Should women be in combat?

Vox

31-05-2025

Women weren't allowed to officially serve in combat jobs when Emelie Vanasse started her ROTC program at George Washington University. Instead, she used her biology degree to serve as a medical officer — but it still bothered Vanasse to be shut out of something just because she was a woman.
'I always felt like, who really has the audacity to tell me that I can't be in combat arms? I'm resilient, I am tough, I can make decisions in stressful environments,' Vanasse said.
By 2015, the Obama administration opened all combat jobs to women, despite a plea from senior leaders in the Marine Corps to keep certain frontline units male only. Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters that, 'We cannot afford to cut ourselves off from half the country's talents and skills.'
The policy change meant that women could attend Ranger school, the training ground for the Army Rangers, an elite special operations infantry unit. When Capt. Kristen Griest and 1st Lt. Shaye Haver became the first women to graduate from the school in 2015, Vanasse taped their photos to her desk and swore she would be next, no matter what it took. She went on to become one of the first women to serve as an Army infantry officer and graduated from Ranger school in 2017.
After the Pentagon integrated women into combat jobs, the services developed specific fitness standards for jobs like infantry and armor with equal standards for men and women. Special operations and other highly specialized units require additional qualification courses that are also gender-neutral. To continue past the first day of Ranger school, candidates must pass the Ranger Physical Fitness test, for which there is only one standard. Only the semi-annual fitness tests that service members take, which vary by branch, are scaled for age and gender.
Despite that, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has continued to insist that the standards were lowered for combat roles. In a podcast interview in November, Hegseth said, 'We've changed the standards in putting [women in combat], which means you've changed the capability of that unit.' (Despite Hegseth's remark, many women worked alongside male infantry units in Iraq and Afghanistan, facing the same dangerous conditions.)
In the same interview, Hegseth said that he didn't believe women should serve in combat roles.
In March, Hegseth ordered the military services to make the basic fitness standards for all combat jobs gender-neutral. The Army is the first service to comply: Beginning June 1, most combat specialties will require women to meet the male standard for basic physical fitness, something most women serving in active-duty combat roles are already able to do.
Vanasse told Noel King on Today, Explained what it was like to attend Ranger School at a time when some men didn't want to see a woman in the ranks.
What is Ranger School?
I went to Ranger School on January 1, 2017. I woke up at 3 am that day in Fort Benning, Georgia, shaved my head, a quarter-inch all the way around, just like the men. Took my last hot shower, choked down some French toast, and then I drove to Camp Rogers, and I remember being very acutely aware of the pain that the school would inflict, both physically and mentally. I was also very aware that there was kind of half of this population of objective graders that just kind of hated my guts for even showing up.
They hated you for showing up because you're a woman?
Back in 2016 and 2017, it was so new to have women in Ranger School. I used to think, I don't have to just be good, I have to be lucky. I have to get a grader who is willing to let a woman pass.
I had dark times at that school. I tasted real failure. I sat under a poncho in torrential rain and I shivered so hard my whole body cramped. I put on a ruck that weighed 130 pounds and I crawled up a mountain on my hands and knees. I hallucinated a donut shop in the middle of the Appalachian Mountains and I cried one morning when someone told me I had to get out of my sleeping bag.
But I think all of those experiences are quintessential Ranger School experiences. They're what everyone goes through there. And I think the point of the school is that failure, that suffering, it's not inherently bad, right? In a way, I like to think Ranger School was the most simplistic form of gender integration that ever could have happened because if I was contributing to the team, there was no individual out there that really had the luxury of disliking or excluding me.
When you wanted to give up, what did you tell yourself? What was going through your head?
I don't think I ever considered quitting Ranger School. I just knew that it was something that I could get through and had the confidence to continue. I had a thought going in of What could be so bad that would make me quit? and the answer that I found throughout the school was, Nothing.
Did you ever feel like they had lowered the standards for you compared to the men who were alongside you?
No. Never. I did the same thing that the men did. I did the same Ranger physical fitness test that all the men took. I ran five miles in 40 minutes. I did 49 pushups, 59 situps, six pullups. I rucked 12 miles in three hours with a 45-pound ruck. I climbed the same mountains. I carried the same stuff. I carried the same exact packing list they did, plus 250 tampons for some reason. At no point were the standards lowered for me.
Whose idea was it for you to carry 250 tampons?
It was not mine! It was a misguided effort to have everyone very prepared for the first women coming through Ranger School.
In Ranger School, there's only one standard for the fitness test. Everybody has to meet it, and that allows you to get out of Ranger School and say, 'Look, fellas, I took the same test as the men and I passed.'
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is saying that Army combat jobs should only have one standard of fitness for both men and women. And there's part of me that thinks: Doesn't that allow the women who meet the standards to be like, look, We met the same standards as the men. Nothing suspicious here, guys.
I think gender-neutral standards for combat arms are very important. It should not be discounted how important physical fitness is for combat arms. I think there's nuance in determining what is a standard that is useful for combat arms, right? But it's an important thing. And there have been gender-neutral standards for combat arms.
In things like Infantry Basic Officer Leader Course, which is the initial basic training for officers going into the infantry, there are gender-neutral standards that you have to meet: You have to run five miles in 40 minutes, you have to do a 12-mile ruck. All of those standards have remained the same. Pete Hegseth is specifically referring to the Army Combat Physical Fitness test, and to a certain extent I agree, it should be gender-neutral for combat arms. But I think there's nuance in determining what exactly combat arms entails physically.
Secretary Hegseth has a lot to say about women, and sometimes he says it directly and sometimes he alludes to it. What he often does is he talks about lethality as something that is critically important for the military. He says the Army in particular needs more of it, but he never really defines what he means by lethality. What is the definition as you understand it?
There's a component of lethality that is physical fitness and it should not be discounted. But lethality extends far beyond that, right? It's tactical skills, it's decision-making, it's leadership, it's grit, it's the ability to build trust and instill purpose and a group of people. It's how quick a fire team in my platoon can react to contact. How well my SAW [Squad Automatic Weapon] gunner can shoot, how quickly I can employ and integrate combat assets, how fast I can maneuver a squad. All of those things take physical fitness, but they certainly take more than just physical fitness. There's more to lethality than just how fast you can run and how many pushups you can do.
To an average civilian like myself, I hear lethality and I think of the dictionary definition, the ability to kill. Does this definition of lethality involve the ability, physically and emotionally and psychologically, to kill another person?
Absolutely.
And so when Secretary Hegseth casts doubt on the ability of women to be as lethal as men, do you think there's some stuff baked in there that maybe gets to his idea of what women are willing and able to do?
Yes, possibly. I think the [secretary's] message is pretty clear. According to him, the women in combat arms achieved success because the standards were lowered for them. We were never accommodated and the standards were never lowered.
What's your response, then, to hearing the Secretary of Defense say women don't belong in combat?
It makes me irate, to be honest. Like, it's just a complete discounting of all of the accomplishments of the women that came before us.
Do you think that if Secretary Hegseth could take a look at what you did in Ranger School, and he could hear from you that there were no second chances, there were no excuses, there was no babying, the men didn't treat you nicer just because you were a woman, do you think he'd change his mind about women serving in combat?
I'd like to think he would, but I've met plenty of people whose minds couldn't be changed by reality. I'd love it if he went to Ranger School. He has a lot of opinions about Ranger School for someone who does not have his Ranger tab.
What is a Ranger tab, for civilians?
A Ranger tab is what you receive upon graduating Ranger School, which means you have passed all three phases and you are now Ranger-qualified in the military.
You have that. And the Secretary of Defense doesn't.