One of the greatest hot-button issues of the century continues to be the evolving role of women in traditionally “male” careers, including the military, science and engineering.

Officially speaking, women have been part of the United States Armed Forces since 1901 with the establishment of the Army Nurse Corps. Before the establishment of a unit comprised completely for women, it should be noted that females have actually served in conflicts such as the War for Independence and the Civil War, albeit in a far less glorified (or even recorded) manner as nurses and even combatants dressed as men. Today, the number of women serving in all branches of the United States Armed Forces is quite staggering, even when compared with figures from just one decade ago. Currently, “women represent 14% of our active duty forces and 20% of new military recruits. Women are also playing a more active role in combat operations in the global war on terrorism than in any previous conflict” (Perlin 861) and women also hold roles as officers in the military.

While these statistics about women in the military may be surprising, Perlin notes that women only account for 5.5% of the total veteran population—a demographic that is bound to change drastically if the pattern of more women joining continues. Overall, the women’s roles in the military do not differ significantly from those of male members, aside from a few rules that have been instituted regarding their ability to participate in heavy combat situations. While this issue will be addressed in more detail in another section, it is reasonable to state that women’s role (aside from that fact) are exactly what a typical man’s might be. Each member, regardless of rank or branch is assigned particular duties and for the most part, these are not assigned along gendered lines. Therefore, men and women often work side by side, performing the same tasks and confronting similar stressors, such as missing family members and completing their jobs to the best of their ability.

While some might argue that the fact that women are not permitted into certain arenas of battle makes their role significantly less important than that of their male counterparts, one must keep in mind that many branches have large numbers of members who are not taking part in actual battle but are working behind the scenes. The wide array of possible employment for females (and males) allows one to avoid the actual front and it is up to each commanding officer and currently, Donald Rumsfeld, to dictate whether or not this is a place for women. Still, generally speaking, even though there are some issues unique to women that must be addressed, their potential to play a vital role in their chosen branch is no more or less equal to that of their male counterparts.

Just as a majority of the roles women have in the military are equivalent the those the males have, so are the stresses and anxieties related to life in the military. In the course of my research, I interviewed Electricians Mate First Class Alicia Nicholson, age 37, about her experiences and found that she often felt that many of the basic troubles she encountered were similar to those faced by her male coworkers. At one point during the discussion, Nicholson stated that she had many difficult times with long periods of time away from family and home, but that it was no different from how the males felt. Many of the men also had families they missed as well and both sexes encountered many of the same daily stressors brought on by working and living away from a familiar setting.

Women in the military face other issues with their families. For instance, relationships in a military family can be complicated and women, especially if they become pregnant during service (or shortly after) can be especially stressful. They are forced to leave their children and spouse and this can cause a great deal of anxiety for both parents. When viewed objectively, however, these same problems could exist for a man who has recently become a parent and is forced to leave home despite the circumstances. Aside from these more general issues, there are some issues which apply only to women in the military and some of these can cause a great deal of stress and hardship. For instance, some women find the current restrictions about their participation in battle rather disturbing and stressful, especially if they feel that is where they should be placed.

According to a task force assembled by the Department of Defense, “because female service members are a minority, are excluded from some of the highly regarded combat specialties, and are held to different physical fitness standards, some in the Academy communities do not value women as highly as men” (Department of Defense 2005). While the everyday stressors faced by women in the military are often the same men confront, these observations summarize some of the other possible contributors to stress among women in all branches of service. Recently, there has been a large outcry on the part of a large group of women in the Army about the prohibitions set in place that bar a woman from taking place in active ground combat. At present, there are regulations in place that “prohibit women from ground combat—a prohibition that also applies to women in FSCs (forward support companies). Nevertheless, the Army, claming there not enough men to fill positions in the FSCs has begin to assign women to them” (Owens 22). Army leaders claim that this change is consistent with current regulations and that Defense Department rules bar women from FSCs only during moments in which those units are conducting combat.

The idea behind this is that women will be there until the battle becomes “too hostile” for them to be present so that they can stay committed to the rules set forth by the Defense Department. In essence, by creating more distinctions instead of fewer, the Defense Department is merely aggravating some of the problems of equality that are already known to exist. Many women in the military believe that they should be given full equality and that this should certainly include the right to fight during instances of ground combat. For some females, this causes a great deal of alarm and anger, simply because it can be seen as a “slippery slope” argument that will lead to even greater restrictions being imposed in the future. Setting forth restrictions on women being pilots (which are no longer applicable) and that they cannot participate in battle only aggravates the differences between the sexes, a problem the military does not want yet continues to promote. According to Alicia Nicholson, “women have every opportunity that males have when making the military a career” although this is only the case when a woman chooses a field that is not combat-oriented. She was able to move ahead and become a high ranking member of the Armed Forces, but this was because she was in an area without gender-based restrictions. Had she wished to specialize in ground combat (as some women do) she would have found her career to be an uphill battle and most likely, quite stressful.

Inevitably, with any organization of mixed genders, there are problems that are bound to arise. Some researchers suggest that the military, which was once far more rooted in male friendships and bonding experiences, has undergone significant changes with the introduction of a relatively large number of women who have joined in the past several years. “One of the arguments against gender integration in the military centers around the premise that male bonding is the cornerstone of small unit cohesion, and that the presence of women undermines this bonding, thus decreasing cohesion and ultimately, readiness” (Rosen 325). To those of such a mindset, the addition of women into the military corrupts something that was once “pure” and masculine and this way of thinking causes problems for women, especially since they are given different physical requirements than men are. Despite this sentiment that may or may not exist among some members of the military, women are working on carving out a unique place for themselves, one that is both concurrent with men and another that is entirely separate since they have a host of unique issues to deal with. One of the most prominent of these problems women encounter is sexual harassment.

When asked if she had been sexually harassed during her term of service, Alicia Nicholson offered a startling response, saying, “I was sexually harassed on a continual basis, but you can’t report every situation. Some of the harassment came from high ranking officers. Over the years, I learned to use this to my advantage to make rank.” The frequency of her problems with sexual harassment is rather astounding and might be too surprising for some until they are faced with some of the actual statistical data regarding the issue. A recent study interviewed 537 United States women who served in the Vietnam and Persian Gulf War eras. They were all asked about a range of social experiences during their term of service and the results were surprising. Out of this group of women, “seventy-nine percent reported experiences of sexual harassment during their military service; 54% unwanted sexual contact; 21% physical violence solely within the context of rape; and 36% threatened or completed physical assault” (Adams 14). This is quite a large number of women and although some time has passed since the initial Gulf War (and of course, Vietnam) one must not assume that heightened media attention of the issue has eradicated such a widespread problem so quickly. What further complicates matters is that Nicholson, like other women in the military who are subjected to constant sexual harassment, has no choice but to take the abuse and try everything to make it work for her, or to “rat” on the aggressor which might bring even more problems. There is no easy solution for women who are being sexually harassed since either way they go they are offering themselves up to more problems and scrutiny from their male counterparts.

The issue of sexual harassment inevitably leads to a discussion about special treatment of women. For instance, during this time of extreme political correctness, the military as an organization is seeking to reach out to women—both those in active service as well as potential recruits. It is important for them to show how it can be a great opportunity to gain valuable skills while remaining safe from aggression and inequality. The problem is, there have been claims made that women are being granted high ranking positions as a result of their gender (so that the demographics of the Armed Forces can be enhanced) and this causes even more resentment from males. It is difficult not to ignore the statement Nicholson makes when discussing sexual harassment. She first comments on the frequency of the assault but then follows it up with the statement, “Over the years, I learned to use this to my advantage to make rank.” Although she was not entirely clear about this point, her statement makes it seem as though her only form of true advancement or power is through a sort of quasi-sexual manipulation of the system. By noting that male members are harassing her, she has the possibility of dangling crimes over their heads—crimes that are punished severely, especially after all of the media attention that has been granted to the issue within the past few years.

While the case of a more sexualized sense of special treatment is worth considering, the largest question many are faced with when considering special treatment of women is the wide margin of difference in some of the requirements for entry into the Armed Forces. All branches have a required set of obligations that one must fulfill before gaining entry, but for women these physical requirements are far less demanding. The sentiment has often been expressed that “women want equality so they should do everything the men do exactly.” While this may ring true for some, there is a biological basis for this—many women simply do not posses the strength of men. This may inflame some sensibilities, but it is almost beyond opinion and is simply fact. What it does not take into consideration, however, is that other skills are required for any military career and this should be more of a focus (especially in non-combat oriented branches such as the Navy, for instance) than it is currently. In any case, equality does not mean everyone must be able to perform at the same capacity, but only that any differences are recognized and not exploited. The task of any woman in the military would be simplified if this realization was instituted instead of endlessly debated.

Related Articles

Women, Science and Professional Limitations

Other essays and articles in the Main Archives related to this topic include : The Full Extent of Damaging Representations of Women in the Media   •   The History of the Non-commissioned Officers Corps     •   A Historical Look at Mothers in Canada

Works Cited

Adams. “Violence Against Women in the Military.” USA Today Magazine 130.2675 (2001): 14.

Donnelly, Elaine. “Rumsfeld Dithers on Women in Combat.” Human Events 62.15 (2006): 18.

Owens. “GI Jane, Again.” National Review 57.10 (2005): 22.

Perlin. “Women in the Military: New Perspectives, New Science.” Journal of Women s Health 14.9 (2005): 861.

“Report of the Defense Task Force on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Military Service Academies.”US Department of Defense (2005).

Rosen, Leora N. “Cohesion and the Culture of Hypermasculinity in U.S. Army Units.” Armed Forces & Society 29.3 (2003): 325.