N※N

Are combat fitness requirements really lower for women?

  //health-fitness.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. fitness-requirements-really-lower-for-women.html
  Published in Health and Fitness on Thursday, October 2nd 2025 at 14:09 GMT by KIRO-TV
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Are Combat Fitness Requirements Really Lower for Women?

In a time when the U.S. Army is increasingly scrutinizing its physical standards, a recent KIRO‑7 story dives deep into a question that has sparked debate across the military and the broader public: Do women face lower combat fitness requirements than their male counterparts? The piece pulls together statements from Army officials, recent policy changes, and insights from soldiers on the ground to paint a comprehensive picture of the current landscape.

The New Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT)

The Army’s flagship physical assessment—known as the ACFT—has been in the spotlight since it was fully adopted in 2021, replacing the older Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). The ACFT is a six‑event test designed to reflect the varied physical demands of combat: a 2‑mile run, a 5‑kilo deadlift, a standing power throw, hand‑release push‑ups, a sprint‑drag‑carry, and a leg‑tuck (or plank). Importantly, the test does not differentiate between male and female candidates in terms of the score required for each event. The Army’s official guidelines state that “the ACFT is a single standard for all soldiers, regardless of gender.”

Yet critics argue that the sheer nature of the events could still create an uneven playing field. The deadlift, for example, is inherently more taxing on a male’s typical upper‑body strength, while the leg‑tuck—requiring significant core stability—has historically seen women score lower on average. The question is whether these differences justify separate standards or whether a single benchmark should truly measure combat readiness.

The “Combat Fitness Test” for Infantry and Special Forces

While the ACFT covers all Army personnel, the Army also administers a distinct “Combat Fitness Test” (CFT) for soldiers in infantry, airborne, and special operations units. The CFT emphasizes agility, endurance, and combat‑specific drills that simulate real‑world conditions. The test is more demanding than the ACFT and is often a prerequisite for advancement within those elite tracks.

According to KIRO‑7’s investigation, the CFT includes a 1‑mile run in full gear, a three‑lap obstacle course, a two‑mile march with a 30‑lb pack, and a 500‑meter assault course. While the Army has not yet issued a separate score matrix for men and women in this test, some infantry recruiters have indicated that women may be allowed to take the test at a slightly different time or under modified circumstances to accommodate training schedules. This has led to perceptions that women are being granted a “looser” standard, though Army officials insist the ultimate benchmarks remain unchanged.

Statements from the Department of Defense and the Army

The KIRO‑7 story quotes several senior Army officials who emphasize that the policy is “gender‑neutral.” Colonel Robert “Rob” Thompson, a spokesperson for the Army’s Human Resources Command, told the reporter, “The Army’s core mission is to maintain an effective fighting force. Physical standards are designed to ensure every soldier can perform the tasks demanded of them, and those tasks apply equally to all genders.”

The Defense Department’s public affairs office reinforced this stance. A release notes that “the Army’s adoption of the ACFT and its implementation of the Combat Fitness Test across all branches underscore a commitment to fairness and consistency.” Yet, the release also acknowledges that “physical performance varies across individuals,” and thus “the Army continually monitors and updates its standards to reflect evolving operational needs.”

Soldier Perspectives

On the ground, experiences vary. KIRO‑7 interviewed several female soldiers in combat roles. Private First Class Maya Lopez from the 75th Ranger Regiment said she had to “put in extra hours to meet the same standards,” noting that “my colleagues and I practice the same drills, but the timing and weight limits are identical.” Meanwhile, Sergeant First Class Daniel Kim—who has both male and female teammates—pointed out that the training environment is competitive but supportive, “We all push each other to meet the standards; no one gets an easier pass.”

The article also touches on a lawsuit filed by a group of female soldiers who claimed that the Army’s testing practices disproportionately disadvantaged women. The lawsuit alleges that the Army’s policy of allowing women to be excused from certain physical tasks in specific roles—such as a “specialist” in logistics—constitutes discrimination. The Army has denied these allegations, stating that any exemptions are based on operational necessity, not gender bias.

The Numbers Behind the Debate

Statistical data, as highlighted in the article, shows that while average scores on the ACFT differ between male and female soldiers, the Army’s current thresholds account for these variances. For instance, the pass mark for the deadlift is 315 lbs, a figure that has historically been challenging for many female soldiers. However, the Army has introduced optional “deadlift assistance” equipment—such as elastic bands—to help soldiers improve their performance without lowering the standard itself.

Similarly, the ACFT’s “leg‑tuck” event has seen a higher pass rate among male soldiers, prompting discussions on whether an alternative core test (the plank) might better serve all soldiers. The Army has already piloted a plank option for the “basic” version of the test in a limited number of units, with early results suggesting a more inclusive approach.

Looking Forward

KIRO‑7 concludes that the Army remains committed to maintaining a single standard for all soldiers, while also acknowledging that the journey to truly level the playing field may require adjustments in training, coaching, and equipment. The article underscores that the debate isn’t about lowering standards for women—rather, it’s about ensuring those standards are truly reflective of combat reality and equally attainable for every soldier.

The question of whether combat fitness requirements are lower for women continues to evolve. With ongoing policy reviews, additional data collection, and a growing focus on gender equality in the military, the conversation is far from settled. But one thing is clear: the Army’s latest initiatives aim to make the standard itself, not the exception, the benchmark for all soldiers—regardless of gender.