Many people praised the announcement that two women graduated from Ranger School in 2015 because they are advocates for women in combat or because they’ve accepted the arguments that women should be in combat positions. But others praised the announcement because they think no one can stop the DOD from eventually putting women into combat positions even as they fear that standards will be lowered in order to achieve this. Therefore, they praised two women passing Ranger School under (supposedly) unchanged standards as way of attempting to say that it proves that standards don’t need to be lowered. The military blog, This Ain’t Hell, hinted at this way of thinking earlier this year.
I offer my congratulations. Having worked with women in the Army as a TAC NCO at ROTC Advanced Camp, I knew that there are women out there tough enough and driven to successfully complete anything that the Army can throw at them. So, this illustrates well that the standards are attainable for women, the standards aren’t skewed against women, so the Army doesn’t need to change the standard.
This is a particularly interesting aspect to note and analyze in light of the allegations that the Army changed standards in order to pass women through Ranger School. In other words, the fact that there are a significant amount of people within the armed forces who believe that women in combat is an inevitability even as they think they can prevent standards from being lowered raises the possibility that the Army lowered standards in order to graduate women from Ranger School so they later could say, “Women graduated under the same standards as men, which proves we don’t have to lower standards.”