The Diverging Cultural Paths of American and Canadian Militaries

U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is unlikely to approve of the sight of a Canadian soldier’s authorized long hair and purple goatee.

Hegseth made it abundantly clear during a speech this week given in front of essentially all of the U.S. military’s top brass assembled in Quantico, Virginia, that grooming standards in America’s military would be strict.

“No more beardos,” the former Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran told an auditorium packed with officers wearing dress uniforms with stacked decoration ribbons.

Speculation was rife before the event, given its sheer scale, about the purpose of gathering top U.S. military commanders serving across the globe.

It was apparently not to discuss an imminent conflict, but rather to impress upon generals and flag officers some of the key changes the Trump administration is making in the U.S. military. Hegseth had ordered a review of military standards in March.

Those changes, which Hegseth said are necessary to refocus the military on its primary mission of winning wars, include higher grooming and fitness standards, while providing more leeway for commanders to enforce those standards.

There is also a concerted effort to purge all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives to instead prioritize performance and meritocracy for matters like promotions.

“No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses,” Hegseth said. “No more climate change worship. No more division, distraction, or gender delusions. No more debris. As I’ve said before and will say again, we are done with that [expletive],” he said.

This stance lies in sharp contrast to the previous U.S. administration, as well as the path the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has been on in recent years in the domain of culture change.

More than a contrast, the two closely allied militaries appear to now be going in opposite directions on that front.

“An entire generation of generals and admirals were told that they must parrot the insane fallacy that ‘our diversity is our strength.’ Of course, we know our unity is our strength,” Hegseth told military leaders on Sept. 30.

Culture Change

Meanwhile in Canada, defence officials view the idea that strength comes from diversity as a cornerstone of the military. It is also a guiding principle of the federal apparatus and public service more broadly.

The CAF has been undergoing a profound culture change, driven in large part by the 2022 review conducted by former Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour. A key focus of the review was on addressing sexual misconduct, after several high-profile cases among top officers, but along with that review came heavy focus on increasing diversity and inclusion in the forces.

Arbour wrote in her report that despite troops receiving classroom training on diversity, new recruits learn early on that what is “truly expected, and rewarded, is conformity to a masculine ‘ethos’ and elimination of the inconvenience of diversity. This is considerably at odds with Canadian values and expectations.”

Arbour made the recommendation that a process be created to screen out recruits who do not conform to the CAF’s values or ethos. This recommendation was implemented in late 2024.

The promotion of diversity and inclusion features prominently in the CAF ethos “Trusted to Serve“ released in 2023, which outlines the key military values a soldier should have.

“Canada as a country is made stronger because of its diversity and commitment to equity and inclusion, and so is the CAF,” says the document in explaining the purpose and function of the CAF’s ethos. “Diversity, equity and inclusion are so critical to CAF effectiveness that they are set as professional virtues and a key part of our military ethos.”

The document defines “diversity” as the differences individuals can have on thought, ethnicity, language, sex, gender, age, ability, sexual orientation, religion, and so on. “Equity” is defined as using different means to ensure that individuals with different circumstances can achieve an equal outcome.

This is different from equal opportunity. Advocates of equity believe that certain individuals face systemic barriers which need to be removed, or that they should be given preferential treatment in order to access certain jobs and positions.

Defence Minister David McGuinty commented on the progress made on implementing the Arbour report in July. He said his department and the CAF continue to “advance meaningful culture change by building a safer, more inclusive workplace for all.”

Hegseth, for his part, said the DEI approach is unsuitable for the military. He has instead directed the restoration of a “ruthless, dispassionate, and common sense” application of standards.

“I don’t want my son serving alongside troops who are out of shape or in combat unit with females who can’t meet the same combat arms physical standards as men, or troops who are not fully proficient on their assigned weapons platform or task or under a leader who was the first but not the best,” he said. His mention of “the first” was apparently a reference to individuals with certain characteristics placed in a position as a historic first.

“Standards must be uniform, gender-neutral, and high. If not, they’re not standards. They’re just suggestions, suggestions that get our sons and daughters killed,” said Hegseth.

Women in Combat

Canada’s Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan became the first woman to serve as leader of the armed forces in July 2024.

A combat engineer by trade, she pushed back on the notion that women can’t serve in combat roles after U.S. President Donald Trump was elected in November 2024. Word was getting around that the Trump administration might ban women from serving in a combat capacity, as Hegseth had said in the past that, “we should not have women in combat roles.”

“I wouldn’t want anyone to leave this forum with this idea that women are a distraction to defence and national security,” Carignan told a security forum in Halifax in late November 2024.

“After 39 years of career as a combat arms officer and risking my life in many operations around the world, I can’t believe that in 2024 we still have to justify the contribution of women … in the service of their country,” she said.

Before taking on the role of top military commander, Carignan was in charge of overseeing culture change in the CAF as Chief, Professional Conduct and Culture. In that capacity, she had called diversity a “superpower.”

Women have served in the Canadian military for more than 100 years, but combat roles didn’t open to females until 1989. Meanwhile, efforts to integrate women in combat roles in the United States began during the Barack Obama administration, starting with a policy reversal in 2013. The different services of the U.S. military submitted their plans to integrate women in all military occupations in 2016.

Hegseth has not proposed an outright ban since joining cabinet, but said women in combat roles have to reach the same standard that applies to men.

“If women can make it, excellent. If not, it is what it is,” he said. “If that means no women qualify for some combat jobs, so be it. That is not the intent, but it could be the result. So be it. It will also mean that weak men won’t qualify because we’re not playing games. This is combat. This is life or death.”

Grooming

The CAF changed its dress instructions in 2022 in order to make them more “inclusive” and to allow soldiers more “freedom” and “personal choice” for their appearance.

The change allowed men to grow long hair, colour their hair, and have any style of facial hair, including long beards, bushy sideburns, and funky moustaches. Essentially no restrictions were imposed except that hair must not cover the face and not impede the proper wear of military headdress. Commanders were given leeway, however, to address potential safety or occupational issues.

Changes were made to the dress regulations in July 2024, with some tightening around the length and bulk of facial hair to not exceed 2.5 centimetres. All styles and colour of facial hair are still allowed. A new hair rule says it shouldn’t “impede a member’s vision when operating equipment where safety could be at risk.”

Hegseth is enforcing stricter grooming regulations for the U.S. military, and he says there has been some abuse of regulations allowing men to wear beards as a religious accommodation.

“We don’t have a military full of Nordic pagans,” Hegseth said, in an apparent reference to troops who were granted beard accommodations claiming to be heathen or pagan. “But unfortunately, we have had leaders who either refuse to call [expletive] and enforce standards, or leaders who felt like they were not allowed to enforce standards. Both are unacceptable. And that’s why today, at my direction, the era of unprofessional appearance is over.”

“No more beards, long hair, superficial individual expression,” Hegseth said, equating the practice of loose dress regulations to the broken windows theory in policing. “It’s like you let the small stuff go, the big stuff eventually goes, so you have to address the small stuff,” he said.

The U.S. Army updated its grooming standards during the summer, and temporary medical exemptions remain available, as well as permanent religious accommodations backed by proper documentation.

Physical Fitness

The higher physical fitness standards implemented by Hegseth could also separate the U.S. military from Canada’s armed forces.

Human rights legislation in Canada informs the nature of the fitness test soldiers must pass to meet the occupational requirement. The FORCE test, which includes sprints, a sandbag lift, a sandbag carry, and a sandbag pull, is arguably not hard to pass. A soldier in decent physical shape can complete the sprints in roughly 35 seconds, with the maximum time allotted being 51 seconds.

A previous standard in the Canadian Army, the Battle Fitness Test, was abandoned some years ago. It included a 13 kilometre load-bearing march in full fighting order to be completed in less than 2 hours and 26 minutes. It was replaced by an evaluation called FORCE combat in 2017, which has a march with a heavier load but over a shorter distance of 5 kilometres.

Hegseth said U.S. soldiers will have to pass two physical fitness tests annually, one related to their service (Army, Navy, Air Force), and a new combat field or readiness test depending on whether the member is in combat arms or not. For the service test in combat arms, soldiers will have to achieve the male standard and score 70 percent across all elements.

The U.S. Army physical fitness test is arguably more challenging than the CAF FORCE test, with the requirement to deadlift the maximum weight possible three times, do as many hand-release push-ups as possible in two minutes, complete a timed 250-metre sprint-drag-carry shuttle event, hold the plank position for as long as possible, and complete a timed 2-mile (3.22-kilometre) run.

“Frankly, it’s tiring to look out at combat formations, or really any formation, and see fat troops,” Hegseth told the top military officers when announcing the new fitness requirements. “Whether you’re an airborne Ranger or a chairborne Ranger, a brand new private or a four-star general, you need to meet the height and weight standards and pass your PT [physical training] test.”

ddThe Canadian Press contributed to this report.