 Equality is defined as the state of being equal, specifically in status, rights, and opportunities.   It cannot be disputed that all persons, regardless of gender, should have equal opportunities to succeed in employment.  Women should be encouraged to pursue the same jobs and positions as men, including not only the private sector, but also in our nation’s military.  However, as the process of fully integrating women into the military workforce evolves, it is important that for combat jobs women are held to the same physical standards to ensure the safety and ability of our service men and women. In a time in which gender equality has become a prominent topic of discussion in America, it is necessary that we acknowledge the potentially severe consequences of selective gender equality in the military. We cannot push for women to have the same equal opportunities and positions as men if they are not required to share equal requirements for those positions. Gender equality in the United States Military can best be achieved by implementing a baseline physical fitness test that is equal for all soldiers, men and women, complimented with additional standards specific to each military occupational specialty (MOS). 

Currently, the physical fitness standards throughout the Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, are separated by both age group and gender. The physical fitness exam contains three components; a run, an abdominal test (crunches or sit-ups), and an upper body test (push-ups, pull-ups, or flexed arm hang). Specific to the Army, the minimum scores required to graduate from Advanced Individual Training (AIT) are drastically different between men and women. While the sit-up standards are the same for men and women, ages seventeen to twenty-one, the push-up and run maximum scores for female soldiers are equal to the minimum scores for male soldiers. In the Air Force, the two-mile run time for females is three minutes slower than their male counterparts, and the minimum push-up requirement is twenty-eight repetitions lower for females versus males. In the Marine Corps, women have the option to conduct a flexed-arm hang as a substitute to the pull-up test, and, similar to that of the Air Force, the three mile run minimum score is three minutes slower than that of a male. The Institute of Medicine Committee on Military Nutrition Research published a book discussing how height, weight, and physical fitness standards in the military were developed and changed over time. In this book, it is acknowledged that standards have changed and been adjusted over the years to better the military’s pool of perspective soldiers as the physical needs of combat change. What this book fails to realize is that the situations in which large adjustments were made to make lower or change the standards were often major wars. It is unreasonable to allow any soldier who does not meet the minimum standards to engage in a unit they are not qualified for.  

As of January fourth, 2017, the United States Army “launched a new physical fitness test designed to determine if new recruits and soldiers can meet the physical demands of certain jobs such as infantry and armor specialties (Cox).” The new test is separated into three categories based upon the physical demands of each MOS. There are now four different exercises, the standing long jump, the seated power throw, the strength deadlift, and the interval aerobic run. The OPAT test is administered after the army physical fitness test (APFT), and is required to qualify for certain MOS’s. This new assessment is gender neutral and requires all soldiers, both men and women, to meet the standards of the category in which his or her intended MOS is classified as. In order to be eligible to go to AIT for ones intended MOS, they must meet the standards for that MOS’s category. Therefore, for MOS’s that are more physically demanding have higher standards than subsequent MOS’s. “When a soldier wishes to reclassify to a new MOS…then he or she would need to take the occupation physical assessment test (OPAT) (Cox).” This means to transfer from one MOS to another, if the MOS is in a higher category the soldier must retake the test to qualify. The retake is not only necessary, but it also serves the purpose of maintaining equality throughout the military.

Throughout The Status of Gender Integration in The Military, by Margaret Harrell, et al, Harrell, along with her colleagues, analyzed the level of representation in newly opened roles, as well as the current representation in the military as of 1998. While this source may be dated, it provides a useful representation that is not drastically different from present day statistics. This source can be used as a benchmark for the results that could be expected today, when all roles are opened to both men and women. In the Army, the total percentage of enlisted women who opted to enter these newly opened roles was only 5.3 percent. In the Navy, only 4 percent of women entered these new roles. In the Air Force, the percentage was only .9, and in the Marine Corps, it was 2.6 percent. This data, when compared to the data of previously opened military occupations for female enlisted soldiers, is much lower. Throughout each branch of the military, gender representation in previously opened occupations consisted of 21.9 percent in the Army, 12.1 percent in the Navy, 18.2 percent in the Air Force, and 7.3 percent in the Marine Corps (Harrell). This data can be used to predict future levels of enrollment of women in the military as more roles are opened to them. While it is not to say that women do not want to be a part of these roles, it is a good representation of the fact that less women than men attempt to enter these roles. This idea proves that equal representation in the military is not realistic. The data shows that implementing a quota would be difficult to meet due to the fact that there are less women than men in the military to begin with. The study conducted by Harrell and her colleagues shows that when new roles are opened it is difficult to reach equal representation because there are far fewer females. It is important to understand that the topic of gender integration is not reaching towards the end goal of an equally split military, male and female, but rather one where everyone is treated as a soldier and given the same opportunities.

In response to former Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter declaring that all combat jobs will be open to women without exception, the Marine Corps conducted a study in which “400 Marines, including about 100 women” (Seck) were divided into different MOS’s and were tested upon his or her battle readiness. The Marines in the study were tested in a “series of assessments…that attempted to simulate the toughest physical requirements for each combat MOS” (Seck). While only two of the one hundred women were able to complete the experiment, the overall consensus of the Marines who were interviewed was that while most women do not want to be a part of these roles, those who are willing and able to uphold the same physical standards as their male counterparts should be permitted. This study serves as evidence that there are women in the military that are who are interested in frontline combat roles, and that those who are physically capable should be allowed to contribute to the success of these units. During the experiment, "When the commandant came to visit [them] out at the range one day, he asked how many Marines felt that [infantry training] is adequate," he said. "Half raised their hands” (Seck). After completing the experiment, many of the soldiers felt as though infantry training did not prepare them well enough for the ‘real life’ training exercises they were put through in the task force. This serves as a message that lowering the standards of basic infantry training, or any other combat arms would not only decrease the ability of our soldiers, but also increase the chance of casualties due to undertrained soldiers.

According to Jonah Bennett, a national security/politics reporter, pressure from the political leaders to integrate more women into combat roles could degrade the standards. The Marine Corps’ gender integration plan “mandates that every ground combat battalion must have a minimum of two female officers” (Bennett). This mandate is required to take place “90 days before other female Marines join the unit” (Bennett). The plan suggested by the Marine Corps brings forth issues in regards to the Infantry Officer Course (IOC), which is a more grueling and difficult process. The Marine Corps “sent 350 enlisted women…through the Infantry Training Battalion Course (ITB)” (Scarborough). Of these women, about 120 completed the course, but due to the mandate, the women cannot enter infantry units. The IOC is 30 days longer than the ITB course. In addition, officers are required to “’know every single job and be the physical, mental and moral leader of that unit’” (Scarborough). To date, no women have completed the IOC, and of the women who have attempted to, none have made it past the first day (Scarborough). The military as whole must adjust its training in order to better prepare all soldiers for whatever challenge each man or woman chooses to take on. 

In order to have equality in the military, woman officers must be prepared to lead and show the other enlisted male soldiers that not only are women capable of fighting side by side with them, but that they can lead them as well. However, to lower the standards in an effort to push more women through the IOC would undermine their leadership, not because they are women, but because they did not have to uphold the same standards as their fellow soldiers. This would endanger the lives of our soldiers because as a subordinate, if one does not have respect for their leadership it creates dysfunction within the unit. This danger does not only apply to women if the standards were lowered, but also to all new officers. As a cadet in the Reserve Officer Training Program, I personally will be graduating as a second lieutenant in the Army. It is extremely important that when I am put in charge of my first platoon I remain humble, as all of my subordinates have more real time experience than myself. Also, I need to be able to prove to them that I can keep up with them both physically and mentally, similar to how women must be able to prove that they are capable enough to not only keep up with men, but also lead men. Lowering the standards for any officer regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, etc. would create an atmosphere in which there would be no respect for enlisted soldiers’ superiors. 

While many people believe it is time that our country allows women into combat roles, there are still some who view it as too dangerous, believing that women cannot meet the standards, or that women will not be able to handle the mental stress of taking someone’s life. Throughout his piece in The Telegraph, Sean Rayment expresses his concern as a former paratrooper that “close-quarter combat is… brutal and barbaric”, and questions if modern society should allow women to engage in this brutality. His questions are later answered when he interviewed a female marine who was in marine boot camp. After asking her whether or not she believed she would be capable of going to war and killing an enemy, she replied with certainty that “[she’s] ready for it. [She] wants to serve [her] country and [she is] prepared to make that sacrifice” (Rayment). In initial boot camp, although women and men are separated, the standards and tasks are all the same. At times, and with certain tasks that men may perform at higher levels, there is still a minimum that the women who succeed have met, and to discriminate against these women and to not allow them to try and enter the same roles as men would be absurd.

In an article featured on Daily Mail, written by Tim Sculthorpe, it is explained how the Army is considering re-writing the fitness test to make sure women can qualify for front line units. One of the tests that is being considered is to require “21 press-ups, 50 sit-ups and run one and a half miles in 13 minutes or less” (Sculthorpe). According to the article, sources have expressed that the modifications to the test are not being made in an attempt to meet a gender requirement, but rather to decrease the number of women injured. This idea to adjust the standards for women to decrease the number of injuries is flawed. Lowering standards in training and producing soldiers who are not capable of performing necessary tasks may decrease injuries in training situations, but in a combat zone there is no way to lower the standards. It is necessary that every soldier is able to carry the same weight and ruck and run the same speed and distance. Creating soldiers who are less capable will only increase injuries and casualties in the warzones. 

An article was written by Bradley C Nindl and other medical professionals that examines the “physiological, musculoskeletal injury, and optimized physical training considerations” (Nindl 50) for women in combat. This article addresses the physiological differences between men and women in their ability to perform tasks necessary to become soldiers who occupy combat positions. The article states that “women are more resistant to muscle fatigue than men… however, in the context of absolute measures, absolute muscular endurance and power are greater in men”. This is relevant in combat positions because in instances where a soldier must lift an artillery shell or ruck with fifty plus pounds of weight in equipment, men are better suited. However, it does later state that with strength and endurance training women can improve their performance in combat-related tasks. Because women are more resistant to muscular fatigue relative to body size, with proper training to increase strength, there would be a reduction in injury due to repetitive use. The article explains the deficiencies that women face due to the nature of their physiological builds, but explains how this can be overcome through training that has greater emphasis on strength and power. Currently “with heavy emphasis continually placed on endurance performance” (Nindl 60), women are unable to build the muscular strength and power required to perform various combat-related task without developing injury according to Bradley Nindle, et. al. The article makes the recommendation that to prepare women for the physical demands of combat, the military needs to adjust their training to “[include] resistance training…, move away from ‘field expediency’…, [emphasize] load carriage task performance…, [and] increase training time dedicated to physical readiness training” (Nindl 61). Essentially the article suggests that with proper training and focus, women can build the strength and muscular endurance to withstand the physical demands of combat.

The pentagon and government has already issued their legislation requiring all military branches to open up all combat roles to women.  As stated previously and continually proven through evidence that combat effectiveness and soldier’s safety would diminish, the physical fitness standards should not be lowered to allow more women into combat roles. It is essential that instead of lowering the standards we should instead place more emphasis on the specific training, like ruck marches and load carriage, that will prepare women for these tasks. By doing so it will not only allow more women to effectively enter these positions, but will also make the military as a whole more physically fit and less prone to injury. It is also important to ensure that with these changes more women are pushed towards leadership and officer positions to promote enlisted women to follow suit. Equality is defined as the state of being equal, especially in status, right, and opportunities. To properly integrate gender equality in the military, women should be provided and encouraged to pursue the same jobs and positons in the military as men, but also be held to the same physical standards to ensure the safety and ability of our service men and women.
