment claims. The Department of Education has opened investigations into more than 100 schools, helping to set off an important national conversation on campus assault.

But Congress exempted the service academies when it passed Title IX in 1972. Perhaps legislators feared imposing Department of Education oversight onto military affairs. Maybe they failed to even consider the possibility of sex discrimination at the academies, which did not admit women until four years later. Whatever the reason, the result of Congress’s omission is that the approximately 2,700 female cadets and midshipmen are deprived of a fundamental protection necessary for their safety and equality.

Students on military campuses can file individual complaints of sex discrimination and misconduct within their academies, which are ultimately decided by various levels within the chain of command. But they have no one to turn to when their academies mishandle their reports or engage in other practices that hurt women. If a cadet or midshipman who reports sexual harassment and discrimination is mistreated by her academy, she can appeal the decision within the academy system and her chain of command, but she can’t appeal the manner in which such decisions are made. Her civilian peers, by contrast, can bring such claims to the Department of Education.

As it is, very few cadets and midshipmen come forward to report sex discrimination, but not because they aren’t experiencing it. According to the Department of Defense’s own surveys and data, 8 percent of women at the military academies were sexually assaulted last year, almost half faced serious sexual harassment and nearly 90 percent experienced other forms of sexism and discrimination. Yet fewer than 5 percent of the roughly 1,400 women who were sexually assaulted or harassed reported what had happened to them within their existing systems.

There is a simple way for President Obama, in his capacity as commander in chief, to put an end to this impunity. To provide cadets and midshipmen with a meaningful way to challenge sex discrimination at their academies, he should issue an executive order modeled on Title IX’s legal protections. This order would, in effect, borrow Title IX’s prohibition against sex discrimination and create a pathway for Title IX-like complaints within the Defense Department. The president should also order the Pentagon’s inspector general to enforce this anti-discrimination rule at the academies.

Over the past decade, public outcry about sexual assault on college campuses and in the military has spurred legal reform. But one group at the intersection of these issues — women at the service academies — are still waiting for meaningful change. Last year, while announcing a new task force on gender-based violence on civilian campuses, Mr. Obama spoke to survivors directly: “I’ve got your back,” he said. Female cadets and midshipmen volunteer to serve our country — the president should have their backs, too.

bailaviborita
05-12-2015, 04:54
Lots of interest groups who will profit with jobs if they can create a worsening "crisis" in the military wrt sexual harassment.

The survey they quote has been ripped full of logic holes and the logic used here is terrible (some terrible jodies were sung by cadets, so obviously they need title IX...?!?)

frostfire
05-12-2015, 15:37
Actually it's worse. We are cutting authorizations for operators and combat soldiers and we are growing sexual harassment specialists... Conventional side and SOF...

aw shucks...I guess I'm part of that growth industry...
No SHARP specialist here, but the US Army did spend $$$ to give second-to-none training in Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiner on me.

While I do see interest group's benefiting from depiction of worsening crisis, the initial expenditure and movement of SHARP to #1 bullet point of every commander's brief (at least at Bragg) are in response to that 2012 Invisible War documentary. We are accountable to the American people, after all. So when American daughters (and sons) are assaulted/battered while placing their faith in the military authority, the armed forces must answer for it. I am biased for sure, but the US Army leads the way miles ahead of AF, Navy, and Marines.

Unfortunately, the 2nd/3rd order effect of that otherwise accountability and responsible ownership has taken a life of its own, and is now advanced by interest group with unbridled enthusiasm.

bailaviborita
05-13-2015, 04:31
Sorry- I don't see us as being "accountable to the American people" on this issue- there has never been a referendum on dropping combat slots and increasing SHARP reps. THAT has come about because of media hype, distortions of survey data. And one - Gillibrand- legislator.

Roguish Lawyer
05-13-2015, 17:46
Hat tip to magician for this link:

http://weaponsman.com/?p=22671

PRB
05-13-2015, 18:11
Hat tip to magician for this link:

http://weaponsman.com/?p=22671

read the replies/comments..an interesting link to an IDF med. study.

PSM
05-13-2015, 18:18
read the replies/comments..an interesting link to an IDF med. study.

The link: IDF Medical Corps in favor of female combat soldiers – but not in contact with the enemy (http://www.jerusalemonline.com/news/politics-and-military/military/idf-medical-corps-in-favor-of-female-combat-soldiers-but-not-in-contact-with-the-enemy-13385%20?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=The+Latest+News+From+Israel&utm_campaign=MiddayNewsletter) :confused:

Pat

CryptKeeper
05-14-2015, 10:33
Dissociation During Intense Military Stress is Related to Subsequent Somatic Symptoms in Women (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2922349/)

The study demonstrates a significant increase in symptoms of dissociation in response to intense military training stress in women, as well as a strong correlation between dissociative symptoms experienced during intense stress and post-stress physical health symptoms.

While female subjects in the general population have a higher incidence of PTSD in response to traumatic stress than male subjects, this sex difference in the incidence of PTSD risk is not well supported in military populations.

This is what practical experience has taught us.

Pre-stress dissociation scores were most similar among women and Special Forces soldiers (1.9 and 1.6 mean pre-CADSS, respectively) and lower for women in comparison to general infantry soldiers (6.0). Average post-stress dissociation scores in women (14.5) fell between Special Forces (9.7) and general infantry (21.3) soldiers. These data thus suggest that the women in the current study represent a self-selected, stress hardy group.

I would imagine that an argument could be made by some unscrupulous politician that such a statement also describes everyone that attends SERE school, namely the infantry, if not the Army in general, and thus, further the validity of these findings.

This does not bode well for the Army, and especially, the Infantry!

Chairborne64
05-28-2015, 20:01
So any update on the status of the recycles? I see the RTB just posted the roster numbers of those who are moving on to the mountains.