Regarding War

Final Thoughts on Women and War

2010-05-20T20:29:33Z

I've learned a lot while writing these posts, more than I really thought I would. I've had many discussions about women in the military over the years, but after participating in Women and War, I've had many more. Here are some final thoughts about our military, women soldiers and more.

Our Army is not perfect and expecting it to be so is unrealistic

Expecting us soldiers to be something we are not is also unrealistic. We are warriors. We go to war for this nation. Expecting us to play nice to appease peacenik sensibilities is not what we do. Everything the military does as an organization should be to ensure that the boots on the ground, male or female, combat arms or support, have the resources, the training and the equipment to conduct their mission and come home safely. Everything else is secondary.

Women who serve are soldiers, just like our brothers who wear the uniform

Expecting us to be treated as women first, soldiers second only highlights perceived inequalities among the ranks. All soldiers should be treated alike: fairly, impartial and in accordance with the standards and regulations. For civilians to expect or want women to be treated differently in the military is for civilians to push policies onto an organization they do not understand.

Writing about the military is not enough to understand it

I do not believe that you can truly understand the mindset that a soldier going into combat has unless you have done so yourself. People writing about the military often don't understand the military. The wars occurring today bear marked differences with wars past.

Whether you agree with women wearing the uniform or not, we are not taking it off any time soon

The fact that women are counted among our ranks as combat veterans in significant numbers changes the history of our military and our nation. We will continue to serve and continue to lead, regardless of the challenges that entails.

When I was asked to participate in Regarding War, I was stunned, then happy, then scared witless as I had to go ask permission from my unit to participate. I had to articulate why I wanted so badly to be a part of this project and I was surprised to find unanimous support for my participation among my leadership.

My thoughts here have been my own. Though I sent my blogs up the chain of command for approval, not once was I asked to change anything. For that, I am grateful. My words on this website have been as honest and clear as I could make them, and I am grateful for the opportunity to present another face to women in uniform than that presented by the mainstream media.

I hope that those who read my words here understand my point of view. I am a soldier, a mother, a wife and a daughter. I am proud of my service. While I recognize that the Army is not perfect, I hope my words here demonstrate my pride in the uniform as well as the responsibility I have as a leader to the soldiers I serve.

Women in the Military: What do Women Get from the Military?

2010-05-06T14:16:49Z

Why do so many women join the military despite the ongoing wars? I think most women join for the same reasons men do: opportunity, desire to serve and education. Personally, I joined to see what else was out there beyond small town Parkman, Maine. And in an ideal world, a soldier is a soldier and women bring nothing more than a body to fill a uniform, just like a man.

I therefore reject the idea that women somehow bring something that is more nurturing or kind or softer to the military by intent or by design. There are a number of things that the military offers that makes joining and staying in the military attractive for women and men alike. According to the Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the Services's Annual Report for 2008, the number one reason women stayed in the military was their sense of job satisfaction and job performance. Other reasons for women to stay in the military included access to health care, education opportunities, a sense of purpose and being part of a team. The only reason these responses were singled out as female responses is because they were collected as part of a gender study. Men might have given the exact same responses.

Education

The military's eArmyU program provides 100% tuition at universities and colleges enrolled in the program. An enlisted soldier, regardless of rank, can have her entire college education paid for by the U.S. Army. Even with the high operations tempo of the last decade, soldiers are earning degrees at unprecedented rates. If soldiers are not able to attend college while on active duty, now they can access more educational benefits through the Post-9/11 GI Bill, which provides the single biggest boost to veterans since the original GI Bill allowed the Greatest Generation a chance at an education. There are no combat requirements for either the Post-9/11 GI Bill or the eArmyU program. All men and women who enlist are eligible.

The educational programs I took advantage of as a young enlisted soldier were critical to my career and personal advancement. From 2000 to 2007, I was steadily enrolled in college courses, either online or in a classroom after duty hours. I earned the bulk of my master's degree while working full-time for the Army, raising two babies (both less than two years old), and with my husband deployed — twice. I finished the last course three days before reporting for Officer Candidate School. It was a challenge to complete the degree, but it was also incredibly rewarding to receive my diploma and know that I'm the first person in my family to earn a master's degree, and only the second to earn any post-secondary degree. It might have taken me a little longer to earn my degree through the military than by going through the traditional route, but in the end, no one asks how long your degree took.

Health Care

Among soldiers, there are some well-known jokes about the military's health care system. One of the most common is about Vitamin M — Motrin, which is used to treat everything from broken bones to tooth aches. But the availability of health care is something I have never worried about, either for my children or myself. Going on sick call in the military is a major pain in the neck, but a doctor is always there. I've had two babies in the busiest maternity ward in the Army, and have subsequently gone to the ER for ear tube problems, a broken arm, and a few other things. It's been a huge a relief knowing that I wasn't going to have any medical bills from any of those visits.

Taking Pride in Work

In the Army, they say that if you don't like your boss, you should just wait, because one of you will leave sooner or later. While moving to new positions can be difficult for civilians, military members often thrive in new environments, excel at facing new challenges, and continue to focus accomplishing the mission and taking care of soldiers. Soldiers take pride in what they do each and everyday, and women take no more or less pride in their work than men do.

Personally, knowing that I can make a difference in a young soldier's life is an incredible experience. I wear my uniform with pride and with the awareness that there are brothers and sisters in arms who have died wearing these colors. That pride is something I feel in the deepest part of me. It is a pride that I share with other soldiers who have served, whether they are women or men.

A Distinct Difference Between Female Soldiers and Male Soldiers

Many female soldiers, mothers or not, love the military life, and love serving their nation, just as many male soldiers do. So what is different about women soldiers' lives in the military?

Whether we want to admit it or not, women across all professions still shoulder the bulk of childcare responsibilities, and military life is no different. When female soldiers feel they are able to balance home and work life, their job satisfaction is high. When they are unable to achieve balance, job satisfaction is low. In an ideal world, all women would be able to balance home and work, and that would include women in the military. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world, and I can say with certainty that while women get into and stay in the military for the same reason that men do, women get out of the military for a more specifically female issue: the impact on their families.

I seriously considered getting out of the military only twice. The first was just weeks after my first daughter was born. She was a fussy baby, colicky and demanding, and I was exhausted. My husband had been deployed to Iraq and I was alone. I thought that there was no way I was going to be able to stay up with her at night, get up each morning to drop her off at daycare by 5:30 a.m., and not to see her again until 5:30 or later that evening.

But I stayed. I had many reasons for staying, but mostly, I stayed because of the incredible support from the unit I served with. When I came to work with dark shadows beneath my eyes, either from crying over missing my husband, or because the baby would not latch, my co-workers didn't baby me; they made me laugh instead. They kept me busy and challenged me instead of pushing me into a corner to cope alone. They went out of the way to keep me on the team and make me feel needed. I don't know that I would have stayed had it not been for the members of the C4 Test Directorate. They were my family when I was alone, and they are one of the reasons behind my commission and my continued military service. With their help, I was able to get through a dark time, and emerge at a place where I could see the value in continued service to the Army.

I seriously considered leaving the Army for the second time quite recently, upon my return from Iraq. My oldest would scream at the top of her lungs, throwing things, for no real reason except that she didn't know what to do with the emotions inside her. Mommy and Daddy were home finally, but for how long? Add the stress of moving from Maine back to Texas, leaving their grandmother who had taken care of them for a year, changing schools and rules. We were all on edge, and there was no Grammy here to help us take the edge off or give the kids any stability while we made the transition back to life as a family.

We've struggled through. I've been fortunate to have a commander who has been incredibly supportive, and who has enabled me to achieve that elusive balance between work and family; I am more grateful than he will ever know. Once more, my ability to be part of the team, useful and empowered to make a difference, has counterbalanced the struggles with coming home from Iraq. Because I still feel like I can make a difference, and my family is slowly making it through this transition, the dark times have not lasted this time either.

Other women go through these struggles alone, without a partner to help make life-altering decisions. And whether they stay in the military, or they leave, depends on the answers they find within themselves in the middle of the night.

Army life is not easy, and no one expects it to be. It is because of the challenges that accompany service that the pride instilled within is so hard won and held in such high regard. Women join the military for the same reasons as men, but often stay or go depending on the impact on their families. I stay because I have been enabled to make a difference. I stay because the joy that I felt at reuniting with my children has not diminished, no matter the tantrums they throw. I hope that my daughters will one day look at mommy, see a strong woman they can look up to, and understand that their mommy had to sacrifice, just like any soldier would.

Mothers in the Military: Punishing Mothers Who Serve

2010-04-13T14:07:27Z

Before I was a mother, I could work until 6:00 or 7:00 in the evening, then head off to college courses until 10:00. I could come in early and work until the mission was complete. I could make permanent change of station (PCS) to anywhere and all I was concerned about was asking the army to station me with my husband.

When I became a mom, all these things changed. The late nights are gone now because daycare closes at 6:00; count in traffic, and I have to leave work no later than 5:30. The ability to pack up and move anywhere must now revolve around the school year. My decision to continue to serve is tempered by my desire to see my daughters, and be the one who raises them.

Thankfully, I have never had to decide between staying in the military or giving up my children. But not all military mothers are as lucky.

It is estimated that nearly 30,000 single mothers have deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan¹. As more and more single and divorced parents serve in the military, there are a growing number of military members, often single or divorced mothers, who face court battles to retain or regain custody of their children upon redeployment.

Women who serve face many of the same challenges that all working mothers do. These challenges include trying to balance work and home, taking sick days because a child has a fever, and the fighting the unending perception that because we work, we are somehow shortchanging our children or that we are less than devoted mothers. But there is a harsher reality that military mothers face which most civilian mothers cannot comprehend unless they are in law enforcement or another similar field.

Since returning home, I've run the gamut of emotions — from guilt for having left my daughters for so long, to anger that my oldest won't eat, to incredulity at how big they are now, and back to guilt, for wanting just a few minutes alone. How could I want time away from them when I just got home? The mommy guilt eats at me and drives me to try and become better, to make events memorable because the day may come when I deploy and don't come back. The memories I want my daughters to remember are not of me griping about them cleaning their room.

Military mothers not only balance work and home, but must also face the fact that by remaining in the military, we may never see our sons and daughters again. All parents realize that they might someday die, but before each mother deploys, she must make all the final preparations in case she doesn't come home. For military mothers, this reality makes the struggles of reintegration and the heartbreak of deployment that much harder.

Bias Against Military Moms

In the courts, military moms have an even tougher time than civilian working mothers. Some argue that working mothers shortchange their children; military mothers are required to make even greater sacrifices than their civilian counterparts. Very rarely is the civilian working mom asked to leave her children for a year at a time. Very rarely is the civilian working mom confronted with the knowledge that when she comes home at the end of a deployment, her child will not know her.

So while civilian moms do find their "choice" to work invoked in child custody debates, civilian moms are usually at least present to defend their cases, not a thousand miles away in a war zone wondering how a judge could deem her an unfit parent and take her children from her. On the flip side, fathers are not thought less of or punished because they desire to wear a uniform after becoming a parent. Mothers should not endure this, either. Yet military mothers are punished for serving our nation. (I should point out that many single fathers are punished for this as well.)

That the courts would look at a mother or father's military service as detrimental to the well-being of the child surprises me. To find courts taking custody away from mothers who serve shocks me. One of my best friends nearly lost joint custody of her children because she was single and her ex-husband had remarried. The judge's argument was that her children were better off with someone who was not their mother than with a woman who has deployed three times in support of our nation. My friend was able to regain custody of her children, but only after a lengthy court battle and nearly being separated from the military because of her lack of a Family Care Plan.

No parent should be forced to choose between the military and his or her children. For thousands of single mothers, being in the military allows them to provide for their children in a way that they would not be able to do otherwise. Despite the long hours, many single parents continue to serve because of better school opportunities, healthcare, and a community they might not have if they were to leave the military.

Losing Custody in Civilian Courts

The Army requires that single parents and dual military couples have what's known as a Family Care Plan. The plan tells the military what arrangements service members have made to provide for their children in their absence. Unlike in the civilian world, the Army needs to know this information. Should you have to ship out on short notice, the Army is not going to be able to wait around for you to drop your kids off somewhere. The Family Care Plan tells the Army that you are able to fulfill your duties.

The Family Care Plan is not a court order, which means it is not legally binding for a civilian. That means that should a service member leave their children with an ex-spouse, the ex can sue for custody². If the service member is thousands of miles away working 12-18 hour days with limited communications, then it would very difficult for the service member to fight a court battle, which puts the service member at a distinct disadvantage. Throw in a court system that sometimes treats a military mom's service as akin to abandonment of her children, and it is no wonder that military mothers are losing custody.

The only way for a parent in the military to back is to go through a civilian court system that might not be near the military base to which the soldier returns. The financial stress, the limited ability of the military legal system to help navigate family courts thousands of miles away, and the uncertain support of the chain of command places an undue burden on a soldier who volunteered to fight our nation's wars.

Custody Battles Across State Lines

In cases of divorce where joint custody is awarded, judges often mandate that in the case of deployment, the children will be left with the other spouse. But many soldiers deploy and find that in their absence, things have changed dramatically. Deployed mothers have received legal notices mandating child support increases, changes in custody, and in some cases, outright refusal by the custodial parent to allow the returning soldier to see their children.

A 2009 New York Times article relays the case of Specialist (SPC) Leydi Mendoza, who was ordered by the courts to leave her daughter with her former partner, Daniel Linares, when she deployed. When she returned, Linares refused to allow her to see her daughter, who was then not quite 2 years old. Because their daughter, Elizabeth, did not know her mother and was extremely upset at having to spend time with a virtual stranger, Linares was able to argue in court that exposing Elizabeth to SPC Mendoza was traumatic, and Mendoza should not regain custody of the girl³. Eventually, the court awarded SPC Mendoza daily visitation and weekly sleepovers with her daughter⁴.

I also went through the emotional fallout of coming home to a baby who did not know me. My soul was torn out repeatedly as she crawled after my mom, calling her "mama" instead of me. When my baby cried, she wanted my mom. I stood by, helpless and heartbroken, unable to soothe her hurts. At the time, the pain was nearly unbearable, enough to make me reconsider staying in the military. But as hard as that was to go through, my daughter is very much attached to me now, and I have stayed in the military. So while I understand Daniel Linares' motivation in trying to protect his crying daughter, taking the child away from her mother is not the answer.

In another case relayed on NPR, Tanya Towne, a member of the National Guard, returned to New York from Iraq only to be told that her 12-year-old son had moved to Virginia with her ex-husband Richard Diffin, and that Diffin now had permanent custody of the child. Because Diffin had moved to another state and gotten a judge to agree that military service was highly disruptive and unstable, Towne lost custody. Neither New York State nor the military were able to help her regain custody. She spent over $6,000 and countless hours traveling in an attempt to get her son back, but failed. Her ex-husband's lawyer had argued that Tanya Towne chose to be a soldier, and that leaving her children for military service is no way for a mother to act⁵.

Lack of Federal Legislation

Army-wide statistics are not available on mothers losing custody of their children because the Army does not track these cases. And unless both parents are service members, the military justice system is unable to effectively engage in mediation on behalf of mothers who are fighting court battles to regain custody of their kids. Divorce affects military women at three times the rate of military men. As a result, there may be a very high number of military mothers who lose custody of their kids in civilian courts.

This issue is not one that is limited to military mothers. Military fathers have been going through custody battles seemingly forever, but the outrage over mothers losing their children certainly garners more public scrutiny. It is not fair that mothers who lose their children receive more attention, but perhaps this is one case where the attention can be cause for change that positively impacts everyone. Parents who choose to serve in the military are dedicated, both to their families and to the military. Someone with that amount of dedication and willingness to sacrifice time should not be punished. Their ability to parent should not be based solely on availability.

The Soldier and Sailor Relief Act of 2003 focuses on protecting soldiers against credit card debt, job loss and loan repayment. Unfortunately, it is woefully inadequate in protecting soldiers' custody of their children, which is by and large left up to state laws. The result is that military moms who are fighting for custody are largely on their own.

Federal action is long overdue to protect a soldier's family while he or she is deployed. This is not something that just military mothers have to face. This is a readiness issue, because parents will do a better job while they are deployed if they know they still have a family to come home to.

Mothers who serve should not be punished for serving. Military service should never be used as the sole decision in custody arrangements.

1. Aaron Glantz, "30,000 Single Mothers Deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan." The Huffington Post, October 15, 2009.

2. Wilson, Elaine. "Care Plan To Encompass More Military Families." American Forces Press Services, March 15, 2010.

3. David Kocieniewski, "A Soldier's Service Leads to a Custody Battle at Home." The New York Times, August 31, 2009.

4. David Kocieniewski, "Family Court Gives Soldier Visitation in Custody Case." The New York Times, September 1, 2009.

5. Brian Mann, "Soldiers Loses Custody of Child After Tour in Iraq." Morning Edition, NPR, February 14, 2008.

Sex and the Military Woman: Female Soldiers Are Not Just Victims

2010-03-29T15:42:19Z

I've been in the Army for nearly 15 years: I enlisted in the mid-'90s when there were still Vietnam Vets on active duty, the wounds from Somalia still bled and the lessons from Desert Storm were still being learned. I joined like many young women today: straight out of high school, looking for something to do while I figured out what I wanted to be when I grew up. The Army helped me figure out that I was a pretty good soldier. I am grateful for all the opportunity the Army has given me, but please understand, I am not speaking for the Army, nor am I speaking for any other woman who has served. I am speaking only for myself. I am not the same naive private I was 15 years ago. The officer I am today is not the same as the non-commissioned officer I once was.

But I am who I am today because of the Army.

So when I read articles like the one featured at The WIP: "Perceived as Bitches, Sluts or Dykes: 1 in 3 Military Women Experience Sexual Abuse," or The New York Times' "The Women's War," I worry about the message the media is sending into our living rooms. The articles cite examples of female soldiers who had significant issues while serving in the Army. The WIP article includes a quote from a former sergeant, who states that because "women are categorically denied infantry service," they are therefore "second class citizens ripe for abuse" and that the "greatest danger that military women in Iraq and Afghanistan face is from their male peers and officers." The New York Times also recently ran "A Peril in War Zones: Sexual Abuse by Fellow G.I.'s," an article that focuses almost entirely on the sex lives of female soldiers, rather than on the perpetrators of the crimes.

Articles like these in the mainstream media makes it sound like in every unit, every female is a victim of sexual harassment or sexual assault, or that we female soldiers have all, at one point or another, been pinned into a corner with penises shoved in our faces. The reporters imply that there is a sexual predator in every squad and that female soldiers are dragged behind barriers every five minutes in Iraq. After nearly 15 years in the Army, I have never been a victim of sexual harassment or assault, yet the media is reporting that female soldiers are nothing more than marginalized second class citizens in a military that would rather screw us than promote us.

Before you dismiss me as being protected by the privilege of my rank, please understand that although I have spent most of my career as a non-commissioned officer (NCO) or an officer, I came into the Army as a young, uneducated private, and I went to Germany — raw, fresh and naive — straight out of training. The first person I met in my unit was Sergeant First Class (SFC) Diane Eaton, my new squad leader. She sat me down and explained to me what I could expect as a female in the barracks. She told me that everyone there was going to be knocking on my door and they were not there to just be friendly. She warned me about the sergeants who would gladly spend the night with me, and then talk about me like a dog the next day. It was SFC Eaton who first taught me how to keep from being taken advantage of as a young soldier. I followed her advice, conducted myself accordingly, and in the years since, have never encountered sexual harassment or assault. Has my rank also protected me from sexual assault? I don't know. But I do believe that my attitude, my confidence, and my knowledge that I am not a victim has set the tone for me throughout my military career. My experience is also not the exception one might think it is. The 2008 Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the Services report on women in the military states that dealing with stereotypes in their military careers is a bigger problem for female soldiers than dealing with actual sexual assault or harassment. Those stereotypes exist, of course, but from the moment a female soldier walks into a unit, by and large, she controls how she is treated and she sets the tone for how she is going to be received. All of us who serve simply want to do our jobs to the best of our abilities, be part of the team, and not be thought of as a potential victim first, soldier second.

Every article that focuses on negative aspects of women in and around the military, focuses on gender, sexuality and sexual behaviors. There are countless articles about rape and punishments for pregnancy, yet rarely do we hear about the female engagement teams in Afghanistan, making inroads with Afghan women and helping save soldiers' lives. Or if we do, the story is buried, because it's not "sexy" enough. Similarly, most people haven't even heard of the Marines' Lioness Program: it's rarely written about because the female soldiers in the program haven't been sexually assaulted while they're out searching for Iraqi women and training female Iraqi guards. But if, in the future, there's an assault to one of the Lioness women? I'm sure it'll be a major media event.

When the media makes it sound like every female soldier is a victim, a slut, a bitch, a dyke, or some other negative stereotype, it negates the positive impact that female soldiers are having within our military. Stories that focus on rape and sexual assault perpetuate the myths that women are unable to serve their nation with the same pride and distinction as our male counterparts. In the Army I serve, women and men are treated based on their performance and how they carry themselves. The media claims that nearly one-third of service women have experienced sexual abuse. This percentage is certainly higher than anyone should find acceptable, but those who suffer abuse are still in the minority. The media points to the outlier and claims that it is the rule, rather than the exception.

I am not dismissing sexual assault as a trivial problem, nor am I minimizing the impact that sexual assault has on victims The numbers do not lie: there is a problem. The Department of Defense reports that in 2010, there was an 11 percent increase in sexual assaults reported across the military, including a 16 percent increase of assaults reported in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of the sexual assaults reported, most involved 18-25 year olds and alcohol. This is the same demographic as college students, and the number of sexual assaults in the military are reflective of sexual assaults that occur in society, even when taking into consideration that most sexual assaults go unreported. This is not to say that the problem in the military should be dismissed, nor that it's okay because it's happening elsewhere. I am simply arguing that the media focus on sexual assault makes it seem like a bigger problem than it actually is, and unfairly stereotypes women in the military as victims. The media continues to focus on female service members' victimization, while the same crimes happen, arguably with greater frequency, on college campuses, while the media remains largely silent.

Sexual assault is a problem the military is working hard to correct, and the military is 5 years in it its current prevention program. The Department of Defense says that it takes 8-10 years before a concerted effort to change behaviors actually brings about the desired change in behavior, and believes it will be another 3-5 years before we begin to see a decline in the number of sexual assaults in the military.

The Army I serve in is a flawed organization, made up of human beings who are fallible. Can we do better at dealing with sexual assault within the ranks? Absolutely. Will we do better? Yes. We continue to push sexual assault awareness training every 90 days, and this training reinforces to our young soldiers that rape is unacceptable in our organization. We are encouraging victims to seek help and, if they choose, report the crime. The number of prosecutions for sexual assault are also on the rise.

Sexual assault in our ranks, however, does not mean that the military as a whole is misogynistic, or treats women wholesale as second-class citizens. Women hold some of the highest positions in the military. There are women who are in charge of logistics operations for the thousands of miles of terrain in Iraq and Afghanistan as Expeditionary Sustainment Commanders. Female company commanders lead convoys on military police missions and resupply Warfighers in Forward Support Companies. The service records of women soldiers also speaks for itself. Women have earned the Combat Action Badge, once only worn by men in the combat arms. These decorated women include women like 1st Lieutenant Tamara DaSilva, who successfully led her fuel platoon during an 9 hour ambush in Afghanistan, or Captain Christina Lewis, who commanded a Forward Support Company in Mosul and did not lose a single soldier, despite the violence that still hung on in Ninewah Province. These women, who have served in combat and served well, will mentor the next generation of commanders. These women and thousands of other women serve with distinction and honor and pride. They are not victims. We are not marginalized. We are a critical part of the team. We are soldiers and spouses and sisters and mothers and wives and daughters. We are not just victims, bitches, sluts or dykes.

To the mainstream media: please stop telling America that's all we are.

Women in Combat is a Moot Point

2010-03-10T21:40:23Z

The Difference Between Combat and Combat Arms

The debate surrounding women in combat is a moot point. Everyone in the military knows that women are already in combat, or direct ground combat, or direct action or closing with the enemy. However you wish to phrase it, women are in combat in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the media and some groups continue to insist that women are somehow marginalized by not being allowed "in combat." The problem with this discussion is that when the media speaks about "combat" it actually means "combat arms." The distinction is critical, and ignoring it reduces the general understanding of how the Army fights. While there is real discussion about women in combat, such as Public Affairs soldiers being attached to a combined arms battalion, the real debate is whether or not women should be allowed in combat arms.

The October 1998 General Accounting Office Report, Information on DOD Assignment Policy and Direct Ground Combat Definition, lays out several relevant definitions for this discussion. The latest definition restricting women's roles came into effect after Desert Storm, when commanders and Congress realized that everyone in theater was at risk, regardless of whether they were on the so-called front lines or not. The rule, as it stands, "excludes women from assignments to units below the brigade level whose primary mission is direct ground combat."

The below brigade exclusion rule, however, only applies to Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) and similar units, which are made up of Combined Arms Battalions, Armored Reconnaissance Squadrons and Field Artillery battalions. There are two other battalions in a standard BCT and these are the only two battalions where women are allowed to serve: the Brigade Special Troops Battalion and the Brigade Support Battalion. These two support units have missions to support the warfighters. So women are allowed below brigade level, just not in combat arms battalions.

Women in Operations Support Units

In the years since Desert Storm, the Department of Defense (DoD) opened up a significant portion of previously closed positions to women who have quickly filled the ranks of operations support units. The fact that our Army has been at war for almost a decade on two fronts means that there aren't enough men on active duty in the operations support branches left to fill those positions at battalion and below exclusively without creating entirely female units as a second order effect. Women are in combat, either as support personnel or as attached personnel, such as intelligence gathering teams or assigned to search and interact with local female populations. They are not, however, directly assigned to the combat arms, and that is where the media confuses the issue.

Starting with the ambush that resulted in the capture of Jessica Lynch and Shoshonna Johnson, the Army realized that operations support units — and by extension women — were going to face combat. Furthermore, that ambush caused the Army to reevaluate how it trained its operations support, its non-combat soldiers, which has lead to more effective tactics, techniques, and procedures designed to train all soldiers to defend themselves. That ambush served as a wake-up call to the operations support branches, alerting us to the fact that we would be expected to defend ourselves and that we would start training accordingly.

Before engaging in our current conflicts, operations support units didn't worry about tactics or maneuver because we always thought we'd be safe and protected, well behind the front lines. These attitudes were based on doctrinal training for a conventional war with front lines and rear echelons, not based on sexism, as some have claimed. Women were not singled out to receive less training; rather it was how the Army trained its operations support units. It was how I trained and was trained as a signal non-commissioned officer. I never expected to have to lead my soldiers in direct combat other than basic site defense, because the prevailing attitude was that someone else was responsible for protecting us. That is, protecting signal soldiers, not female soldiers.

Within the military, we know that combat arms can't fight without operations support. And that means the Army can't go to war without women going into combat, period. Because they are only allowed in operations support units, women serve in significant numbers in the battalions that provide this support to the warfighter. So you can argue that by keeping women from combat arms units keeps them out of direct action, but that denies the reality on the ground and the tactical necessity that requires women go out into combat to support the warfighter and bring that infantryman beans, bullets and bandages.

It is also well known within the military that combat arms battalions have forward support companies attached to them. These units are attached to the combat arms battalions and provide direct logistics support to the warfighter. This habitual relationship is critical to the way the Army fights but it also forces commanders to violate the DoD Assignment Policy because these forward support companies are collocated with the combat arms battalions that they support.

The simple solution of filling the support companies with all male soldiers is impossible, unless the Army is willing to accept that other units will be made up of majority females as a result. Given that operations support soldiers are assigned regardless of gender, there are not enough males to fill these units 100 percent with all men without taking females out of brigade combat teams and filling noncombat units almost exclusively with females. So commanders must make a choice: either send these units out half filled to meet the combat exclusion policy or assign female soldiers to these forward support companies. No commander is going to send a unit out half staffed when there are trained and willing soldiers to fill those positions.

As a Rule, Women Should Not be Assigned to Combat Arms Units

There is a distinct difference, however, between being in combat and being assigned to the combat arms. I am not advocating for a wholesale opening up of all military occupations to women. Part of the problem with using Iraq and Afghanistan as a model for whether or not women can serve in the combat arms units is that we are moving into a mature environment. There is a big difference between high intensity offensive operations and the low intensity conflict that has defined Iraq. As always, this is just my opinion based on my experiences in the military. Others may feel differently, but I believe selectively allowing women to serve in combat arms will allow the final barriers to fall gradually, without causing undue harm on the Army's warfighting capability.

Using Iraq and Afghanistan as examples, I believe women can be assigned to combat arms units by exception. In my officer candidate company, out of approximately 100 candidates, there were two women that could have even come close to cutting the mustard in a regular infantry platoon and that was only based on physical capabilities. But then again, most of the men in my class would have had trouble holding their own in an infantry platoon, too.

It's an unspoken rule that soldiers who don't meet a unit's standards are moved around to the job where they will do the least amount of harm. They're shuffled to the staff or to another unit and the local commanders are the ones who make that decision. It's not about whether they're male or female or any other equal opportunity issue. It's about whether or not they can hold their own and that decision, ultimately, remains with the commander. If you mandate that women serve in combat arms units, the first time a female fails a physical fitness test and is moved out of her squad leader position and decides to fight the decision, the unit will be embroiled in an equal opportunity case that will distract from the mission of training for war.

If you allow women to serve in combat arms units at the commander's discretion, you will gradually see women begin to compete for these positions, just as men compete for them now. They will know that if they go to an infantry platoon, they've got to keep up with — if not lead — the men, in all things. If a woman wants to go to Ranger School, let her. But hold her to the same physical requirements that all men must meet: the 17- to 21-year-old physical fitness test standards. It will not be easy to be the first female to go through Ranger School, just as every barrier that women have broken through has been difficult to shatter. But the women who make it will be accepted, having earned their right to stay; she will be accepted because no one will be able to say she made it just because she was a female.

We Are Part of the Team

The men I've met and worked with throughout my 15 years in the military don't care if you're male or female. They care if you are a valuable member of the team. Will you do your job when it counts? That's what matters. We train together at all levels of training: basic training, officer candidate school and West Point. We fight together every day in Iraq and Afghanistan. Men rolling out the gate know that the women on the guns can shoot them. And the women out on missions know they're expected to fire those weapons and save themselves, not wait to be rescued like some defenseless damsel. We women are soldiers. We're part of the team.

I disagree with those that say excluding women from the combat arms somehow marginalizes us and makes us prone to victimization. Our service record speaks for itself. General Ann Dunwoody was the first female to attain the rank of a four-star general and commanded the Army Material Command. There are 57 active duty women wearing a general's stars or the equivalent. Those women are not marginalized. It is phenomenal that they wear those stars because the women wearing those stars today came into the Army at a time women really were marginalized. They and those who came before them, have shot through the glass ceiling and paved the way for me to serve today.

Women serve an absolutely critical role in our military and each female soldier is just as important to accomplishing the mission as each male soldier. Not allowing us into combat arms does not mean we are marginalized or second class, because as part of operations support, we are, without a doubt, already in combat and critical to the success of the warfighting mission. The Congressional definition — and by extension the media's understanding — of ground combat is completely irrelevant in today's tactical environment. Any female who moves into Iraq or Afghanistan is entering a hostile combat zone that may very well require her to engage the enemy with her individual weapon or fire a crew-served weapon to defend herself and her soldiers. We already put our gear on and face hostile fire to recover a disabled vehicle or rescue wounded soldiers. We already encounter enemy fire and risk the same IEDs as our male counterparts every time we roll outside the gates of the FOB with a fuel convoy or establish a communications site on a remote combat outpost or provide security to a route clearance team as they search for IEDs. Pretending we can keep our female soldiers safe from harm is antiquated thinking at best and harmful at worst. More harmful is moving us out of the unit we have trained to deploy with because we have to meet a requirement regarding gender based assignments.

A Moot Point

A war is neither the time nor the place to prove a point about women's equal opportunity, but the current wars have also made the discussion about women's roles in combat a moot point. I believe that forcing women into combat arms to conduct a social experiment in women's equality will result in greater harm than good, just as refusing to allow them to serve in specific units that might need them would be detrimental to overall mission accomplishment.

Lifting the combat exclusion ban requires two things: one, that all Military Occupational Specialties (MOS) be opened to women and two, removing designators of units as "male-only" because of their direct ground combat mission. Both must be accomplished in order to truly make the Army equal in the eyes of its critics. The Army assignments process does not focus on capability, just numbers. Opening all MOSs to all soldiers will result in people unable to accomplish the mission being assigned to combat arms units. I believe this would adversely impact the Army's ability to conduct full spectrum, high intensity operations, which contrary to the Army's critics, remains a real threat in today's global threat environment.

I am, however, in favor of removing restrictions on unit assignments. Allowing local commanders the flexibility to assign soldiers based on the needs of the unit, regardless of gender, would end the debate about women's equal footing in the Armed Forces.

We're already in combat. Allow commanders to decide how to complete their mission and stop pretending women are not in harm's way just because we aren't in the infantry.

Introductions: The Successes and Failures of a Female Soldier

2010-02-17T19:37:43Z

The photo on my first driver's license listed my height at 5 foot 6 inches and 183 pounds. Not exactly soldier-in-the-making material. But the fastest way to get me to do something is tell me I can't. So when the U.S. Army said, "Thanks, but no thanks," I was in. I buckled down, lost 15 pounds, and squeaked into military service in August 1995.

Jessica Scott (center) with her parents on the day she joined the army.

Weight loss wasn't the only reason I joined. I was 18, an average student and no idea what to do when I grew up. I came from blue collar, working class parents who gave me the best gift a parent could: they told me to do what I wanted, so long as I was happy. So I did it — I joined the army. Today, I'm a career army officer and have a BA in Cultural Studies, and an MS in Telecommunications Management. The best part? I'm happy.

When I joined the army at 18, I didn't know if it was going to make me happy, but I figured: what the hell — I'd sign up for 4 years and if I didn't like it, I could pack my bags and head off to college somewhere.

Four years turned into 15, enlisting turned into commissioning and fat turned into reasonably fit. I'll be the first one to admit that my reasons for joining the army were purely selfish. My reasons for staying, however, are not the same as my reasons for joining. In serving around the world, in Germany, Fort Hood, Korea and then Iraq, I learned about myself as a soldier first, as a woman second. I am who I am today because I joined and because I stayed.

While I've always been opinionated, being in the army taught me to temper my opinions with tact and a little bit of patience. I'm still learning those lessons, though. Trust me, they're tough to learn, especially for me. I've always spoken my mind, but I do so now from a seat of much more experience, in life and inthe army. Back when I was starting in the army, there were things about the institution that I didn't understand as a soldier. Now, as an officer, I make a point to explain those things to the soldiers serving under me, especially when I make a decision that's different from what the recommend. Of course, I've made mistakes too. I've made lieutenant mistakes that I did not expect to make because I was senior enlisted, but I try to learn from them and grow.

On the family front, my transition to being a mother has been especially challenging, and I've had it better than most army women. I've learned that my very directing way of doing things doesn't necessarily work with children (which should come as no surprise). As a mom, I try to focus on what's important and not so much on the silly stuff. I want my kids to always know they're loved, which is a hard thing to communicate via Skype. I left my youngest when she was 6 months old to attend Officer Candidate School. I've been gone for a year and a half of the three years she's been alive. My husband is also in the military, and he has missed three years out of our oldest daughter's five years. I worry about the long-term impact of our absences from their lives, but I can't dwell on it. I just try to make the most of every day, because you never know what tomorrow holds. This is a lesson I had to learn regardless of whether I'm in combat or not. Being in Iraq showed me just how short life really is. It truly is the little things that are important.

I joined the army because I didn't know what to do with my life. I stay because I believe I can have an impact on an organization that has changed tremendously since I first raised my right hand and swore to serve my country. Today, I'm the company executive officer for a signal company in a brigade combat team. In the past, I've worked several different levels as an officer, having been a platoon leader and a communications officer for Brigade S6. Those different jobs have given me the ability to see a broader picture, one that goes beyond my single company, and I hope that broad perspective helped make me a stronger officer. I do my best at whatever I'm doing, but sometimes, that best is tempered by being a mom. The competing requirements of being an officer and being a mom are a difficult juggling act, one that I, like every army mom, struggle with.

I am not going to tell you the Army isn't without its flaws, but I am not going to be one of the Army's detractors. In the next few months on Regarding War, I will tell you about my experiences, which may or may not reflect other women's experiences. Some have had it harder. Some have been victims of sexual assault and abuse and of a system that, if they allow it, will set them to the side.

That is not my story. In every unit I have served in, I have been part of the team because I have gone into situations believing I can be part of the team and knowing that I had to work harder to prove myself because of the breasts I carry beneath my uniform. I have not always succeeded, but I believe those failings — those lessons — were not because I was a woman. They were my lessons to be learned as a soldier.

A friend of mine once said that there are female soldiers, and then there are females who happen to be soldiers. Over the course of this blog, I will explain the difference, because I believe there is one. My experience in the Army has been largely positive. Almost all the challenges I've faced have been as a soldier, and not as a woman. At least, that is what I believe. I'll tell you about my challenges as an army mom, the on- going balancing act between mommy and soldier that I struggle with and never fully understood until I saw that thin pink line for myself.

My posts here are my experiences and my opinions. Nothing here should be taken as official policy for the U.S. Army or the United States government. I am not a spokeswoman for either. I speak only for myself, and to give voice to my experiences as a soldier who happens to be a woman, a wife and a mom.