Mrs. Gutmann insinuates that the reason for this is to make recruits feel special. Here is an example of the author taking something completely out of context. The reason they are not called private is that many of them are not privates. In BCT (basic training) I was a Private First Class and my training class had numerous Specialists in it. When speaking to an individual, the DS (drill sergeant) will use that soldier's rank or last name. This is the only appropriate form of address by Army tradition. When speaking to the group or of the group, it would therefore be inappropriate to say "privates" when some may not be. Another reason is to instill in new soldiers their very reason for being there. While some may have signed up to be cooks or mechanics, they are all soldiers first. Addressing them as such is the first step in creating this mentality is to address them as such. The reason they are not called recruits is because the army does not have recruits. The Marine Corps has recruits, and they are still referred to as such. .
As far as the physical training goes, Mrs. Gutmann has many factual errors here as well. One of the first is on page 40 in her reference to "ability groups". She alludes that trainees are broken down into these groups so that some will not be made to feel bad by training at a higher level than they are able. The truth is in fact exactly the opposite. Soldiers are broken down into ability groups based upon their first performance evaluation of the Army Fitness Qualification Test (on which each soldier must make a minimum score to even ship to BCT). These ability groups are then used to give those who scored the lowest special attention to make sure they can accomplish the far more stringent requirements in order to pass BCT. The slowest and weakest are actually given more work in order to bring them up to par with the rest of the class. The author also refers to more than ten pushups or sit-ups in 30 seconds as being classified as trainee abuse.