# 84% of female soldiers are failing the US Army's new gender-neutral physical fitness test (ACFT) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 8, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487 "2019-10-08T18:10:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/1 "2019-10-08T18:10:29Z")
> [@](#): > > According to the numbers, a jaw-dropping 36% of soldiers overall failed the test, with 64% passing. When you break it down by gender, 70% of men passed. But here is a number should kill and bury the ACFT evermore: 84% of women failed the test. Those numbers are so absurdly biased against women that I was afraid this was some sort of elaborate joke by Duffelblog. But I spoke with one soldier in a leadership position at an ACFT test battalion, and the soldier confirmed that the leaked numbers lined up almost exactly with those of the soldier’s battalion. [source](https://news.clearancejobs.com/2019/10/05/army-combat-fitness-test-fiasco-slides-reveal-84-of-women-failing-acft/) What should the Army do about this? Should they go back to different standards for (realizing I might be stepping into a quagmire with this next word, but unsure how else to phrase it) each gender? Should the test be changed? The event the women seem to be struggling the most with is the “leg tuck”. [The Army’s website describes it like this](https://www.army.mil/acft/#event5): > [@](#): > > Complete as many leg tucks as possible in two minutes; maintain a relative vertical posture while moving the hips and knees up and down without excessive swinging or kipping > > The Leg Tuck (LTK) assesses the strength of the Soldiers grip, arm, shoulder and trunk muscles. These muscles assist Soldiers in load carriage and in avoiding injuries to the back. Are things like “the strength of the Soldiers grip, arm, shoulder and trunk muscles” rightfully important to the Army and this is just a bad way of measuring them? Is there a way to measure “the strength of the Soldiers grip, arm, shoulder and trunk muscles” that would be more favorable to female soldiers? Or should the Army be working on ways to fight a war that don’t involve soldiers carrying loads and / or injuring their backs? ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/2 "2019-10-08T18:31:58Z")
Is there a source for the slide other than the US Army WTF Moments facebook group? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/3 "2019-10-08T18:41:27Z")
I don’t know what the Army was thinking - no test involving upper body strength is going to have gender-neutral results. Men are way stronger than women, particularly in the upper body, and training increases the gap. > [@](#): > > Is there a way to measure “the strength of the Soldiers grip, arm, shoulder and trunk muscles” that would be more favorable to female soldiers? The short answer is No. Any measurement of arm or shoulder strength is going to disfavor female soldiers. That was why they used to test women with the bent arm hang, and men with pullups. > [@](#): > > Or should the Army be working on ways to fight a war that don’t involve soldiers carrying loads and / or injuring their backs? Yes, they should, and they are. But there are still lots of ways of fighting wars that do involve carrying loads, and that cannot be eliminated. You will always need boots on the ground, and boots on the ground always mean packs on the back. And rifles and rations and radios and ammunition and all the things we give the Army to kill people and break things. The Army could make the test easier. Then more of the 30% of men would pass as well as more of the 84% of the women who failed. Is the Army making its recruiting goals? If they aren’t, maybe look into why. If they are, I don’t see a problem. > [@Robert Heinlein](#): > > A second-best military is the most expensive luxury on earth. The only significant measure of an army that is best, vs. second-best, is how good are they at killing people and breaking things. Whether they are 50% female, 5% female, or 100% male, is irrelevant. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/4 "2019-10-08T18:57:49Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > Is there a source for the slide other than the US Army WTF Moments facebook group? I don’t think so. The test results have been described as a “leak”. I doubt you’ll get some official acknowledgement of the results in the public domain. You’re doubting that they’re authentic or accurate? I think it’s pretty obvious that what Shodan said is true: > [@Shodan](#): > > … no test involving upper body strength is going to have gender-neutral results. Men are way stronger than women, particularly in the upper body, and training increases the gap. The short answer is No. Any measurement of arm or shoulder strength is going to disfavor female soldiers. … and that reality is being reflected in the results of the ACFT. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/5 "2019-10-08T18:58:47Z")
Did you share before Facebook takes it down? ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/6 "2019-10-08T19:11:37Z")
So exactly who has to pass this test? The vast majority of people in the Army don’t do anything more physically strenuous than what civilians do. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/7 "2019-10-08T19:15:40Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I don’t think so. The test results have been described as a “leak”. I doubt you’ll get some official acknowledgement of the results in the public domain. You’re doubting that they’re authentic or accurate? I think it’s pretty obvious that what Shodan said is true: > > and that reality is being reflected in the results of the ACFT. This reality that is supposed to be pretty obvious to you, me and Shodan but has somehow slipped by the US Army? Maybe it hasn’t and there’s a reason that the first recorded ACFT is at least a year out still. I’m not going to work myself into a lather about something posted on facebook by someone who uses sPonGeMOcK tEXt. ---
**Author:** ![divemaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/divemaster/32/78_2.png) [@divemaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/divemaster)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/8 "2019-10-08T19:19:29Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > So exactly who has to pass this test? The vast majority of people in the Army don’t do anything more physically strenuous than what civilians do. Regardless of your garrison job, every soldier receives basic combat training and has the potential to require use of the Basic Training every soldier receives. Even a desk clerk might find him/herself in a position to carry a wounded comrade back to the truck, etc. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/9 "2019-10-08T19:21:33Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > So exactly who has to pass this test? … (Almost\*) everyone in the Army. From[the Army ACFT FAQs](https://www.army.mil/acft/): > [@](#): > > Why does a clerk, a nurse, cyber-warrior, etc. need to take a “combat fitness test?” > > All Soldiers, regardless of MOS, must be capable to deploy and fight. From the Army Vision: “The Army Mission – our purpose – remains constant: To deploy, fight, and win our nation’s wars by providing ready, prompt, and sustain land dominance by Army forces.” To accomplish that mission, the Army will “build readiness for high intensity conflict” with training that “will be tough, realistic, iterative and battled-focused.” The battlefields of today and tomorrow are increasingly complex, fluid, and uncertain; they demand that all Soldiers are physically fit and ready for full-spectrum operations. - There are apparently alternative events: > [@](#): > > Who qualifies for alternate assessments? > > Army senior leaders have approved a modification of the ACFT that included three aerobic test events for selected Soldiers with permanent profiles that prevent full participation in the 6-event test. The alternate assessment, including the additional aerobic test events, do not apply to Soldiers with temporary profiles. Soldiers on temporary profiles are expected to recondition, retrain, and pass the full six-event ACFT. I don’t have any hard figures to cite, but I’d be surprised if the % of “selected Soldiers with permanent profiles that prevent full participation in the 6-event test” is very high. ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/10 "2019-10-08T19:28:24Z")
> [@divemaster](#): > > Regardless of your garrison job, every soldier receives basic combat training and has the potential to require use of the Basic Training every soldier receives. Even a desk clerk might find him/herself in a position to carry a wounded comrade back to the truck, etc. You could say the same thing about me, a 39-year-old Air Force veteran and current reservist. At no point in my 17 year career would I ever have been able to drag a 200lb soldier with gear out of a firefight, and I (a male) would have no problem passing the Army’s fitness test. I know the Air Force is not the Army, but the Army is not the Army infantry, and the Army infantry isn’t Delta Force. Gender neutral requirements for specific jobs are fine, but if 84% of all female soldiers are failing a baseline fitness test, the test is too hard. If these stats are true, and I’m skeptical, then someone seriously fucked up in setting the standards. Again, I’m skeptical. I want to reiterate that. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/11 "2019-10-08T19:33:35Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Gender neutral requirements for specific jobs are fine, but if 84% of all female soldiers are failing a baseline fitness test, the test is too hard. What failure percentage would you say _wouldn’t_ mean the test is too hard? ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/12 "2019-10-08T19:40:20Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > What failure percentage would you say _wouldn’t_ mean the test is too hard? Yes, we should be careful not to go from an “unequal outcome” to “discrimination”. Unequal outcome is a red flag, not evidence of discrimination. Work ability tests can be fairly too approximative. I remember push-ups being a big deal in the Canadian military but, even though I was quite good at them, I’m not sure that helped me out much aside from having an easier time during punishments. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/13 "2019-10-08T19:40:38Z")
Here is some additional information on the data from the OP: > [@](#): > > A leaked document was posted on social media this week showing a roughly 70 percent pass rate for men and an 84 percent failure rate for women, with many of the failures attributed to the leg tuck event. The slides, which came from Army Forces Command and not CIMT, documented testing conducted by 11 of the 63 battalions tested this past year. > > “That was a snapshot from those units,” Hibbard said. “I cautioned the Army senior leaders when I did a brief with the vice three weeks ago because when we start aggregating the data, people are going to make conclusions. The problem is, most of the time, when they did the diagnostic test, this is the first time they’ve ever done it.” > > A lot of units hadn’t trained for the ACFT prior to their first practice test, Hibbard warned. Most of the time, units were briefed on the exercises involved and then they scheduled the test. [source](https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/09/27/acft-standards-released-test-proponent-talks-roll-out-addresses-soldiers-common-concerns/) It seems to me pretty clear that they’re quietly / tacitly acknowledging that the numbers are accurate, but with a couple of caveats: 1. this is only a subset of all the battalions taking the new test 2. this test is new, and they expect that soldiers will train and prepare for it over the next year so that when it becomes the test of record, more of them will pass ETA: > [@](#): > > “The chart in question is not an official document and wasn’t assessed or aggregated by CIMT to produce official results,” said Lt. Col. Peggy Kageleiry, public affairs director for CIMT. > > The Center for Initial Military Training has been collecting data and feedback regarding the ACFT and plans to do so throughout the test’s implementation this year, until it becomes the test of record on Oct. 1, 2020, according to Kageleiry. > > “It is premature to discuss pass/fail rates as troops are not familiar with or trained for the ACFT," Kageleiry said in a statement to Army Times. “For many Soldiers, their initial ‘test’ was the first time they had ever executed a fitness test with strength, power or anaerobic exercises pegged against high demand Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills." > > “It is vital to emphasize that the first record ACFT is at least 13-14 months away,” she added. “The Army will use this year to teach, train and mentor troops on how to prepare for the ACFT and therefore prepare for their combat mission. When training is complete and units have adapted to the new test, we expect performance rates to be similar to the current test.” [source](https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/09/24/slides-showing-high-failure-rates-on-new-fitness-test-are-not-official-cimt-documents-officials-say/) ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/14 "2019-10-08T19:45:51Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > What failure percentage would you say _wouldn’t_ mean the test is too hard? A 20-30% failure rate would probably bring it inline with other branches and/or the previous test. I have other opinions about military fitness tests but they’re outside the scope of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/15 "2019-10-08T19:51:05Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > A 20-30% failure rate would probably bring it inline with other branches and/or the previous test. > > I have other opinions about military fitness tests but they’re outside the scope of this thread. Why does agreeing with other tests mean that that test is good? It could be the other tests which are wrong. OP can chime in but I’d think that the level of relevance of military fitness tests is germane to the issue. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/16 "2019-10-08T20:01:05Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > … OP can chime in but I’d think that the level of relevance of military fitness tests is germane to the issue. I agree, and the Army certainly seems to think that the new ACFT is relevant to the job of being a soldier in the US Army: [https://www.army.mil/acft/#faq-section-1](https://www.army.mil/acft/#faq-section-1) ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/17 "2019-10-08T20:17:38Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > Why does agreeing with other tests mean that that test is good? It could be the other tests which are wrong. Fair point. > [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > OP can chime in but I’d think that the level of relevance of military fitness tests is germane to the issue. > [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I agree, and the Army certainly seems to think that the new ACFT is relevant to the job of being a soldier in the US Army: [https://www.army.mil/acft/#faq-section-1](https://www.army.mil/acft/#faq-section-1) Very well then. Yes, the Army has lots of rules. And it’s almost a trope that good people fuck off to the civilian world because they can make more money without all the hassle, and the upper ranks are filled with lazy deadbeats who can’t hack it elsewhere but know how not to get kicked out until they can retire. Now imagine you’re not a US Army policy maker, you’re a 45-year-old US Army Intel squadron commander. Your best troop, like your 100% go-to soldier for getting-shit-done to complete the mission and win the war, is constantly stressed out because she’s worried she won’t be able to do enough leg tucks. Or worse, she actually does get kicked out, against your say-so, because big Army is worried that she won’t be able to drag a soldier out of convoy ambush that she’ll never be in. That _sucks_. Or just imagine your favorite, hardest working coworker at whatever job you work gets fired for making personal copies or some other dumb rule violation that you don’t really care about because it doesn’t affect you in any way. It’s true that the standards aren’t that tough, and if people really wanted to stay in the military they’d find a way to pass. Rules are rules, after all, and we all have to follow them. But that’s of little consolation when you’re losing good people to a fitness test that will 99.99% of the time never apply to them. (This opinions are my own, and do not reflect my professional views as a senior NCO, nor the views of the US Air Force. Others in my position can and do disagree with my feelings). ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/18 "2019-10-08T20:41:31Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > A 20-30% failure rate would probably bring it inline with other branches and/or the previous test. The article said 64% passed overall - 70% of males, and 16% of females. > [@](#): > > "The problem is, most of the time, when they did the diagnostic test, this is the first time they’ve ever done it.” > > A lot of units hadn’t trained for the ACFT prior to their first practice test, Hibbard warned. Most of the time, units were briefed on the exercises involved and then they scheduled the test. So 70% of men could pass the test without much or any preparation. 84% of women couldn’t. Thus, if you want soldiers who can pass a fitness test, women need more time to prepare, more training, and are more likely to decondition to the point where they fail the test without special maintenance. Meanwhile, 70% of men can do it cold and can be off getting trained on something else. Men, therefore, are more efficient soldiers. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Intergalactic\_Gladiator](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/intergalactic_gladiator/32/112_2.png) [@Intergalactic\_Gladiator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Intergalactic_Gladiator)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/19 "2019-10-08T20:47:32Z")
My wife’s 2nd cousin posted about the ACFT on Facebook and it was dizzying just looking at it and all of its events. She’s been on active duty for a couple years now but she put herself through college in the reserves and through ROTC and she’s a hard charger. I don’t know how useful the new PT test will be but I didn’t think 2 minutes of pushups, 2 minutes of sit-ups, and a 2 mile run was bad either. At least soldiers will look good now when they all finally get switched over to the pinks and greens. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2019, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487/20 "2019-10-08T20:48:35Z")
Back in the dark ages (early 1970s) there were a lot of complaints about women applicants failing to pass some physical tests on the grounds that they would not be able to successfully use the “fireman’s carry” to remove injured or unconscious people from burning buildings. Then someone realized that a standing firefighter holding an injured person up above the ground where the most smoke and toxic air existed was dangerous to both the firefighter and the victim. Tests were changed to use dragging to remove victims and the number of successful women applicant went up. It had nothing to do with “lowering standards” but happened roughly contemporaneously. How have women been performing in actual combat? If they have been failing, then they should not be permitted in combat roles when they fail the ACFT. On the other hand, if women have not been failing in combat, the ACFT should be redesigned to test realistic conditions, not hypothetical ones. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/84-of-female-soldiers-are-failing-the-us-armys-new-gender-neutral-physical-fitness-test-acft/841487.md?page=2)