If you don't know what you're talking about you should really stop talking.

I'd say that most of the comments are from people who don't know what they are talking about, including people who serve in the military who perceive this as a discriminatory standard. I've at least been researching both policy and legislation to validate most of my arguments. I am also being clear about my lack of first hand experience with the military. I do, however, know a lot about labour statutes/legislation within the United States and Canada, which a lot of the people responding do not appear to.

First of all pushups are one part of the test, the other 2 parts and sit-ups and running.

I know.

You don't have to pass a PT test to for admission to basic training

I lost track of all of the comments I'd already edited, but I learnt this a while ago thanks to another commenter. I appreciate you adding to it, though, in case my comment was misleading people.

PT tests (which have different standards for men and women) are a regular thing and you have to meet a certain standard to stay in the military.

That's where the rest of my comment, particularly the edit, comes into play. The APFT test is intended to test physical fitness rather than an objective labour standard. As such, it's being compared against the age and gender to which the person is a part, as a relative measure of fitness against their population cohort. So when people cry foul about a discriminatory standard, this claim has only face validity. Once you realize it's just about physical fitness, that fades away, particularly in the face of the fact that all occupational standards are universal regardless of age or gender.

Unfortunately, this comment was not amended to clarify misinformation I'd provided earlier on (but I learnt a lot in the last two-three hours).