Posted on Dec 7, 2015
Why is it we're debating military standards and female abilities?
8.1K
60
22
9
9
0
Why is it that the standards, written primarily by men, in many cases years and years ago, is how we are to "set" the rules? With the advances in medicine and modern warfare, why aren't the "objectives" established and our informed military physicians, military mental health professionals and military strategists brainstorming to set the appropriate "standards?" Just a side, I notice when tagging the topics, there is one for "women in the military" but not one for "men in the military," is this a further example of the perspective "we" look at things?
Training
Women in the Military
Health
Combat
Men
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 10
11
11
0
Here we go again.
This is the "world according to Jerry", but I will try and take a swing and see if you all will pick up what I am putting down.
*Standards* are not "standard". They are set by the commander based upon METL and anticipated mission. An easy example of this is Infantry. Standards vary widely between light Infantry, mechanized or Stryker Infantry, and Rangers. They are all 11Bs, but they are going to train and be measured by their commanders very differently. Train like you fight.
Standardized tests like the APFT don't measure the Soldier or define whether or not they are good enough. I have seen plenty of PT studs that are useless out in the field. What the APFT does is give the commander a tool to assess the physical fitness of his/her unit and determine what training they should conduct and whether that training is effective at improving overall fitness. The PT Test instructions themselves tell us this every time we take one.
To bring it back to the topic and keep it brief, if it is my unit I am just fine with having an APFT with different standards for males and females (or younger and older Soldiers, for that matter). What I really want to see is if we have a timed event like say a 15 km road march in say two hours, that everyone in my unit crosses the line at or under two hours. Young, old, female, male, clerk, cook or grunt.
Because my unit has standards.
Set by the boss.
And if you do not meet them, I will train you until you do.
This is the "world according to Jerry", but I will try and take a swing and see if you all will pick up what I am putting down.
*Standards* are not "standard". They are set by the commander based upon METL and anticipated mission. An easy example of this is Infantry. Standards vary widely between light Infantry, mechanized or Stryker Infantry, and Rangers. They are all 11Bs, but they are going to train and be measured by their commanders very differently. Train like you fight.
Standardized tests like the APFT don't measure the Soldier or define whether or not they are good enough. I have seen plenty of PT studs that are useless out in the field. What the APFT does is give the commander a tool to assess the physical fitness of his/her unit and determine what training they should conduct and whether that training is effective at improving overall fitness. The PT Test instructions themselves tell us this every time we take one.
To bring it back to the topic and keep it brief, if it is my unit I am just fine with having an APFT with different standards for males and females (or younger and older Soldiers, for that matter). What I really want to see is if we have a timed event like say a 15 km road march in say two hours, that everyone in my unit crosses the line at or under two hours. Young, old, female, male, clerk, cook or grunt.
Because my unit has standards.
Set by the boss.
And if you do not meet them, I will train you until you do.
(11)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
Exactly.
You have clearly identified an Objective Task (Standard #1 - Ruck march in Time X) which can be associated with Stated Mission, whereas a Subjective Test (PFT) does not necessarily correspond with Stated Mission.
You have clearly identified an Objective Task (Standard #1 - Ruck march in Time X) which can be associated with Stated Mission, whereas a Subjective Test (PFT) does not necessarily correspond with Stated Mission.
(1)
(0)
SPC Margaret Higgins
1SG (Join to see), I really like the fact that you are willing to train your Soldiers-again and again-until they meet the standards.
I think that you are a wonderful First Sergeant!
I think that you are a wonderful First Sergeant!
(1)
(0)
10
10
0
Sgt Spencer Sikder great question the time has come to look at all standards equally and not worry about gender male, female or Trans gender. We need to change our perspective to allow growth and a successful transition to adapt.
(10)
(0)
SSG Todd Halverson
So very true. The Military needs to adjust to the changing times. Set one standard for all to follow.
(0)
(0)
SP5 Lori Pong
I would have to disagree, whether some women will admit it or not, physically men and women are different. There is the rare female who can keep pace with the men when it comes to physical strength/activities but that is the exception not the rule. To limit the military to one set of standards would end up barring a large number (probably the majority) from being able to successfully complete training because you aren't going to lower standards for the men right?
Different standards doesn't mean lower expectations. Each individual has their own strengths. I know that I could not have passed basic if I had to run at the same speed as the men. Honestly I think the standards could actually be based on your MOS. If you are in a combat MOS your speed and agility is a matter of life or death. Where if you are in a support MOS...it didn't matter how quickly I got to the courtroom for a courts martial as long as I was there on time. AIT for combat MOS' help to reinforce the strength and agility needs while AIT for non-combat is hands on or book learning for whatever that field is.
We all have our strengths and weaknesses and we just need to make sure that the military ensures that where ever/however someone serves they use the strengths of the individual to the best advantage of both the military and the individual.
Different standards doesn't mean lower expectations. Each individual has their own strengths. I know that I could not have passed basic if I had to run at the same speed as the men. Honestly I think the standards could actually be based on your MOS. If you are in a combat MOS your speed and agility is a matter of life or death. Where if you are in a support MOS...it didn't matter how quickly I got to the courtroom for a courts martial as long as I was there on time. AIT for combat MOS' help to reinforce the strength and agility needs while AIT for non-combat is hands on or book learning for whatever that field is.
We all have our strengths and weaknesses and we just need to make sure that the military ensures that where ever/however someone serves they use the strengths of the individual to the best advantage of both the military and the individual.
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
Why don't women compete against men in the Olympics? Or any professional sport? but somehow interesting them into combat arms is just fine?
(6)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SMSgt Minister Gerald A. Thomas I don't disagree. I'm just clarifying. The order has been given to march, and march we will.
The issue is that many people are trying to make the competition appear "level" or think that it can be level despite evidence.
The issue is that many people are trying to make the competition appear "level" or think that it can be level despite evidence.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SP5 Lori Pong
Women in combat is something that is based on the individual. They should have to maintain the same standards as the men (not to get thru basic but to get thru their advanced training). When I was at the E5 board I was asked about the EEO program in the Army. I explained that while "it had improved it had a ways to go. When I enlisted I was given the option of every MOS the Army had available with the exception of 15 and the only reason I was not eligible for those 15 was because I was a female. While I have no desire to be airborne infantry ranger there are women who do and to bar them simply because they were women wasn't equal opportunity, if they meet the qualifications as they now exist, they should be allowed to enlist in any MOS regardless of whether or not they are female."
(0)
(0)
MSG Danny Mathers
I am sick of the subject. Men and women are different. Transgender want to bes, should not be allowed in the military to fund their operations. The navy has had a sever problem because for the most part, they are not deployable. Let them find another path to completely trasnsform from one sex to the other and have them evaluated for service like any man or women. The military is sworn to protect and serve the nation, not a political experiment proving ground. Opinions vary and I exspect a few thumps down.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google