Gender Norming

Gender Norming (Final)

Matt Amos

What exactly is a standard? According to Webster's dictionary, a standard is a level of quality or excellence that is accepted as the norm or by which actual attainments are judged. Standards are created because someone believes that a fair and efficient form of doing something is necessary. The military is full of these standards. One of the most widely known is the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT). It tests the maximum amount of push-ups and sit-ups a person can do in two minutes. Along with completing a two-mile run in the allotted time prescribed. The APFT is different from any other standardized test I have ever seen. It is painfully obvious that the test is severely skewed in the females favor.

About fifteen years ago, "a group of sports medicine experts in the Army decided that the standards for the females in the APFT were not fair" (www.us.army.mil/athleticmed.html). They believe that overall some parts of the body were weaker on females than in males, and that a new test could help females be equals in the military. This is despite the fact the women had been doing the APFT for years with out a problem, and no complaints were ever filed. Never the less, a physical fitness board was created in order to research a fairer standard. After several years of research, the board eventually came up with what is now the current APFT. They created a process called gender norming. Their hope was that this would set the bar for all other gender-integrated programs in the military. However, all the program succeeded in doing was creating weaker females and a bitter male population in the Army.

The way gender norming works is more of a theory than a proven fact. The idea is that by taking a handful of case studies done in a laboratory we can figure out every female's physical fitness level. There is only one problem with that idea. Every human being in the world has different genetics. Meaning not every female is going to have the same body type and muscle structure as the next. To imply that females are weaker genetically than men is preposterous. Just as some women may be weaker in a certain event in the AFPT so might a male be as well. For example, I hate running with an extreme prejudice. I have never been a good runner and more than likely never will be. Does this mean that now, because I do not run well that all males in the Army should have an easier standard? Of course not, that is crazy. The male soldiers would find that insulting and would not allow it to stand. The Army has created a double standard and the women for some reason seem to accept it. It is ironic considering how females in the army have been constantly asking for equal rights and how they only want to be considered as equals.

It was not until three years had passed since the creation of the new female standard, that women started to complain about unfair standards. All of a sudden the board was receiving letters on the how the Army's basic training standards were to hard for females. Thus the formation of a new basic training establishment for females and

noncombatant MOS (military occupational specialty) was created in order to create a "less gender prejudiced basic training and general training atmosphere" (Athletic Medicine # 2). Now a days it is commonplace to hear about a formal complaint is being filed against the Army, saying that something is gender biased. Women claim that because they do not have the same amount of upper body strength, they should have to do fewer push-ups. They also claim that their legs are not as strong as their male counter parts so they need a slower run time. I could agree that some women are not as strong as males and that maybe an easier standard could help make things fairer. That is however, if the Army does not have a physical