First Group of Female Soldiers Fail to Pass Phase One of Army Ranger School

Submitted by Mastodon on Fri, 2015-05-08 22:37

Story here. Excerpt:

'All eight female soldiers participating in the first co-ed class of U.S. Army Ranger School failed to advance to the second phase of the grueling infantry course.

On the male side, 115 male students met the requirement to begin the Mountain Phase of Ranger School in Dahlonega, Ga., on Saturday, May 9, according to a Fort Benning press release.

The eight female candidates, along with 101 male candidates, will be recycled to repeat the Darby Phase of Ranger School.

Approximately 35 male Ranger students failed to meet the standards of Ranger School and will not be recycled, the press release said.

"They will return to their units having learned a great deal about themselves and small unit tactics, patrolling, leadership, and team work," according to the release.

No changes have been made to the deliberate evaluation process used to determine which students are dropped, recycled or allowed to move forward to the next phase, the release states.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Can't speak for others, but to see female soldiers fail at these attempts brings me no joy. I agree that no standards ought to be changed merely to allow women to pass the various tests or challenges. I have no problem however with targeted or higher-standard training for people of either sex. For example, let's say I have a weak area of physical strength or skill such as pull-ups. Targeted training or higher-standard would have me setting my sites above the required standard. If I was required to finish 30 full pull-ups within 2 minutes, I would instead train to meet that standard but with a 20-lb. weight pack on. I would strive to meet that standard then when the day came to do the pull-ups, I would exceed it, maybe completing 40-50 in 2 mins. Or I would simply strive to complete 40 pull-ups in 2 mins. and if I succeeded, again I would blow away the competition, or so I'd hope, assuming they did not like myself train *past* the goal.

Not to say these women are not already doing that. If so, and if they nonetheless are not passing the tests, it's not a good thing (well, from the standpoint of their aspirations; from the standpoint of their personal fate, it may well be good) for them personally. After all, they are ready to risk life and limb like their male comrades, and if they really want to, they ought to be allowed to-- but only if they can meet the necessary standards, since failing to do so places their comrades at greater and avoidable risk, as well as themselves. One incapable of pulling herself literally out of a hole before a grenade thrown into the bottom of it explodes dies an avoidable death. Had she not been passed into the Rangers then deployed into combat mostly b/c she was female, she would have been able to serve in another capacity alive rather than die in the combatant capacity, perhaps without bringing victory any closer. Now *that* is tragic. And that's why I am 100% against messing with the standards re admitting anyone into combat roles, male or female.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sun, 2015-05-10 22:09