84% of Women Fail New Army Combat Fitness Test

[Common]

Standards should never be lowered to allow those that cant make the grade be admitted. Wherever that was done the agency was the worse for it. Standards are created for a reason, to assure that the people hired can do the job and meet the physical level and challenges to actually accomplish it.
You are playing with peoples lives and putting them at risk, placing people that cant do the job by lowering standards. The military, police, fire, need men and women that can MEET THE STANDARDS not meet reduced standards.The army has finally woke up.




– In a new report, the Center for Military Readiness says that 84% of women fail the New Army Combat Fitness Test and that “all military officials should drop the ‘gender diversity’ agenda and put mission readiness and ‘combat lethality’ first.”
“It makes no sense for recruiters to devote more time and money recruiting ‘gender diverse’ trainees who are more likely to be injured, less likely to want infantry assignments, and less likely to remain through basic training or physically-demanding combat arms assignments for twenty years or more,” states the CMR report.



https://www.cnsnews.com/article/wash...t-fitness-test

[Ransom]

Mission readiness and combat lethality in front of making everyone feel equal and not hurting feelings?

Make our combat soldiers less likely to be injured and more capable concerning physically-demanding assignment?

What concepts.

[midcan5]

Been there done that and guess what, many men do too. But your point is the usual baloney from a misogynist. Grow up, your mom went through some tough times having you, could you do same? LOL

"The misogyny that shapes every aspect of our civilization is the institutionalized form of male fear and hatred of what they have denied and therefore cannot know, cannot share: that wild country, the being of women." Ursula K. Le Guin

"Feminism is hated because women are hated. Anti-feminism is a direct expression of misogyny; it is the political defense of women hating." Andrea Dworkin

[donttread]

Standards should never be lowered to allow those that cant make the grade be admitted. Wherever that was done the agency was the worse for it. Standards are created for a reason, to assure that the people hired can do the job and meet the physical level and challenges to actually accomplish it.
You are playing with peoples lives and putting them at risk, placing people that cant do the job by lowering standards. The military, police, fire, need men and women that can MEET THE STANDARDS not meet reduced standards.The army has finally woke up.




– In a new report, the Center for Military Readiness says that 84% of women fail the New Army Combat Fitness Test and that “all military officials should drop the ‘gender diversity’ agenda and put mission readiness and ‘combat lethality’ first.”
“It makes no sense for recruiters to devote more time and money recruiting ‘gender diverse’ trainees who are more likely to be injured, less likely to want infantry assignments, and less likely to remain through basic training or physically-demanding combat arms assignments for twenty years or more,” states the CMR report.



https://www.cnsnews.com/article/wash...t-fitness-test

I agree as long as the standards make sense. I question things though. Like I doubt too many male fireman could carry my ass to safety, but some people can be carried out and you need a person that can do that. On the other hand you can't get ridiculous about it and only hire weight lifters and old school farmers ( the ones that tossed those bails of hey)
As for the military I do wonder in this age how much really comes down to strength in most units. If all our killer tech hasn't limited hand to hand fighting than what's the point?
I can remember Peter telling me that "light infantry" has to move with 160 lbs. of equipment. Our 140 lb. grandfathers and 160 lb fathers fought wars without ever having been able to move their own weight long distances. So I didn't and don't understand why we need to move that much today.
If the standards apply to the soldiers real every day life than I am all for them. But I also doubt the government's ability to put together such a realistic test.

[Ransom]

Remember it was metallurgy and gunpowder that was the first technology to limit hand to hand fighting. Hand to hand combat known to every conflict known to mankind. I expect many members here unaware of that.

[Peter1469]

I agree as long as the standards make sense. I question things though. Like I doubt too many male fireman could carry my ass to safety, but some people can be carried out and you need a person that can do that. On the other hand you can't get ridiculous about it and only hire weight lifters and old school farmers ( the ones that tossed those bails of hey)

Regarding standards for fitness, they should be set by experts and not politicians.

As for the military I do wonder in this age how much really comes down to strength in most units. If all our killer tech hasn't limited hand to hand fighting than what's the point?
I can remember Peter telling me that "light infantry" has to move with 160 lbs. of equipment. Our 140 lb. grandfathers and 160 lb fathers fought wars without ever having been able to move their own weight long distances. So I didn't and don't understand why we need to move that much today.

Because light infantry units (airborne and air assault included) have to carry everything they need for 2-3 weeks. I spend most of my infantry days in airborne and air assault units- our missions would be behind enemy lines, so resupply was not guaranteed in the short term.

If the standards apply to the soldiers real every day life than I am all for them. But I also doubt the government's ability to put together such a realistic test.

[Peter1469]

Remember it was metallurgy and gunpowder that was the first technology to limit hand to hand fighting. Hand to hand combat known to every conflict known to mankind. I expect many members here unaware of that.

In Desert Storm there was very little hand-to-hand combat. It was a conventional force on force battle.

In the current wars there has been a lot of hand-to-hand, to include a Canadian light infantry unit conducted a bayonet charge against a Taliban position. Because much of the fighting is urban warfare, there are countless instances where our troops had to engage in hand-to-hand combat. Remember Dakota Meyer? He was awarded the MoH. He killed a lot of Afghans in that battle. One of them jumped him after playing dead and almost got the best of Meyer. But Meyer used his combatatives training turned the tables on the enemy. He ended up using a rock to crush his skull.

This is a 28 minute video interview by Joe Rogan of Meyer. I rarely watch podcasts this long, but this one is worth it.

[silvereyes]

Wait. Having never served in the armed forces I guess I never wondered if training and stuff was gender based at certain levels. I understand the weight-carryng part would be different but what other things are gender specific? Man oh man, I'm going to get really raked over the coals for this, I'm sure.

[Peter1469]

Wait. Having never served in the armed forces I guess I never wondered if training and stuff was gender based at certain levels. I understand the weight-carryng part would be different but what other things are gender specific? Man oh man, I'm going to get really raked over the coals for this, I'm sure.

The current physical fitness test has separate standards for male and female, and has age categories. Regarding age, the toughest standards are around 28-32 yrs. The people who set that standard figured if you are trying to stay in shape, those will be your peak years. But under that test a female can max the female standard for push ups. If a male match her number of push ups he would fail the test. I have posted the Army PT test score card many times.

The new test is one standard for all. No difference for sex or age. I think it is ultimately going to fail because the Army can't afford to administratively discharge its older more experienced Soldiers and 86% of the women in the Army. Also the new test will gut the Reserves and National Guard.

[silvereyes]

The current physical fitness test has separate standards for male and female, and has age categories. Regarding age, the toughest standards are around 28-32 yrs. The people who set that standard figured if you are trying to stay in shape, those will be your peak years. But under that test a female can max the female standard for push ups. If a male match her number of push ups he would fail the test. I have posted the Army PT test score card many times.

The new test is one standard for all. No difference for sex or age. I think it is ultimately going to fail because the Army can't afford to administratively discharge its older more experienced Soldiers and 86% of the women in the Army. Also the new test will gut the Reserves and National Guard.

Are things like agility also gender based?