The US Army is considering reversing gender neutral physical tests because women are overwhelmingly failing to keep up with their male counterparts. The results showed that an overwhelming majority of the women failed to clear the tests while almost 90% of the men managed to pass them.
“Research showed that the Army Combat Fitness Test [ACFT], which is the same for male and female soldiers, was leading to lower results for women with a knock-on effect for promotions,” The Telegraph said in its report. “An early Pentagon study showed that women were failing the ACFT at a rate of 65 per cent, while only 10 percent of men did.”
The report stated further, “In the ACFT there are six events – the maximum deadlift, a standing power throw, hand-release push-ups, a sprint, drag and carry, leg tuck, and a two-mile run. To pass the test those taking it must score at least 360 points out of a possible 600, and those who achieve higher scores are more likely to be promoted. However, average sores for women so far are said to have been 100 points lower.”
A report last year said that 54% of women failed the tests while the same was only 7% for men. Captain Kristen Griest, the US Army’s first female infantry officer, said that lowering the standards would hurt the Army and women. She said that scoring based on gender would “have both immediate and insidious impacts on combat effectiveness, as well as on women’s credibility and potential.”
“The entire purpose of creating a gender-neutral test was to acknowledge the reality that each job has objective physical standards to which all soldiers should be held, regardless of gender,” she wrote last month.
“The intent was not to ensure that women and men will have an equal likelihood of meeting those standards. Rather, it is incumbent upon women who volunteer for the combat arms profession to ensure they are fully capable and qualified for it. To not require women to meet equal standards in combat arms will not only undermine their credibility, but also place those women, their teammates, and the mission at risk.”
