Again, by reading what is provided you would make a more informed statement. The rigors and nature of the test are kept from the candidates in advance as part of the mental demand structure. In such a situation it is the responsibility of the instructor to insure that instruction or preparation is sufficient that if the prep is mastered the exam can be mastered. What she faced was the equivalent of training for a 4000 meter swim then going to the pool and told the race would be 8000 meters, surprise. The men weren't told it was an 8000 meter swim in advance, but they were trained to swim 8000 meters during their training.
It is clear here the inadequacy of preparation is the fault of the instructor not the student especially since there was inequality in the nature of preparation presented to different students.
As indicated, knowing what to expect, she would fully prepare herself for the challenge if given a second chance. I'm sure many men would say the same. The difference is the man gets the second chance.
I read what was provided. If you know more about it than that, good. I’m only commenting on the information in that piece.
Frankly, I don’t give that much of a damn anymore anyway. This is barely significant anyway to the reality of what is being done to the military in total.
If the OCS instructor holds her to a higher standard than specified by regulations in order to help her achieve her goal, the OCS instructor will be subject to severe discipline. A single complaint of discrimination, upheld by the investigative process (which is required to see exceeding the regulations as a violation) will end the career of the instructor.
I agree the lack of a second chance, when seen in light of the male regs, is wrong. But to blame OCS, which enforces standards enshrined in the regulations, is poppycock. Further, to make a public outcry when the proper channels are inside the chain of command is disgraceful.
To be rewarded for doing so is further disgrace on the Corps.