Are we serious about EQUALITY? Should we go to a non-gender specific Army Physical Fitness Test?

SGT Anthony Rossi — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 01:03:24 -0400

Equality isn't true equality until gender isn't even recognized just as race shouldn't be. Do we really want to embrace equality?

Response by SGT Richard H. made Jun 3 at 2015 1:07 AM

SGT Richard H. — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 01:07:18 -0400

I think we should. The current fitness standards were put in place when women weren't allowed to do anything beyond clerk positions and nursing. Nowadays they do *almost* everything. With things looking like the almost is going away, it may very well be time for one set of standards. Personally, I think most women could handle it if given the chance and the same training.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jun 3 at 2015 1:37 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 01:37:20 -0400

After seeing a Female Marine do more pull ups than I've ever seen any human being do before. Works for me!

Response by LTC Donell Kelly made Jun 3 at 2015 2:09 AM

LTC Donell Kelly — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 02:09:31 -0400

Does this chart go to an age group 50-55, 56-60, 61-65, over 65? Can't get it to expand to full size.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 4:01 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 04:01:26 -0400

SGT Anthony Rossi I think there is equality in the current APFT (although I don't think the APFT is a great measure for determining fitness and don't have a better solution). The APFT, as I understand it, takes into account physical abilities are that are medically "general" to each gender based on our bodies are structured. Are there exceptions, sure, but not so much as to say that there should be one test. If you want to go that far, why not just say 1 standard and remove the age groups as well, because are the equal? Or do they take into account the wear and tear on our bodies as we get older and serve longer in the military?

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jun 3 at 2015 4:27 AM

PO1 John Miller — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 04:27:23 -0400

Absolutely! I think that effective immediately, men should have to meet the current female PT standards for their age category!

That was sarcasm if anybody didn't get it.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 5:20 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:20:10 -0400

I think the only equality that anyone should wish or pursue is equality before the law. In every other case, everyone should be striving to be superior and those efforts should be allowed.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 5:57 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 05:57:05 -0400

The navy designed it's fitness program with the idea in mind hat women and men are designed differently. Men are better suited to handle push ups that's why the standard is so high and women sit ups. The thing about gender equality really comes down to this in our day to day job so I need a certain standard to perform my job: divers, combative fields, EOD, ect. If not then the standards shouldn't matter the same way...personally I feel that if I choose to take on the tasks men take on I need to meet them but if I am meeting everything my job requires: ammo moments and stores on loads why should it matter if I get tested the same way on my PRT? I still pass and I still pull my own weight.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 3 at 2015 6:34 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 06:34:58 -0400

As long as it is a "Physical Fitness" test, it cannot be genderless. Physical Fitness REQUIRES taking Physiology into account. Male & Female Physiology is different, therefore the test for Physical Fitness must be different.

We make an attempt to "normalize" them against each other, but that's it.

Women, as a group, are not as strong (upper body), or as fast as men, as a group. This is not a Social Equality issue. This is a Science issue. Let's not conflate the issues.

Now, the idea of tying Physical Fitness to promotion, as opposed to some other Objective metric, like "Can lift X lbs, can complete Y in Z time" is frankly silly. But it's convenient. Convenience breeds massive misunderstanding of the intent of the system(s), hence the CONSTANT threads about this topic.

So, no, there should not be a genderless (A)PFT, because quite simply, any test that is "fair" for one would either be too easy for one, or too hard for the other. If you want a genderless test, don't tie it to the (A)PFT. Create a new metric which you want it tied to, and leave the (A)PFT out of the equation.

The (A)PFT has almost no relevance on Combat Prowess. It is about moving your own bodyweight only. Someone can be physically fit at 120lbs, and not be able to to lift the barbell, and not physically fit and able to bench massive amounts of weight.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jun 3 at 2015 6:55 AM

SGM Matthew Quick — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 06:55:44 -0400

Hasn't this topic been beaten to death?

Men are physically stronger than women, who have, on average, less total muscle mass, both in absolute terms and relative to total body mass. The greater muscle mass of men is the result of testosterone-induced muscular hypertrophy. Men also have denser, stronger bones, tendons, and ligaments.

Men have greater cardiovascular reserve, with larger hearts, greater lung volume per body mass, a higher red blood cell count, and higher haemoglobin. They also have higher circulating clotting factors, which leads to faster healing of wounds.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 7:48 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 07:48:21 -0400

This may be a partial answer to why the Army is going towards a two version PFT. It will consist of a "regular" PFT, much like the one in use today, and an "MOS specific" PFT. The "regular" PFT will be what is used for promotion points, ATTARS Schools, NCOES, ect. The "MOS" PFT will be what is used to keep your job, and for MOS specific schools. Much like the PFT Standards for Ranger School and Special Forces Selection and Assessment are different than APFT standards.

Response by SGT Anthony Rossi made Jun 3 at 2015 9:58 AM

SGT Anthony Rossi — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:58:15 -0400

When it comes to your promotion packet for NCO your p.t. Score is reviewed. If a female soldier doesn't have to do 75 push-ups to max her P.t. Test, why should a male be required to do so. In other words it is more difficult for a male soldier to get the same amount of promotion points even though both he and his female counter part are doing the same job. The male is required to do more to be promoted and make the same amount of pay as his female counterpart. Do you see where I'm coming from? Thanks

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 9:00 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:00:00 -0400

SGT Anthony Rossi I completely agree. There is NO reason a healthy woman is innately unable to meet (and excel!) male standards on the APFT. The current scale is an absolute joke. A 15:36 2-mile run is basically a jog. The minimums and maximums for female pushup reps standards are ridiculously low. We are doing our military a disservice by setting the bar low for any group of Soldiers. One team, one fight!

On a related note, NCOs and officers are supposed to lead by example and lead from the FRONT! You can't do that if you accept a lower standard. No exceptions!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 9:30 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:30:22 -0400

The APFT is a terrible indicator of physical fitness. The Army should incorporate an assessment similar to Regiment's RAW and RPAT to gauge true combat effective fitness levels. It does not need to be gender specific.

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 3 at 2015 9:58 PM

PVT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 21:58:14 -0400

Equality when it's convenient.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Jun 3 at 2015 10:05 PM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Wed, 03 Jun 2015 22:05:23 -0400

Some one should take a biology class.

Response by SPC Samantha Greenlee made Jun 4 at 2015 1:34 PM

SPC Samantha Greenlee — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 13:34:40 -0400

It is scientifically proven that men have more muscle mass then woman.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Jun 4 at 2015 10:37 PM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Thu, 04 Jun 2015 22:37:07 -0400

Don't I get enough of this crap from Obama and Hillery and any other Democrat.

Response by SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA made Jun 5 at 2015 2:21 AM

SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 02:21:16 -0400

SGT Anthony Rossi I believe your premise is wrong.

You confuse equality with equivalency.

We are all equals but we are not all equivalent.

This pesky thing called physiology always getting in the way.

Women are our equals, so they have the right to join the military.
Women are not our equivalents, thus separate standards based on their physiological makeup.

Equality means we all have to pass with a 60.
Equivalence means our 60 standard is different.

It's simple really. But then again, obtuse angles are not easy, they are complicated.

Response by ENS Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 2:21 AM

ENS Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 02:21:58 -0400

I see what you're getting at, but I feel you're missing the point of the fitness test. It tests fitness, not ability to do a certain job. It's ignorant to pretend females are biological the same as males. Their bodies are simply built differently and are considered fit in different ways.

The above being said, there should definitely NOT be a gender based test for combat or otherwise dangerous job ability fitness tests, as those tests are designed for a specific job, and not to ensure overall fitness.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 5 at 2015 2:25 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Jun 2015 02:25:54 -0400

Response by SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA made Jun 6 at 2015 2:24 PM

SPC Elijah J. Henry, MBA — Sat, 06 Jun 2015 14:24:48 -0400

Yes, we should. We should go to the current male standard, which is wimpy enough already.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 2 at 2015 1:05 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:05:48 -0400

of course we should.
The same standards and recognition for the same score, that's equality. Then all scores can be compared on a level playing field. The same obviously goes for academic scores in which women generally do much better than their male counterparts. What we do with those result is another matter but everyone should be scored on the same level playing field.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 2:07 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 14:07:35 -0400

I say we go to equality in everything we possibly can. Including grooming standards and uniforms. As soon as there is a unisex version of the ASU, and as soon as women have to keep the same haircuts as men, then we can be said to be making some true progress.

Response by SGT Paul Mackay made Apr 14 at 2016 8:52 PM

SGT Paul Mackay — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 20:52:15 -0400

yes