The ACFT and the Problems with the Military's Cult of Physical Fitness

Buried in this article are several outrageous claims. The author essentially argues PT tests should *first* consider exercises that women can excel at, whereas application to combat should come second, if at all. And I quote:

"Gender-neutral currently means men and women are held to the same standard. If the Army is serious about increasing diversity across the force, something multiple leaders have mentioned, it has to define gender-neutral not simply as equal-opportunity, but also as unbiased in statistically significant ways. The ACFT has not been proven to be gender-neutral."

So in the author's view, gender neutral *outcomes* of an Army physical test are more important than the fact that men and women are tested by the same *standards*. Standards she even cites were developed by the Army to apply specifically to combat functions (not male or female bodies). But that's beside the point. It follows from her logic that unless a test is statistically 50/50, it is not truly "gender neutral." According to the author, perfectly gender equal outcomes are the sole determining factor of whether an Army fitness test is appropriate.

This is an absurd argument. While the ACFT is nowhere near perfect, at the very least it is the first time the Army will test men and women by the same combat-relevant standards. Contrary to the author's claim, it is the most equal of all physical fitness tests. Since both men and women are tested by the same standards, it is by definition gender-neutral and a welcome change solely for that reason.