Air University Review, November-December 1978

Women in Combat

the need for cultural reconditioning

Captain Judith M. Galloway

IN THE past few years, the debate over the role of military women has evolved to the point where the Department of Defense is now recommending to Congress that Title 10 to the U.S. Code be changed to allow women to serve aboard aircraft or on ships engaged in combat.

The ban on women in combat is the last barrier to equal opportunity for military women. However, the issue cannot be resolved on the basis of equal rights but rather on the basis of mission effectiveness. The problem is that mission effectiveness is not measured by competence alone. There is much evidence to suggest that women would be competent as fighter pilots, or in any other combat role for which they are physically and mentally qualified. Women have not been kept out of combat because they are unqualified but because their presence makes men uncomfortable.

The idea of a woman being tortured as a prisoner of war is unbearable for many men because it somehow implies that they have failed in their role as protector. If women are to be smoothly integrated into nontraditional military roles, there must be some cultural reconditioning.

Foremost among the critics of the exclusion of women from combat roles is Major General Jeanne Holm, USAF retired. Last year, in a prepared statement before the congressional Subcommittee on Priorities and Economy in Government of the Joint Economic Committee, General Holm said:

I have no problem with the idea of women as members of combat aircrews. Rated officer training programs are voluntary. Anyone who applies must face up to the risks involved including the possibility of being shot down over enemy territory.¹

The utilization of women in the Air Force today is more extensive than it has ever been. However, for most of us who are really interested in a full career, the limitation on our role as combatants seriously affects the kinds of challenging jobs we will be allowed to hold and our promotion potential. This is why many military women are concerned about the limitations on their duty' status. General Holm put her finger on the problem rather well in her testimony:

Increased utilization of military women has always been a difficult concept for the military to accept. They [military decision-makers] have traditionally thought of military women as the resource of last resort, after substandard males, minorities, and civilians.²

General Holm further cited that the root cause of the problem is the inescapable fact of cultural conditioning. The deeply ingrained belief that national defense is a man's job is not easily altered.

In the all-volunteer force of the 1980s, it will become increasingly difficult to recruit good quality male high school graduates as the pool of 18 year olds will be considerably smaller than in this decade.³ This will continue the need for expanded utilization of women. In recognition of this, the Air Force is continuing to increase its representation of women in the active force in a planned, steady manner. Women are responding to these opportunities in greater numbers than ever before. The young woman who enters the military today does so with high expectations of equal opportunity and treatment. The impact of her first supervisor mayor may not be quite so ideal. Nevertheless, the utilization of women in nontraditional career fields has been widely publicized and is considered by many an unqualified success.

Yet, there remains some tension, and, on occasion, even open hostility is evident in previously all-male work groups. These cases have been documented by Social Actions offices as well as by the Leadership and Management Development Center traveling teams. Of the statistics compiled from more than 150 field visits to date, women's problems rank as one of the more frequently encountered issues.⁴

If women are experiencing difficulty in gaining acceptance and being fully integrated into the work force in nontraditional fields such as aircraft maintenance and security police, what problems are we likely to be facing if we include them in combat specialties where resistance may be even greater? There is continuing concern on the part of senior planners and policy-makers that women just will not fit in well in certain combat-related, male-dominated functions without adversely impacting on mission effectiveness.

The success of women in pilot and navigator training is a testimony to their determination and capability. However, the real test will come only after they have been flying on the line for several years. The requirement for frequent TDYs, sometimes for considerable lengths of time, is quite likely to cause some strain on the home life of both men and women aircrew members. How well this situation is handled will determine the real success or failure of women in this role.

One of the reasons, in addition to the combat issue, that women were not allowed to serve in missile launch crew positions for so long was that some wives of crew members violently opposed the idea of their husbands being isolated with another woman for extended crew alert periods. Despite the sniggering of some "dirty old men" who would like to think otherwise, the real issue is not one of sexual promiscuity. The real issue centers around greater contact with one's coworkers than with one's spouse, and this may be particularly true in the missile business. The lack of time with one's family is likely to cause resentment and even hostility. When that is compounded by the fact that one's co-workers happen to include a member of the opposite sex, the likelihood of jealousy is even greater. One must not overlook the fact that many military women are also military wives.

Women have now entered Titan II training on a trial basis. If that program succeeds--and there is no reason to expect it will not--women may ultimately be placed on other SAC missile crews as well.

With the exception of World War II, women have not been needed by the Department of Defense in nontraditional roles. Now the all-volunteer force and the projected decline in males eligible for military service may bring the issue of the utilization of women to a head, and women may at last achieve full participation across the entire spectrum of military roles.

The issue remains one that will only be resolved by further analysis of current and future Air Force needs and careful assessment of the impact of women currently serving in operational roles. If women will seriously jeopardize the combat readiness of combat crews by instigating petty jealousies and rivalries merely by their presence in these groups, then we cannot risk admitting them to these career fields. However, if we can reasonably establish that this will not happen, then we owe it to the women to make the best possible use of this resource.

Women have a tremendous responsibility to make the transition from previously all-male career fields to integrated ones as smooth as possible. There are adjustment problems on both sides. Most military women, however, are better equipped to deal with the stress and pressures of being in a previously all-male unit because they have experienced it before. We owe it to the mission and the men we work with to be patient and understanding instead of overreacting to every joking remark that could possibly be misinterpreted as a male chauvinist attitude. Berating them for their prejudice will only cause male backlash. We must not be too proud to do more than meet them halfway.

THE INCLUSION of women in combat roles need not undermine the institution of marriage nor the professionalism and effectiveness of the military. The careful staffing by our senior military and civilian leaders in planning for the admission of women to the Air Force Academy and to pilot and navigator training is obviously also being applied to the entrance of women into the security force specialist, enlisted aircrew, and missile operations career areas. There is no reason to expect that women will seriously upset the combat readiness of our operational units if the past performance of women in other areas is any indicator. Only time will give us all the answers, but while we are waiting, every professional military woman must do the best job she possibly can wherever and in whatever capacity she is presently serving.

1. U.S., Congress, Senate, Joint Economic Committee, The Role of Women in the Military: Hearings before the Subcommittee on Priorities and Economy in Government, 95^th Cong., 1^st sess., July 22 and September 1, 1977, p. 96.

2. Ibid., p. 95.

3. Sam Nunn, "National Security with the All-Volunteer Force," AEI Defense Review, no. 5, 1977, p. 14.

4. USAF Management Consultation Information System Special Report: 1976-1977, Composite Analysis Report Number 1 (Maxwell AFB, Alabama: Leadership and Management Development Center/ AU, 15 January 1978), p. 20.

Air & Space Power Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor