Kind of makes me glad I chose infantry.
Kind of makes me glad I chose infantry.
Standard NYT smear piece. "If you are a female in the Army, you will be raped or harassed. The men all want to rape or harass you." Blah, blah blah. Certainly, rape and harassment do happen but to read this article you would think that it is only a matter of time before any woman who dares to join the great big misogynist frat party that is the military is raped and/or harassed. Now, in order to maintain the pretense that this was balanced report the author did throw in this paragraph on page six of the sixteen page article
I worked with females early in my career before a reclassed to combat arms and my current wife serve a little over three years before leaving the Army as a Sergeant (one of the best I have seen in my career by the way). I have seen how it works. This article seems to imply that most often commanders will ignore harassment or even rape. That is so patently untrue that it is laughable. Most commanders I have known are so paranoid about even the possible appearance of impropriety that they will crush anything that even looks wrong. I have seen some downright draconian policies enacted to prevent this sort of thing. I once saw a young soldier get his butt chewed because he used the word "chick" to refer to a female and a female soldier who was neither being talked to or about said she was offended. This is not "tailhook". This is just the NYT trying to stir up trouble again, the same as yesterday and the day before and probably tomorrow as well.There were women, it should be noted, who spoke of feeling at ease among the men in their platoons, who said their male peers treated them respectfully. Anecdotally, this seemed most common among reserve and medical units, where the sex ratios tended to be more even. Several women credited their commanders for establishing and enforcing a more egalitarian climate, where sexual remarks were not tolerated.
SFC W
It is a small war issue when Al-Jezzera features it on their English language website. I can't imagine ANYONE making sexual advances at Al-J's star witness, Janis Karpinski.
I'd say it's more of a media management/IW/IO-type issue for Small Wars. In other words, how do you counter the story?Originally Posted by Old Eagle
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
How about having a credible source that is not affiliated with the Army, do an article on integration of the sexes in a combat environment?
I don't buy into the pile that the NYT puts forward - every female at risk for rape. But I do agree that putting a few females in a platoon is a recipe for trouble. I think it translates into a discipline issue at that point.
women are veterans too!
Dusty,
Although I somewhat disagree with using a source outside of the Army channels (starts to sound like we're in a scandal cover-up and worse, who knows what it means to be a woman in the Army, better than the Army ?), there are indeed several good pages on female veterans that cover those bases where doubt exists.
Such as: http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/
There's more than enough opinion out there and I think we could use a female's perspective herein. Do we have any ?
In my 23 years, I never saw such Bravo Sierra. Where did our discipline go ?
Regards, Stan
Something I Used to Mull Over...
... when I ran the Urban Operations Journal webpage and it has carried over to here. Both sites attracted / attract serious students and practitioners of urban operations and small wars. So... how come our site visitor demographics and SWC membership are overwhelmingly male? Food for thought or maybe ammunition for a food fight...
Stan,
I see what you mean, but I was really aiming for the 'disinterested party', a business that would release the story for good or ill of the Army.
I don't have statistics or studies on this subject, so I'm left to personal experiences.
When I deployed into Afghanistan in DEC 01, we left the females in our platoon aboard ship. They weren't allowed ashore until a month or so later. As I haven't deployed to Iraq yet, I asked my SNCO about his experiences - if he ever saw females sexually harassed. He said no, but then added the caveat that if it was a National Guard unit, he would believe it, no problem.
My CO once told us, in sort of a pep speech, "I expect you all to act like men, not girls. We're the infantry, we are one of the last jobs that is all men. We function effectively because we dont have all the drama and problems caused by working with women."
I cant remember what he said word for word but thats pretty much the jist of it. Working with females in a military environment (like 80% males) probably causes more problems than anything else in the military. no im not being sexist thats just the truth.
Last edited by neowolfe; 09-28-2007 at 03:36 PM.
Non-military woman butts in
There were a lot of interesting thoughts on this subject that were all over the spectrum.
First, aside from Hester, you would be surprised how many women have been in fire fights and have medals that you never hear of. I think there are two issues here:
1) The military does not promote it because they want to avoid having to keep defending the subject of women in "near combat" roles.
2) If you want equality, you don't necessarily promote one over the other. You make them like the other. Like the men who are quietly going about their jobs without fanfare who do plenty of things every day that would be noteworthy. But the media attention is very distracting. Much better to treat it like an every day thing.
since I am someone that is interested in the subject, I actually look for it and know of several women that have CABs and silver stars.
I think that the military is going about it the right way in terms of slowly integrating forces through different field operations. There are plenty of units in both Afghanistan and Iraq doing CMOC or CAP that have at least one or more women attached. women are doing "convoy security" or actually driving a truck in hostile territory. The Army corps of engineers have women doing much and so do several of the civilian elements attached to PRTs in these theaters.
To me its the "quiet, quiet" approach. One day, you're going to wake up and find this discussion moot and you won't even know when it happened.
I always liken it to the struggle of integrating blacks and other minorities in the military. Except, of course, some of that occurred during much more turbulent times so its history is a little more intense. Still, you can bet that there was plenty of discussions in the open and within barracks. Plus bad behavior. but that is how we work things out until we are satisfied its resolved. At least until the next issue.
In regards to the abilities of women or what issues they cause in a unit, what its really about it "personalities" and "character". I have worked in female dominated offices (health care is full of women) and ones that were relatively integrated. I've also worked in offices and situations where I was the only woman.
Women in a group can be equally "off color" as men. In the "female dominated" office, I had two men who worked there and had to routinely tell the women to "tone it down" because they would be talking about subjects that are not appropriate for mixed company.
I've worked with "integrated" offices where there is always at least one guy and one girl that don't know how to behave themselves in "mixed" company.
And, in the male dominated area, there is always at least one guy that forgets his manners. I actually was hit on - I mean, hand on the leg, making remarks about body parts, asking what I was doing later, and he was married - by a brand new salesman that I had only met two hours previously at a "working dinner"; the rest of the men in the group all stopped talking when I picked up his hand and stuck it back on the arm of the chair. That guy was gone in two days because my boss, a man, told him that was wrong and chose to set the tone.
The point I'm trying to make here is that, yes, the military actually reflects male/female relationships and working issues outside. While it may not be "deployment", you understand that people spend a lot of time together, sometimes more than with their family, in the work place. In my experience, I actually flew around with a team that was all men and me, staying at hotels, long working hours, eating together, going to "fun" times, etc.
While no one was shooting at us and death was not eminent, it certainly was "living in each others pockets". none of these men made on-toward advances or attempted anything inappropriate. Neither did I freak out when they told jokes that were slightly off color. On the other hand, if things were getting out of line, I would signal that through either word or I would simply make my excuses and leave their company. It usually worked to pull everyone back in line.
The issue here is, as one said, who sets the tone? Leadership sets the tone and so do the people. I have mentored young professional women. My advise to them is that, if they say nothing to the person that is making them uncomfortable, then they have missed the opportunity to set the tone. In my experience, most people are receptive to "gentle rebukes" that let them know where other people's lines are.
Men or women have a responsibility, not just to behave appropriately, but to signal their own comfort levels. Any woman that has made it through boot camp and received a few stripes or bars ought to be comfortable enough to set it. Failure to do so is partly their responsibility. That is why most offices have a policy where they ask the "complainant" what action they took before making a formal complaint. Some think that is making women a victim "again", but I don't see it. This policy helps to re-enforce that part of the responsibility for the tone of the office is up to the people that work there. I would say that goes for a military unit.
However, those that don't accept direction or correction of inappropriate behaviors are discipline issues, inside or outside of the military. In the office, it can be just as detrimental to the work atmosphere and accomplishing goals if you are distracted with internal "relations" issues. However, the office has been integrated and so have many work situations that are long hours, difficult and even labor intensive simply by not accepting that the problem is the integration, but individuals.
I think that is the appropriate tone for the military to set. It doesn't take power points, it takes people who are willing to accept their responsibilities, up and down the chain of command.
Three women I can think of in the military who have done what is barely covered in the media even for men are Sgt Hester, SSgt O'Hara and a Sgt whose last name escapes me but her first name, Lauren, sticks with me (she is army, received the CAB and a silver star for combat). Each of these were either MPs or convoy security. I can't remember their names, but five women have bronze starts for their actions under fire (they were medics). however, all of the women have eschewed most of the publicity because, as Hester said, it would be detrimental, not helpful. They are like the rest. That is the tone they are setting.
When the shooting starts, by the way, I don't think that there is a lot of time to be worrying about the "women" in the unit and their protection. As far as I can tell, it winds up at the age old situation that all male units always talk about: when the stuff hits the fan, you're worried about living, dying, protecting everyone and going home to tell about it.
I will make a final point. I am a big history buff. Reading diaries of women pioneers, they would probably find some of the arguments about women's roles and capabilities amusing. They worked in the fields, fought fires, staved off threats with fire arms and did many other things, sometimes without a man, that would make some combat situations seem like a day at the park. all this angst is really not about women, its about culture. Since we reverted back to largely urban dwelling people, we have also reverted to some stereotypical categorization of gender roles.
All discussed on the academic side, far away from reality. Somewhere, as I type this, a female officer is taking down a criminal. Right down the street, a woman is finishing her twelve hour shift at the Ford plant, welding car parts. Somewhere in Afghanistan, a woman captain is leading a patrol (I know, I read about it). Somewhere in Iraq, a woman is standing guard at the gate of a camp with her rifle while, down the road, another "mans" the .50 pulling convoy security.
And, yeah, somewhere over there, some chuckle head is making an off color comment to a female soldier who is either putting him in his place or is thinking that's the third time and she's not sure whether to report him or kick him in the 'nads.
yet, somehow, the army goes rolling along, combat patrols happen and the world has not fallen apart.
Go figure.
Kat-Missouri
You've pretty much summed it up, kehenry1. Thank you.
Maggie
And some of the firefighters I've worked with would agree with you. I, however, consider that the men were the ones causing the drama and problems....
Maggie
Very true. The most outrageous example of this that I have experience of was at a Corps-level MI Bn when a SSG was given a Company Grade Art 15 because he did not intervene when a male SPC was making off-color comments to a female SPC who both were in his PLT. The incident occurred off-duty, in a civilian nightclub, and he was not with them - they were on a "date" together, and he just happened to be sitting at a table across from them at the time. The command simply assumed he could hear what was going on, and asserted that he failed in his responsibility to immediately stop the SPC from making such remarks. The male SPC received a Field Grade.
DoD 2004 study on the issue here.
A 2023 update. An article by a British academic and the title is IMHO is simply wrong, the deployment was not a secret. See: https://theconversation.com/womens-s...nistan-205669?
davidbfpo
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks