Pete Hegseth’s disparagement of women soldiers factor into new test requirements

The U.S. Army recently introduced new fitness standards aligning with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s directive to equalize requirements for women and men in combat roles. However, these standards, like many of Hegseth’s previous decisions, seem to lack proper consideration.

Hegseth’s past remarks suggested skepticism about women serving in combat roles and implied that military standards were lowered to accommodate them. While he later tempered these views during his confirmation hearing, concerns remain about the intention behind the new Army combat fitness standards and their potential impact on women’s participation.

The updated physical fitness test now includes five consecutive events: deadlift, hand-release push-ups, sprint-drag-carry, plank, and a 2-mile run, with higher standards needed for combat roles. Despite initial tests showing lower pass rates for women compared to men, with training, more women are likely to meet the requirements. It remains to be seen if Hegseth will acknowledge these women as fit for duty.

The Army claims the new fitness standards aim to enhance readiness and lethality, but this overlooks the achievements of women in combat roles since the ground combat exclusion policy was lifted over a decade ago. Women have excelled in combat under existing standards, with many earning awards for valor and undertaking roles previously reserved for men.

Research indicates that the new fitness test, focused on brute strength, may not necessarily enhance combat readiness. It appears to overlook crucial elements like flexibility and endurance, which are vital for job performance and injury prevention. The assumption that the new standards will boost readiness lacks solid backing from studies.

The new standards fail to acknowledge that women may outperform men in tests measuring flexibility and endurance, key contributors to combat readiness. Women have been shown to possess advantages in endurance-based activities due to factors like slow-twitch muscles, which resist fatigue better.

In light of these considerations, the new standards should apply equitably across all genders for true accountability and performance evaluation. Presently, there seems to be a discrepancy in how standards are applied and the accountability of those overseeing them.

While women are being scrutinized to validate their place in combat roles, the individual advocating for stricter standards seems exempt from facing consequences for misconduct that would typically lead to disciplinary action for service members. This highlights a broader issue of selective accountability within the system.