Following a three-year review, the Army has scrapped plans to use the same physical fitness test for all soldiers, choosing instead to have some reduced standards to allow women and older soldiers to pass, the service announced Wednesday.
The decision follows a RAND-led study that found men were more easily passing the new, more difficult Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) compared to women and older soldiers, who were “failing at noticeably higher rates.” That six-event test developed in 2019 was an expansion from the three events — pushups, situps and a run — soldiers had done prior.
“This test is an essential part of maintaining the readiness of the Army as we transform into the Army of 2030,” Army Secretary Christine Wormuth said in a statement announcing the changes. “The revisions to the ACFT are based on data and analysis, including an independent assessment required by Congress. We will continue to assess our implementation of the test to ensure it is fair and achieves our goal of strengthening the Army’s fitness culture.”
The Army first changed its fitness test to include dead lifts, power throws, pushups, planks, a run and a sprint-drag-carry event, as well as a leg tuck that was eventually eliminated.
Service leaders hoped the newer test — the first such change in more than 40 years — would better replicate tasks needed for combat while reducing the risk of injuries.
But the new fitness curriculum was quickly criticized after it became clear women, older male soldiers and National Guard and Reserve troops had difficulty passing it.
About 44 percent of women failed the test from October 2020 to April 2021, compared to about 7 percent of men, Military.com found at the time.
Why not? If Private Pyle can become a Marine, anybody can, right? (Guess what the reference is and, no, it’s not a TV show.)
Private Pyle, did your parents have any kids that lived?
“You’re so ugly, you could be a modern art masterpiece!”
All wars are bankster wars.
From an old book.
“War is a racket.”
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers.
In short, I was a racketeer; a gangster for capitalism.
I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914.
I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.
I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.
I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912.
I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916.
I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903.
In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested.
Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints.
The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts.
I operated on three continents.”
-Smedley D Butler-
USMC
American companies did legal business in many countries then those countries decided they wanted to steal those businesses. Should they have been allowed to? Or should the armed forces, financed with taxes those businesses paid have been available to stop the theft? Sounds to me like Butler was a commie.
Wasn’t there a report a while back that mixed sex army units underperformed male only units because esprit de corp meant that the men would help the injured and physically deficient women in the mixed units? Good thing Russian corruption and low morale mean they can’t field a decent military either.
I have heard of that. Not physically read or even seen it, but heard the filter downs.
It shouldn’t be a surprise. “Toxic” Masculinity drives us in that direction. Men evolved to work in groups of OTHER MEN. We accept there is strength in the group and also accept at a base level that someone must be the alpha.
Men in social groups do one of three things.
– challenge
– submit
– leave
We understand this concept at base level and it is usually only in situations of enforced social groups (cruelly your school years are the worse offender for most people) that the system breaks down. A group in a flexible social boundary (aka – you can walk away) will not usually have long term problems.
Why do men do this? Cause we are smart enough to know that if we fight over every issue we can kill each other. Challenge. Submit. Or Leave. That is how groups of men function.
The other side is that if you want to be part of the group you need to, well, be part of the group and act for the group. Or challenge and change things. Or leave. Male groups can bond very strongly because great chunks of our evolution encouraged it.
Mess with that dynamic – say by adding women – and you start getting mixed results. There is the ‘part of the group’ aspect that wants the members to look after the interest of the group and that is combined with the ‘Toxic Male’ mind set that women are different and need to be protected from physical danger.
And why do we men do that?
Cause we men can’t raise small children. Men don’t lactate. Get a small mother-father-new born group and kill the father? The mother and child do it tough. Same trio and kill the mother? The new born dies as the man has ZERO ability to feed it without modern products or the help of another (lactating) woman.
Plus both men and women have a ‘need’ to ‘lay together as consenting adults’. Nearly all adults when first meeting someone of the opposite sex will at some level assess them as a worthy sexual partner. Add a woman to a group of men and, even at lower levels, there will be some consideration about ‘competing’ for that person (or that person competing for one of the group – it cuts both ways). Get a group of all men and the ‘need’ to compete is almost totally removed.
Even removing the ‘need’ to protect and the ‘need’ to… get to know them better… you have the aspect of respect. Look at mixed social sport. As a guy on the team you are reminded not to dominate too badly because it cuts your female team mates out of the game. ‘Toxic’ masculinity is also about the ‘proving’. You challenge male peers and/or rivals in order to increase your standing over them. You do this by ‘punching up’. If you are playing sport and win a contested ball against someone your base strength and skill level then you own that guy. People respect the display of your skills. They may still hate your guts but you have shown you can best the other guy. You win a ball off a 12 year old and you prove nothing.
(actually age match ups can be really awkward. Playing team sport in the lower grades where you sometimes get younger kids filling in to make up numbers and get some experience from the oldies. As a defender you end up standing some kid a 1/3 of your age and body weight and you basically have to just let them take the ball and wait for them to either pass off or make an unforced error. You CANNOT contest those players!!!)
Same principle if you are a guy contesting a ball against a woman. You COULD go full William and use your strength and height advantage to dominate and look like a complete arsehole, or you can concede the play.
So yeah, a study to see if mixed units perform as well as a male or female only group? And the result surprises you? DUH!!!
Very interesting analysis. I get it.
“…You win a ball off a 12 year old and you prove nothing. …”
True as you meant it, but it might be more true to say it proves something, but it’s not something good about you.
The reality is that when the war comes, the older and underperforming will be sorting mail, doing laundry, typing, cooking and driving trucks. The front line units will still consist of the serious badasses.
Ah, Logistics.
But seriously, the ranks of any armed forces is full of older or broken folks that played the infanteer game when younger. Now they have busted knees and busted back. Some remuster and become mechanics, aircraft techs, etc. You want a young shithead Rambo to do the planning, write doctrine or command a battalion, or you’d like more seasoned people? Even hockey teams know how to use the built up experience of its older cadre.
As for cooking, doing laundry and all that retarded shit, the Forces hire civilians to do that.
but we need to have a way of determining that the group of badasses as a whole all have the same base level abilities.
“Troops! I need you all to run those 5 kilometres across the dark fields before the enemy patrol returns in 30 minutes. I… What is it Joe?”
“I don’t do the running, Sir. I elected the bike ride for my test.”
“Fine… You stay here. Everyone else… What Harris?”
“I also can’t run. But I can do 300 push ups if you need me”
And there’s a lot of hard labour in adverse conditions required for groups of soldiers in the field to do more than survive those conditions and actually operate against the enemy, e.g. digging-in defensive positions, loading, carrying, unloading equipment and supplies. You can’t have lighter radios, lighter rifles, lighter ammunition, etc. for smaller/weaker individuals.
If only there were a pattern to these sorts of reports!
https://blazingcatfur.ca/2022/03/24/canadian-armed-forces-too-white-and-too-male-senior-officers-say/
Well, the lack of bullshit isn’t a problem. I’d really like to know how many CF members quit because of a “lack of inclusion”. I think the CF fails to include modern fighters, frigates and kit as simple as working pistols. Then yeah, maybe that kind of lack of inclusion is a factor in retention.
I’ve seen a lot of comments from ex-military that quit on other threads. None on them mentioned the lack of diversity as a reason for quitting. Many mentioned their leadership doing stupid woke shit instead of concentrating on the core business. “Why do you want to join son?” “Because I want to be more diverse Sir!”… “Uh, dontcha wanna drive a tank or a plane”. “Nah the’re too old, I don’t want to fight the Russians with this junk, I could get killed…”
In that way, anyone serving in the armed forces is an equal to one another.
None of them want to go out like punks because of malfunctioning equipment.
Gender is a social construct though so there is no such thing as “women”.
Besides, don’t you have to be a biologist to properly identify who a woman is? Will a degree in that discipline be necessary to be a recruiting officer?
No need for biologists in the modern Canadian Forces. If you want to know if someone is a woman you just ask him and if he says he is, you make sure he is supplied with his favourite brand of tampons.
Gender is a grammatical construct.
The Russian language has three genders but Russians themselves only have two biological sexes.
Discuss.
Perhaps the enemy will fight less hard against women and older recruits.
Especially if they have pink markings on their uniforms!
Well, the lack of bullshit isn’t a problem. I’d really like to know how many CF members quit because of a “lack of inclusion”. I think the CF fails to include modern fighters, frigates and kit as simple as working pistols. Then yeah, maybe that kind of lack of inclusion is a factor in retention.
Easiest way to solve the problem is to just change the tests to make it more relevant to 2022, welcome to the new Armed Forces:
Recognition and correct usage of fellow soldiers Verbs.
Demonstration of Understanding the 38 Genders.
Inclusiveness of Speech and understanding minority issues.
Who cares about all the physical stuff anyhow, it’s not like the Canadian Military actually fights, they just lecture other Countries and tell them everything they are doing that isn’t Liberal and Woke.
I don’t think they lecture. They convene!
The army of 2030? There’s not going to be a 2030—not for the Empire of Lies at any rate.
Either the uniformed men of the globalist West will relieve the globalists of their power over other human beings, or Putin will do it for them.
If it’s done Putin’s way it won’t take eight years. Eight hours will be more like it.
Physical standards have never been the same for men and women in the US, and they’ve always decreased with age. Someone said the sit-ups are the same, but everything else is different.
That was recognized about 60 years ago when the RCAF introduced its 5BX program. I still have a copy of the booklet and the recommended exercise levels vary with age and physical conditioning.
Both the 5BX and the XBX are deceptively simple systems that still work surprisingly well.
I’ve been using it during this phony plague.
I remember doing the 5BX exercises back in the 90’s. I think my mother gave me the booklet and she got it from her brother.
This whole fitness plan was a joke from the start. A perfect example of how there are too many generals in the Army. There was a more elaborate and complicated fitness test in the Army 50 years ago, but it was changed to make it easier to give (i.e., you didn’t need any special equipment or apparatus), you could give it anywhere, anytime (sit-ups, pushups, and running), and it was very good at testing a soldier’s fitness. But nothing gets a bureaucracy going better than making something that’s simple and works, more complicated and broken. Going back to the old test would be the best thing for the Army.
“For the Left…
Quick Back-peddle!”
Everywhere physical standards have dropped.
But the general population are a bunch of sad sacks of shit anyway.
For dudes, if you don’t use it, you lose it.
Most women never had it or never had enough of it and many think its unfair.
Well I wanted to be taller so I guess that’s not fair either said no guy ever.
On a tangential side note, ‘Russian’ dressing was off the shelves at ‘No Frills’ so our enemies know we are NOT to be screwed with.
A good friend, who was in military, and committed to the service, hit mandatory retirement “age” . He was not “required” to participate in fitness evaluation, due to age. In fact, had not been required to for some years.
Fact is, he did, and passed full evaluation at 64, and said the process, two years ago, had merit, and he trained, conditioned to pass it. Although he was not required to. He said, the whole thing, as presented, and being remodeled, is a crap show. Failure has no consequences, you tried, golly you are a couch spud, but still, we’re gonna pass you. Our military generally are marshmallows,
He went out proud, showed the “mutts” it is possible, should be valid, and screw them all.
Sad really, says the RCMP old timers he knew, had same opinion. We are are collection of unfit, misfits, and chasing the low denominator. Could not defend or do anything of merit.
New World, and a total wreck. Better protection by Hells Angels than this mess of misfits. His words.
Oh Well, Canada in 2022, Lib/Dip/SJW crew. Grab a chair, watch the show. Good Luck to all.
Our post-secondary educational system isn’t any better, as I found out both as a grad student and while I taught at Armpit College.
I avoided post secondary education and passed those savings onto my customers for many years. I also enjoyed a lifetime of thinking for myself and being my own boss.
That’s the beauty of capitalism and freedom. You can make your life what you want it to be.
It ain’t easy, but nothing good comes easy .. eh?.
Tip … avoid becoming cannon fodder in fat banker-sponsored wars. If the war isn’t happening in your country …. stay the hell out of it … It’s likely ‘just business’ anyway.
A good friend, who was in military, and committed to the service, hit mandatory retirement “age” . He was not “required” to participate in fitness evaluation, due to age. In fact, had not been required to for some years.
Fact is, he did, and passed full evaluation at 64, and said the process, two years ago, had merit, and he trained, conditioned to pass it. Although he was not required to. He said, the whole thing, as presented, and being remodeled, is a crap show. Failure has no consequences, you tried, golly you are a couch spud, but still, we’re gonna pass you. Our military generally are marshmallows,
He went out proud, showed the “mutts” it is possible, should be valid, and screw them all.
Sad really, says the RCMP old timers he knew, had same opinion. We are are collection of unfit, misfits, and chasing the low denominator. Could not defend or do anything of merit.
New World, and a total wreck. Better protection by Hells Angels than this mess of misfits. His words.
Oh Well, Canada in 2022, Lib/Dip/SJW crew. Grab a chair, watch the show. Good Luck to all.
Less fit = easier to kill.
One more component of the Trudope shit show . The perfect formula for defeat .
Well, he did lecture us that “When you kill your enemies, you lose.”
I guess Hitler won WW2. At least, he won Blackie’s moral high ground.
Potential enemies realize that it would terribly unfair to take advantage of lax training standards that they could exploit in battle.
Can you imagine a bayonet charge of muscular men against a platoon of women and skinny pajama boys?
God, we’re idiots.
How many of these physically unfit soldiers are calling to find out how to get the hell out of the army as soon as possible?
In Obama’s army … it’s actually best to be a pudgy incel who can’t do five pushups. Those young “men” make the best drone controllers. Their thumbs are are the most lethal assets. The rest of the body parts? Meh.
America will outsource any human combat to the hundreds of thousands of young, military age, men flooding across our borders. Oh! You were told those were … the … chillllldren? *giggle*. They’re canon fodder for the next Neocon-leftist war. They’ll join the military for citizenship and the welfare benefits … and will be wholly expendable. Yeah, I’m cynical. My country has trained my cynicism
Back about 10 years the big thing in my part of the world was the move towards the ‘Hardened Networked Army’.
The plan was we would have bigger meaner gear, and a cutting edge command control system to allow us to concentrate that bigger meaner gear in a way that would best allow us to use, or threaten to use, great violence to bend our enemies to our will.
In other, less Politically Correct words, “Please get along with us and support our foreign and domestic policy objectives or we will KILL YOU!”
No idea what this 2030 army the spokes person mentioned is going to be, but I fear for you Canadians.
“Diversity is where societies go to die”
– Mark Steyn –
mhb23re
Look at the upside…. more diversity going to fight wars means fewer casualties among likely conservative voters