Combat Arms Physical Requirements Review Ordered
SECDEF
“For far too long, we allowed standards to slip, with different standards for men and women in combat arms. That’s not acceptable.”
SECDEF Hegseth
Hegseth orders review of physical standards for military combat roles
By Leo Shane III
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday ordered a 60-day review of military combat arms standards to ensure that exceptions are not being made for female troops to assume the physically demanding roles.
The review follows past concerns from Hegseth that military readiness has diminished since 2016, when combat roles were first opened to women. Roughly 4,800 women serve in Army infantry, armor and artillery jobs, according to data provided by the Defense Department late last year.
Although military leaders have testified that standards have not been lowered for entry into those combat posts, conservative groups have insisted that women are being subjected to lower physical fitness requirements than their male counterparts, and they demanded changes in the military’s approach.
The memo recognizes differences between combat arms occupations and non-combat roles, then further specifies ground combat, special, and specialized operations categories. These military sub-specialties require heightened entry-level and sustained physical fitness, and the demonstrated ability to accomplish unique and demanding tasks in hostile and often extreme environments, over extended periods.
Implementation of the new standards will happen over the next six months. Since the Perfumed PrinceX have testified existing standards have not been lowered, there should be no problem with the implementation of the new real-world physical requirements right?
Riiiight.
Thanks to our very own OAM for the head’s up.
Category: Big Pentagon, Guest Link, None, Reality Check
Nice post, I read the article earlier in this mornings Mil Times Early Bird Brief.
I remember a number years ago when the Army Physical fitness standards were lowered. If I remember, each requirement was first performed by a Woman and the men had to match the Womens performance. I forgot to add my above comment that this mornings Early Bird Brief article covered a little more in the article.
From “101 Reasons Why Captains are Quitting the Army” e-mail in 1999… “My 27 year old wife and 52 year old father have the same APFT performance standards.”
Good! I have no issues with someone doing a job that they are physically, mentally, and emotionally qualified to do. No doubt that there are women who can compete toe to toe with some men, but for the most part, sorry…not sorry, most women cannot. If they could, the Mythical Tribe of Amazon Women Warriors would be ruling the Earth right now.
“Tame” Fed.gov judge filing an injunction against this in 5.4.3.2..
About God Damn time!
I’m so old, I got to watch the ACFT devolve from “one standard, no waivers” physical fitness test to a essentially an APFT with extra steps and equipment.
Honorable mention goes to the untold amount of $$$ spent outfitting every company+ in the entire United States Army with ACFT equipment.
I’d love to be the disabled Native American black lesbian from a small town in the ghetto who won THAT contract!
Even better: you had a bunch of companies jump up to fill the sudden need for ACFT kits. A lot of units used their own funds to buy the fully equipped deployable CONEX units and get ahead of the game, so to speak. Of course, the Army eventually settled on “approved” ACFT equipment from a handful of contractors, leaving many of these units with expensive exercise equipment that they weren’t allowed to use for record ACFTs. In a way, it’s not unlike the money spent to get NCOs and officers Crossfit certified, not to mention building Crossfit gyms across the world, despite that program never being officially adopted. I still blame hernia #2 on Crossfit. I’d had a repair done in 2010, then moved from brigade S3 down to a Squad leader job in 3-15 IN. My platoon leadership had the smart idea to do the “Murph” (1-mile run, 100 pullups, 200 pushups, 300 air squats, followed by another 1-mile run, ideally in body armor or weighted vests) every Wednesday. I’m the sort that has to build up the strength and endurance for pullups, so Week 1 I knocked out only a few before needing assistance. Week 2 saw me barely getting one, then having to push in my guts with every rep and after every few pushups. This was the same brigade that handed out AAMs for the “volunteers” that converted the gym on FOB Shank into an unsanctioned Crossfit gym. The officers were all about that life, so it was easy getting the BSTB commander to sign off.
The Army spent the entire GWOT period going back and forth on APFT/ACFT/PT/PRT/etc. My Drill Sergeants had us doing some of what would become PRT in 2001-2002. The least I can say about that program is that the only equipment required were pullup bars for the Climbing Drills. PEO Soldier spent a fair amount to build an ACFT testing area outside of their HQ. The contractors were happy, at least, as were the officers who got the good OER bullets.
Hey, somebody got an good OER bullet out of that! /sarc
I still look back in wonder and awe at our ability to run and exercise wearing boots and long pants. Truly those bygone days were an age of iron men.
Pull every Ranger Tab from every female.
But all of those were rightfully earned by women who passed the exact same demanding standards as their male counterparts… and who were in no way protected by Big Army as untouchable “Firsts”.
How many fellow Ranger candidates and graduates, not to mention instructors, reported that the female candidates were granted extra privileges (additional sleep, etc.) that no other Ranger candidate receives? This is hearsay, and I’ve never been able to find anything at all to corroborate it, but the cynic in me asks, “why should I find anything?”. A classmate in my SLC class was a 4th RTB (Darby Phase) Ranger Instructor and mentioned that one of the first two female graduates had gotten two DUIs while stationed at Benning. I saw here once, when I was scouting out a training area as a Drill Sergeant. I guess I can just attribute it to the rumor mill without substantiation.
The first two to receive the tab had over a month of pre-Ranger training, had multiple recycles (in my day you got only one), and they brought out a one star to grade them on their patrol leading performance, to make sure they passed. In my class, we had two Navy SEALs that didn’t get the tab because they didn’t pass over 50% of their leader performances. They didn’t get any second chances.
And not to mention pre-pre-pre training at the unit level.
And a lot of missed command time, I might add.
I guess it’s like the young buck Sergeant sporting Airborne, Air Assault, Pathfinder, Ranger, and an EIB. A lot of training and a pretty uniform, but that Specialist who filled his shoes while he was gone is a much more experienced Team Leader.
female Marine was released from the infantry due to her inability to carry the base plate for 81mm mortars, a requirement for her role, despite her successful completion of infantry training.
Here’s a more detailed explanation:
This one?
Remedios Cruz, female infantry Marine, booted for fraternization: ‘I really want to move on’ – Washington Times
“Regardless of the outcome of this case, Corporal Cruz has been a courageous pioneer for women in the military and she has earned a place in Marine Corps history,”
Negative. Her “Aw Shit” erased every “Attagirl” she earned. What’s the female equivalent of “dickstepping”?
“…female equivalent of “dickstepping”?”
Clit crunching? Clit crushing?
Ah, “the female lieutenant problem” folk called it… hormones and the small number of male LTs made them, just made them, hook up with SPCs and SGTs they shouldn’t. (It happened with guys too– keep yer hands off SPC Hottie, even if she comes up to you, ’cause that’s trouble.) The greater visibility and individual lack of zipper control (a gender-neutral thing) was actually the problem. Don’t matter whether you’re a boy or girl, keep it in your pants.
In my 24 years of active duty service, I only saw 2 instances of a female leader banging a subordinate. Both of them LT’s, both repeat offenders. Different spanks, though, from different battalions. 1 exited the Army as a 1LT, the other was a MAJ last time I looked.
The proof of lowered standards would be to review every unit’s “manning” rosters and see where the women are assigned. I’ve got a big bill on the table which says they’ll find an inordinate amount of them are drivers, S3 shop, training rooms, etc., and not on the line. Of those on the line, they are not machine gunners, RTOs, Javelin gunners, or anyone who is carrying the heavier loads.
I never served in infantry, and I still know enough about it that I ain’t taking that bet.
When you are in a real shooting conflict with live ammo against foes that shoot back, you figure out how to bench your weakest links. Otherwise, you will be signing more of those next of kin letters for your KIA’s. Trust me, that is not a pleasant task for an infantry rifle company commander.
And that is the real point of this exercise. Equity/equality/whatever goes in the crapper when the bullets fly. Whatever physical standards are acceptable in CS/CSS will not work in CA. I only had one female Soldier that struggled physically in her MOS and that was due to her being 5’2″. Total PT studette, hard worker, all around good troop. Can’t blame it on her sex, a 5’2″ male would’ve struggled.
And if she tried to be an “infantrywoman,” she could not hump a loaded ruck, rifle, ammo, and 35 pounds of body armor up a steep mountain trail. I was 24, 6’1″, 175 pounds, fit from over a year in Vietnam as a rifle company commander, and I had trouble carrying my 116 pounds of battle rattle in I Corps’ jungle covered mountains. Women do not have the musculoskeletal strength to endure those kinds of loads. Even the strongest will eventually be out with injuries. There is a reason there are no NFL female football leagues or coed teams.
I won’t bother with all the sociological conundrums of having a couple of women in your infantry squad in combat.
“I won’t bother with all the sociological conundrums”
I think we would agree that those are actually more important than the physical limitations.
That’s because we’re all mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging, sexist neanderthals.
Well, I do not drag my knuckles!
Evolution, my friend, is only superficial. Deep down inside we are all still animals. That is why we share about 98% of our DNA with apes. You have probably heard the aphorism that civilization is only a thin veneer over our baser instincts. True, dat. Especially when you live in a hole in the ground, wipe your butt with leaves, and have your clothes literally fall apart from filthiness.
We had one guy in my company who had a bad habit of falling asleep when the company stopped humping for more than a minute. As you no doubt know, this causes a large and unwanted separation to occur as the part of the company in front of him marches off. The CO finally assigned him to permanent KP in the rear—a prized assignment. The guy complained and wanted to go back out in the field. Also had an O2 Platoon leader with similar military talents. He got bounced, after an intermediate step or two, all the way back to Saigon.
It still amazes me how tolerant and understanding front line troops are when those weak links get sought after safe and comfy assignments ahead of more deserving soldiers.
Fixing a problem they already fixed years ago.
Back during the reign of 45 all the PT tests for combat arms were revamped and the combat arms branches each came up with their own spin and all of them already have their own PT test that goes above and beyond the ACFT. CS and CSS just use the ACFT.
So #2 son who is getting ready to pin on E6 after five short years of service, is officially in a combat arms MOS, Cyber Warfare. Even their test is a little bit more, not even sure why, but well within the capabilities of just about anyone that is physically fit, male or female. An infantry test is going to be a bit tougher. The US Army website has all the different tests for each of the combat arms branches.
And this is just the start… thanks to Democrats we’re back to here (1979) again and need to get better: