Washington – The decision of the Secretary of Defense to review the military standards on combat and physical aptitude and appearance opens a pandora box of very different rules between services. And will raise a crucial question: should there be a cookie cutter approach, or should the service of differences, the evolution of social norms and the recruitment of realities play a role in political decisions?
Pete Hegseth has been very public about their opposition to women in combat jobs And his belief that the standards were reduced to accommodate women, and warned that there would be reviews to address problems. He is a signed a proponent of making all the standards the same, Regardless of gender, and military officers are prepared for changes as reviews continue.
In a memorandum on March 12, Hegseth said that the Undersecretary for staff must collect information on military standards “related to physical aptitude, body composition and preparation, which includes, but is not limited to beards.”
“We must remain attentive by maintaining the standards that allow the men and women of our army to protect the American people and our homeland as the most lethal and effective struggle of the world,” he wrote.
The effort is seen as a wide side against women that serve in the first line, which they have been doing successfully for years. The Hegseth memorandum requires a review of how the standards and impact of these shifts have changed since January 1, 2015, the year in which the Defense Department opened all the fighting work to women.
And ask questions about whether you want to make all physical condition tests the same for services and make them all gender and age neutrals or if you will establish minimal standards and allow services to require stricter requirements as desired.
Eliminating the current policy of qualifying the annual physical conditioning tests based on age and gender could damage retention and recruitment if troops are suddenly told that they meet a new and dramatically harder requirement. These changes generally graduate over time.
Here is a look at the current standards.
The army has long had a large extent a two -part system for physical aptitude standards:
– Annual physical conditioning tests with different requirements based on gender and age.
– More exhausting standards for specific combat, special operations, infantry, armor, parajumpers and other works that are the same for all in that occupation, and do not adjust by age or sex.
At this time, physical aptitude tests are a Hodgepodge.
Each service has basic tests that all service members must pass once or twice a year. For each service, the tests vary. The score is adjusted by gender and age. For example: a 20 -year -old man must complete a career in a time faster than a woman or a 30 -year -old man to receive the maximum score.
Fitness tests used to be simpler: execution, flexions and abdominals. They evolved over time and can now include options. For example, members of the Air Force Service can make an execution of 1 1/2 miles or a sprint. Other services will sometimes allow cycling or oar as a cardiovascular substitute for execution; Tables are now used more widely than abdominals.
The Army and Marines have more extensive physical conditioning tests.
The Army, in an important review Several years ago, he expanded his physical conditioning test to six events, including a dead elevator, race, planks, flexions, standing power launch and a sprint/drag combination. The events were destined to imitate real -world military circumstances. An early plan to do that test The gender and age neutral was discarded After the studies they showed problems.
Marines’s body has two tests a year. In the first half, the Marines take a physical conditioning test that includes a three-mile, pull-up race and planks. In the second half of the year, they take a physical combat conditioning test that includes an 880 meter race in combat boots, an ammunition elevator and an exercise that mimics the maneuver of the troops under fire.
The maneuver portion includes an obstacle race with a low tracking, high tracking and sprint, as well as dragging a person and using the firefighter transport.
Specific military works such as special operations, infantry, armor and parajumping require different, often mental and psychological, tests, requirements and qualification courses.
These standards require everyone to meet the same gender and neutral age requirements. For example, an army soldier who wants to be a green beret or a sailor who wants to be a seal must pass those scoring courses exhausting months.
In addition, after the Pentagon allowed women to be in all combat work, the Army established specific physical conditioning standards for each military occupation that are the same regardless of sex or age. Recruits that wish to serve in an infantry Or the armor work must approve a specific physical evaluation that has higher and more significant demands, to sign a contract for that specialty.
Over the years, a wide range of standards and requirements have been adjusted for reasons ranging from religious tolerance to social recruitment and evolution social trends.
In large part, they are driven by the recruitment of struggles and the need to attract those of a changing universe of young Americans, including those with less academic schooling or people from states where marijuana is legal.
The Navy, for example, began in 2022 to enlist more recruits that obtain a very low score in the armed services qualification test. That was to help meet the recruitment objectives. A year later, he began to attract people who did not graduate from high school or obtain a Ged. Both were changes that the other services have avoided largely. The Navy argued that it needed these lesser score recruits to fill jobs that involve intense manual work.
Hegesh has said little about this type of standard and has focused on physical aptitude instead of mental.
In addition, several services have changed policies in hair and beards. They now allow different buns and tails for womenand beards in certain circumstances for medical or religious reasons. And most services have relaxed policies in marijuana in recent years.
Similarly, all have afloed restrictions in the size and placement of tattoos, opening the door to complete manga tattoos. Most now allow little ones in the neck or finger.
