Tag: U.S. Army

Unfortunately the Army senior leadership brought this criticism on themselves. Everyone outside of the Pentagon could see this train wreck coming:

The chairwoman of a House Appropriations Committee subpanel slammed Army officials at a hearing Monday over what she called insufficient answers to questions on how the service is combating gender bias, specifically with its new combat fitness test.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., grilled Sgt. Maj. of the Army Michael Grinston on why so many women are unable to pass the service’s new combat fitness test.

“The test shouldn’t be structured in a way that is unfair and makes it so lopsided that it’s impossible for women to really be able to succeed and that definitely will reflect in your recruitment and retention efforts. So it looks like you have a problem and I hope you recognize that,” Wasserman Schultz said during a hearing of the subcommittee on military construction, veterans affairs and related agencies about Army quality-of-life issues and installation updates.

The Army Combat Fitness Test has long been criticized by Congress for its design, which lawmakers say comes at a disadvantage for women who struggle to pass the test. Data revealed in April shows 44% of women failed the ACFT, compared to 7% of men, Wasserman Schultz said.

Stars & Stripes

You can read more at the link, but the Pentagon’s efforts to create a gender neutral test caused them to become gender blind on what that would ultimately mean. You can’t implement a test that disadvantages females and think Congress is going to go along with it. The updated ACFT 3.0 eliminates the gender neutral elements of the ACFT which was one of the main reasons the test was created in the first place.

The way I look at this is that very few females want to join combat arms. Do I really care if for an example an Army nurse or a truck driver cannot do a leg tuck and instead does a plank? No I do not, so why kick this person out of the Army? The Army could not function if it kicked out the amount of females that the ACFT in its prior format would have removed from the force.

Captain Kristen Griest became the Army’s first female infantry officer in 2016 after becoming one of the first females to finish Ranger School. Now she is getting heat for demanding that females meet the same standards as men:

“I’m here saying, ‘Women can do more than we think.’ I have learned this,” she said in an interview, explaining her thinking. “Your gender is not as much of a limitation as you think it is.”

Griest, 32, has received a frosty response from some female service members and veterans, and was accused of “internalized misogyny.” Others have taken her side, or said that they understand her motivation. (……)

“To not require women to meet equal standards in combat arms will not only undermine their credibility, but also place those women, their teammates, and the mission at risk,” she wrote.

Stars & Stripes

You can read more at the link, but she believes that women should meet the same standards as men on the Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT). The problem with the test was that over 50% of women were failing it largely because of one event, the leg tuck. Because of this Congress forced the Army to relook the test and the leg tuck was changed to allow anyone to take an alternate plank test. The plank is easier for people struggling to do the leg tuck to pass.

Another change was in the scoring; before there was three scoring tiers based off of one’s duty description. For example if you were combat arms you had to score in the highest tier of the test; now everyone just has to pass the minimum scores to pass the ACFT. CPT Griest is unhappy about all of this and wants to go back to a test that over 50% of females fail in order to motivate them to get fit.

The way I look at this is that very few females want to join combat arms. Do I really care if for an example an Army nurse or a truck driver cannot do a leg tuck and instead does a plank? No I do not, so why kick this person out of the Army? The Army could not function if it kicked out the amount of females that the ACFT in its prior format would have removed from the force.

I would have handled this differently in this situation, but of course the media is making this into a racial incident when it is not:

A white Fort Jackson soldier seen in a video pushing and yelling at a young Black man in a northeast Columbia neighborhood has been criminally charged, according to the Richland County Sheriff’s Department.

The incident took place in the Summit neighborhood, a sprawling community located between Clemson and Hardscrabble roads.

At an evening news conference, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott identified the man charged as Jonathan Pentland, 42. Deputies charged him with third-degree assault and battery.

The State

You can read more at the link. Pentland did push the guy in the video after he walked towards his wife. The rest of the time he was just aggressively questioning and yelling at the other man. Of course the media is trying to frame this as a white guy doesn’t want a black guy walking around this neighborhood narrative.

What many in the media are not mentioning is what happened before the confrontation. Four days before the incident a man sexually assaulted a woman on the sidewalk in the neighborhood. Then two days before the incident a man tried to walk away with a baby he took from a woman and had to be stopped. The day of the incident caught on the clip something else happened because Pentland’s wife can clearly be heard in the video saying that the man picked a fight with one of their female neighbors. According to the Washington Post the man that Pentland pushed is being investigated for the prior assaults on women in the neighborhood, however police say he has an underlying medical conditions that could explain his behavior.

So essentially we have someone who has possible mental issues assaulting and harassing women in the neighborhood and Pentland intervenes more aggressively than he should of, but should this make him a racist? I see nothing in this video indicating that Pentland targeted him because he was walking while black like the narrative is claiming. If the man was just walking down the sidewalk not bothering anyone, no one would have bothered him.

Pentland was charged for pushing the man and will likely face bigger punishment from the Army, but is anyone going to charge the man in the video with assaulting and harassing women in the neighborhood? Additionally is anyone going to charge the protesters who vandalized Pentland’s home? Pentland is far from the only person in the wrong in this incident, but he is the only one many in the media are focusing on because of the narrative they want to push.

It is amazing that Army leadership did not foresee how controversial a fitness test that puts females at a great disadvantage would be with Congress:

The defense bill halts the implementation of the Army Combat Fitness Test until a study is complete to assess the test’s impact on recruitment and retention. The study, which has to be conducted by an entity independent of the Pentagon, also has to investigate whether troops in different environments where outdoor activity is hindered are at a disadvantage.

The test has already been on hold. Army leaders have said units can conduct the test now, but will not count on a soldier’s record until 2022. This is to give troops more time to train for the test and as a reaction to the pandemic, which has restricted gym access across the country.

The ACFT replaces the decades-old fitness test with more events aimed to gauge a soldier’s physical fitness for combat. This includes CrossFit-style exercise events, hand release pushups, and leg tucks. The test retains the timed two-mile run.

Stars & Stripes

You can read more at the link.

Here is what the Army Secretary had to say about the SHARP program:

“My preliminary review of the report, recent cases and recent media coverage, have hardened my belief that the Army’s SHARP program hasn’t achieved its mandate to eliminate sexual assaults and sexual harassment by creating a climate that respects the dignity of every member of the Army family,” McCarthy said in a video statement Wednesday afternoon.

Army leadership intends to also release an action plan to address the review’s recommendations when it’s released next month.

The Army’s Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention program, or SHARP, has been under scrutiny in recent months following the death of Spc. Vanessa Guillen, a Fort Hood soldier who prosecutors say was murdered in an armory on post by a fellow 3rd Cavalry Regiment trooper.

Guillen’s family said she had been sexually harassed by a fellow soldier prior to her death, but she didn’t report the incident for fear of retribution. Following those allegations, Army Forces Command sent a small team in June to specifically look at the SHARP program on Fort Hood.

Army Times

You can read more at the link, but the problem I see here is setting an unattainable goal. The Army will never eliminate SHARP incidents, just like it will never end theft, murder, assault, and other crimes in the ranks. Everyone who has ever served in the Army has experienced barracks thieves. What makes SHARP different is the politics involved with the issue. When have you ever heard a politician claim theft between soldiers needs to be ended?

What needs to be determined is if the system is allowing soldiers to report and seek investigations and ultimately punishment of those responsible. It is pretty clear that a large number of soldiers are reporting based on the numbers from the Pentagon, what is tricky is the punishment portion when you get into the he said, she said cases particularly when many of them involve alcohol.

This is the same problem that civilian courts have and no one is trying to blow up the civilian court system like politicians want to do with the military justice system.