Ranger school was something we joked about my first summer attending cadet basic training. The guys would say, “You’re going to be the first female ranger” – as a joke. Well, of course. We all knew that there was no way women were ever going to Ranger school. When I saw a ranger tab (a decoration that shows the completion of a military school and is worn on the left sleeve of the Army Combat Uniform), I felt automatic respect for the person wearing it. He went through a grueling 60 days of physical and mental stress. Pushing himself to the limit. According to the Ranger Training Brigade, the overall graduation rate for the past 6 years has been 50.13%. That means 1 out of every 2 people do not even make it through, and they’re supposed to be some of the top soldiers in the infantry. The Rangers that I have had the privilege of meeting during my short time in the Army have all been incredible people. Now, however, many are talking about ditching their ranger tabs the moment the first women enter Ranger school in 2013.
I’m torn about this decision to open Ranger school to women. On one hand, I firmly believe that women should be allowed to do anything they choose. If they can meet and uphold all of the same standards as men then they should be able to go. This means scoring well on the male Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The current minimum push-up standard for males ages 17-21 is 42 push-ups, which is currently the female maximum. The 2-mile run is also similar. The male minimum is 15:54 while the female maximum is 15:36. The only thing that both the male and female APFT have in common is the sit-up rate. For Ranger school you also need to be able to run 5 miles in 40 minutes, and do the 6 pull-ups required to pass the Ranger Physical Fitness Test. Additionally, women need to be able to carry the same weight as the men. If someone goes down, a woman would need to be just as capable at getting him to safety as any other guy.
Rangers are known as the best of the best. They focus on light infantry tactics – which brings up another point. Women are currently not allowed to go combat arms, which includes infantry and armor. So why send females to Ranger School when they will never use the majority of the things they are taught? Possibly for the same reason other soldiers go to Ranger school who are not prepping for the infantry. Ranger School is one of the world’s premier leadership schools. Women may not be allowed in the infantry, but they still lead in high stress environments, and going through Ranger school could help them save someone’s life.
Take for instance Cadet Field Training at West Point. It is a 27-day course that cadets are required to complete their second summer at West Point. We spent close to 20 days on light infantry related tactics, 1 day on the field artillery branch, and 1 day on the engineers branch. Women have to complete all the same training as men even though we are not allowed to enter the infantry. In all honesty it really does not matter that we cannot enter the infantry, because it is more about developing our leadership skills and pushing ourselves under stressful situations. Situations that are mentally and physically straining in the present make soldiers capable of making decisions when it matters later. Or maybe admitting women into Ranger school may be the ticket that finally gets women into the infantry. Once women prove that they can survive Ranger school they may prove that they have what it takes to contribute on the frontlines.
There is talk about how standards will be lowered when women enter. Retired Colonel Longgrear said in an article that “a women can not make it through Ranger school unless we lower the standards.” Admitting women may change Ranger School. If there is interest want to change the standards then they might as well change the name. Also, when the first group goes through, will a certain amount be guaranteed to graduate? Half of the men already fail out, so it is possible that even more women would fail. If they start guaranteeing graduation then it’s almost as if they are just handing out Ranger tabs. These are a few of the things that many people are torn about.
If a woman can go through Ranger school with the exact same standards, then by all means let her be a Ranger. If standards start to change, then so does the meaning of being a Ranger.
Katlin VanWye is a cadet at West Point. She is originally from a small dairy farm in Ashley, Indiana who is currently interning at the Service Women’s Action Network.
Thanks Katy for the articulate and reasoned article. It helped me think through some ideas I hadn’t considered. From 1986-88 I was an infantryman at the 3/75 Ranger Regiment and I graduated from Ranger School in February of 1987. I served again in the Ranger Regiment from 2005-07 and then became cadre at the Ranger Training Brigade [i.e., Ranger School] in 2008. I’ve given my credentials in order to say (with a fair amount of authority) that the comment by Robyn Ryan dated August 8, 2012 shows that, unlike the author of the article, she has a somewhat naive concept of Ranger training. First, Ranger school is not a “competition” between students. In fact, if anything, the only person a Ranger student is competing against during the course is himself. So Ms. Ryan’s comment about the 1980s “‘fat boy’ purge which decimated the ranks of female officers and enlisted”…and, therefore…”once all the women capable of physically competing with men were purged, the services claimed women weren’t capable of competing with men physically” is nonsense and entirely irrelevant to the present discussion. Furthermore, Ms. Ryan’s question asking whether or not the current upper-body physical standards for Ranger students are really necessary, is like asking whether or not a person needs to have upper body strength in order to become an Olympic gymnast. Again, her argument displays a naïveté that is unhelpful to the discussion. Finally, Ms. Ryan’s example of picking up a chair while bent over with one’s forehead touching the wall may, perhaps, have been relevant to the discussion if picking up a chair in that manner was one of the physical standards for Ranger students currently set forth by the Ranger Training Brigade. Unfortunately, Ms. Ryan’s seems to have a chip on her shoulder. Her argument is obviously based on sentiment and not fact, and, therefore, not only was her post unconvincing, but it actually undermined the arguments of those women who actually have a reason for wanting women to attend Ranger School.
Cadet VanWye, my hat’s off to you, and I am glad that our young generation of leaders is able to think rationally and always keep the Army mission at the forefront of everything you do.
My opinion: keep the current standard, send only highly qualified young women.
Ranger School is about leadership in high stress / near combat conditions. You learn about yourself; what your physical and mental limits are in training so you can apply those lessons in combat. Any good leader desires to be tested in that way prior to combat. Your mind and body do not respond the way you want them to when you are starved, exhausted, and in pain. And that is what Ranger school is designed to do. Test you under those conditions. That is why the entry standards and graduation standards are high. It is a very difficult test that many cannot pass.
Advice: The PT minimum is a joke. If you struggle to meet the minimum you will never meet the current standard at Ranger School. As a Commander, I would never send a young soldier to Ranger School who simply met the minimum standard. Why? Because the minimum may get you in the door but you will be walking out in short order. Any leader needs to be surpassing the standard if not maxing it in all categories. You need to be in your best shape of your life..period! What the Army should be doing is finding the most qualified women. Conduct rigorous tryouts for young women to select the top 5 or 10 for the first Ranger class. They’re out there, find them! Train them in all the basic tasks required at Ranger school and do not enroll them until they are ready. Send in the first team and see how they do. We owe that our service women, nothing more. A fighting chance! You will lose weight, muscle and any fat you once carried (I lost 30 lbs.) Your body literally starts to fall apart. I am concerned about what that may do to a women’s body in the long term.
If the young women go and meet the current standards I will be proud to call them Ranger. If the Army lowers the standard, well I won’t be happy!
Rob Ryan you know nothing of what you are talking about, Ranger school is not summer camp. Do some research, watch surviving the cut before asking asinine questions.
As an old, retired Army guy, what I am concerned about is the information that has leaked about what has been driven down to Ranger School from levels above reality (aka the 5 sided nut-house): The the order (yes, order) is that female students WILL pass (other than medical drops) and there will be personal representatives of the Chief of Staff and Sergeant-major of the Army on hand to supervise the process as well as close civilian oversight by politicians to ensure that this happens. The first women students will arrive NLT class 5/13.
So no one misinterprets my post above, as long as women students have to pass the MALE PT test and meet EXACTLY every other standard that the male students meet, EXACTLY the way the male students meet them, I have no problem with women going to Ranger School. The problem is that we all know that that is not what is going to happen.
Off the top of my head:
Is the Ranger course designed to provide the right skill set for the mission, or is it designed as a muscle camp? How do Ranger skills apply to the modern battlefield?
It is physically demanding, but does it rely on upper body strength rather than practical skills? The rope crawl picture could be at summer camp.
The ‘could a woman carry a man?’ question assumes an isolated small woman, a large man and both are too dumb to strip off excess equipment. It is also an ‘upper body strength as preferred attribute’ problem.
In the 1980s, the services went through a ‘fat boy’ purge which decimated the ranks of female officers and enlisted. Women who didn’t conform to a specific waist to hip formula were bounced. Not that they weren’t excellent performers, or were obese – they just didn’t look feminine enough.
Once all the women capable of physically competing with men were purged, the services claimed women weren’t capable of competing with men physically. Of course, all the competitions depended on upper body strength.
Try this one: Place a chair or stool about 4 inches from a wall. Bend over, with your head touching the wall. Pick up the chair. Stand up.
Males can’t do it. Their hips won’t work that way.
One standard, one tab. But make sure the standards are useful, practical and meet the requirements of the mission.
Always challenge conventional wisdom.