(September 10, 2015 at 9:46 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: Not the bedroom combat. I always get my ass whipped. HAH
When it comes to physical abilities and there are lives on the line, yes, there needs to be a performance standard. I believe fire fighters have a standard also. Not sure about all police. I've seen some really unfit examples.
Not up on any military combat duties. Do all require the same level of physical abilities? Do they all need the same abilities in case one goes down (not able to perform) the next available can step in?
I was a physical fitness officer for about a year when I was in the Air Force. I was one of two people responsible for the fitness standard of about 75 people. This was about 3 years ago.
When it came to our standards. The maximum allotted points for women on pushups and situps was still not even a passing score for men. And when it came to 1.5 mile run times, men's minimum required times were minutes faster than women's minimum times... for a mile and a half run. In other words, you could have a male fail his fitness test, but if he were a woman with the same results, he'd get a 90+%.
I don't think the standards have changed much since then, and I know that the situation was similar between the branches.
When it comes down to it, every member of a unit should be able to perform at least the same tasks physically and lethally. Every member of your unit should be able to fireman carry every single member of the unit, in full gear. Can a woman at those standards carry a 220 lbs man in 100 lbs of gear if he was shot in combat? I don't think so. That's just one example.
The standards must be set to the performance required for the job, not to the relative ability of the individual.
