U.S. Army halts gender-neutral fitness test

[Angel Eyes]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/us-army-halts-gender-neutral-fitness-test-as-women-struggle/CHFHJA5EYGHHQR4W73QZEHIHXY/

The US army is considering scrapping its new gender neutral fitness test because women have been failing in much larger numbers than men.

Research showed that the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT), which is the same for male and female soldiers, was leading to lower results for women with a knock-on effect for promotions.

An early Pentagon study showed women were failing the ACFT at a rate of 65 per cent, compared with 10 per cent for men.

...

An army officer told Military.com: "We have to figure out a way to make it fair to both genders."

How long until the usual suspects get upset that the officer didn't say "all genders"?

[Ben]

Ironic that this has come out at the same time that an official Marine twitter account made a political statement attacking Tucker Carlson regarding his viewpoint on pregnant women in the military.

[Hawkmoon]

An army officer told Military.com: "We have to figure out a way to make it fair to both genders."

I thought the whole point of the gender-neutral PT test was to be fair to both genders. The Army wanted to integrate women into combat MOS's and the only fair way to do that is to have everyone take the same qualification test(s). The argument when they adopted this was that women could perform equally as well as men.

Apparently that's not the case. So now, in order to be "fair" to women, the Army will have to [again] come up with a system that's unfair to men.

Why can't we just accept the fundamental reality that most women are not as strong as most men, and let the science be settled?

[Hawkmoon]

Ironic that this has come out at the same time that an official Marine twitter account made a political statement attacking Tucker Carlson regarding his viewpoint on pregnant women in the military.

I don't think Tucker was attacking women in the military, in general. Wasn't he ridiculing the concept of a maternity uniform for combat operations?

[Ben]

I don't think Tucker was attacking women in the military, in general. Wasn't he ridiculing the concept of a maternity uniform for combat operations?

I believe he was also talking about taxpayers paying for gender reassignment surgery for weirdos in the military that want that. I don't care if a weirdo wants to do that, but I'm not paying for it.

I think Carlson also didn't have a problem with pregnant women serving, except, as you say, in combat or other operations that would stress an unborn child. Goes back to the argument that women in combat roles can work if they can pull their weight and pass the same physical requirements as men.  I  notice that the tweet the Marines used to diss Carlson showed a non-pregnant woman in a flightsuit carrying a guy, not an 8 month pregnant woman doing so.

"Maternity flightsuits" are stupid. I realize that everyone from drone operators to whoever, that can wear a flightsuit as their uniform of the day, wants to do it to be cool and all, but by the time a woman is pregnant enough to need maternity clothing, maybe she should have a sit down assignment.

I would need to look it up because I only saw a snippet, but apparently Carlson was also making a comment about how the Chinese military had noticed their recruits were kinda pussies and they were "manning up" their military, while there now seems to be call via the new administration to feminize or "gender-neutralify" or whatever our military.

[Boomhauer]

Remember we were told that to accommodate women in combat arms jobs that there would be no lessening of standards.

And those of us that called bullshit on that were called sexist.

[Hawkmoon]

Remember we were told that to accommodate women in combat arms jobs that there would be no lessening of standards.

And those of us that called bullshit on that were called sexist.

That's the problem -- being honest about gender differences is "sexist" in newspeak.

[WLJ]

Remember we were told that to accommodate women in combat arms jobs that there would be no lessening of standards.

And those of us that called bullshit on that were called sexist.

That's okay, you're given extra points for having the most diverse army in a war.

[MechAg94]

I thought the whole point of the gender-neutral PT test was to be fair to both genders. The Army wanted to integrate women into combat MOS's and the only fair way to do that is to have everyone take the same qualification test(s). The argument when they adopted this was that women could perform equally as well as men.

Apparently that's not the case. So now, in order to be "fair" to women, the Army will have to [again] come up with a system that's unfair to men.

Why can't we just accept the fundamental reality that most women are not as strong as most men, and let the science be settled?

...but gender-neutral PT test didn't give the results they want so they have to make changes until it does. 

To leftists, the end result has to be fair, not the opportunity.  The individual doesn't exist in their minds. 

[Hawkmoon]

...but gender-neutral PT test didn't give the results they want so they have to make changes until it does. 

To leftists, the end result has to be fair, not the opportunity.  The individual doesn't exist in their minds.

I guess it depends on your (or, rather, their) definition of "fair."

[MechAg94]

True.  Leftists see "fair" differently.  Of course, they don't intend for you to apply them to themselves.  They are the new leaders after all.

[kgbsquirrel]

I guess it depends on your (or, rather, their) definition of "fair."

Ours: equality of opportunity and equal application the law.

Theirs: equality of outcome and capricious application of the law.

[Grandpa Shooter]

Ours: equality of opportunity and equal application the law.

Theirs: equality of outcome and capricious application of the law.

You hit the nail squarely on the head.  It is not about equality of opportunity, but rather equity in outcomes.  Huge difference there.  What I busted my butt to have they want everyone to have without the years of planning and effort.  BS!

[Pb]

Get all the women out of combat positions.

Reality is sexist.

[Grandpa Shooter]

Get all the women out of combat positions.

Reality is sexist.

^^^^ This

[230RN]

I'm trying to imagine a nursing fight suit.  Or combat outfit.  Where will they hang the hand grenades?

"Why can't we just accept the fundamental reality that most women are not as strong as most men, and let the science be settled?"

Because the fundamental reality is there are wuss-headed jerks in command who are afraid of repercussions if they cite reality.

And we keep electing them in civilian positions, too.

Fear, fear, fear.  I blame it all on the live or die selection process of all our wars.  We send the ballsiest, smartest, and most fit out to do battle and 50,000 of them were deselected from the gene pool in Viet Nam.

And 33,643 "battle deaths" in Korea.

Why, it's almost as if it were a deliberate process.

POed Terry, 230RN

[RoadKingLarry]

Hard times build strong men.
Strong men build good times.
Good times build weak men.
Weak men build hard times.

Rinse, wring, repeat.

[Ben]

Hard times build strong men.
Strong men build good times.
Good times build weak men.
Weak men build hard times.

Rinse, wring, repeat.

This is a solid truth. I compare my dad and my nephew in-law. The latter is a good and nice guy, but the "hardships" he complains about are not even annoyances in my world. My dad was taken out of school at the 8th grade by his dad because there were too many mouths to feed in the family, and sent to apprentice with someone in another town. Lived through the German depression, time in a losing WW2 Navy, and a British prison camp thereafter. I could go on with a book-length list of what we would consider hardships that my parents just took as life.

In the end, it comes back to one of my dad's favorite sayings: "People got it too good." When we're provided a life of leisure, which truly, even our "poorest" iPhone carrying, $200 tennis shoe wearing citizens have, all you have left to complain about are "microaggressions".

[RoadKingLarry]

Dad's family were dirt poor Oklahoma farmers during the depression. My grandparents and aunts and uncles as well as my great aunts and uncles were/are some of the hardest working people I've ever met. God fearing honest "salt of the earth" people. (and, some of them could squeeze change out of penny.) I learned a lot from those folks.
Grandad was a week short of 96 when Alzheimer's finally took him. He was still farming and selling produce out of the back of his truck till that vile disease took his mind at 90.
My dad's older brother is 88 and if/when he recovers from the kidney infection that put him in the hospital last week (he's home now) I suspect he'll go back to running his sawmill and building houses.
Wear it out, use it up and fix it and use it again. Do it yourself, make it your self, grow it yourself, fix it yourself.
Hell, I was 19 years old before I knew you could go to a hardware store and buy nuts and bolts. I thought you just dug through the coffee cans on the shelf till you found what you needed and made do. If you were scrapping something you salvaged every fastener you could out of it, then you used what was left to make something else useful.
Locally there are still a lot of those type of folks around. I suspect every small town and backwater rural community is similarly populated.