Cultural Sensitivity and Male/Female Soldiers

This blog entry is going to be some thoughts based on the recent interaction I've had with large groups of combat arms soldiers in all-male units.  Just some opinions I've had recently, and I know they could be completely off, and I really have no scientific evidence/research to back any of these thoughts with, but I like to speculate... 

First, I have to say I had forgotten how different it is being surrounded by males, as my branch has quite a few females... In my current unit, we are almost 50% female, which is quite rare in the Army.   I have to say, the dynamic is quite different in our unit as opposed to all-male units.  The dynamic in our unit between males/females is probably more similar to what you would see in a civilian work place.  You have some men and women who are just hard to get along with and are inconsiderate, no matter what, but from what I have seen,  people are not as rowdy/disrespectful/blatantly sexist/inconsiderate in units with a higher percentage of females (at least not around me!)   Of course, I have never been in an all-male unit, but I did spend four years in a male-dominated military academy (ahem, only 15% of our student population were women), which is pretty darn close to all males.  I don't think I realized it as much as a cadet,  because I thought that maybe male cadets were just a rowdier bunch than most men, but based on what I've seen, it would seem most men just act completely different when they are surrounded by almost nothing but other men.

 I bring this up because recently I have been around quite a few all/mostly male units, and the way they act is quite similar to the way cadets tended to act.  They tend to be rowdy, don't seem to care at all that there are at least a couple of women around when they talk about sex/women in general, and are generally much less considerate of other people.  One of the other female lieutenants in my unit and I were talking about it while we were on the bus with several guys, and it got me thinking of all the recent issues we've had with Soldiers doing things on deployment that aren't exactly conducive to building strong relationships and building good impressions (ahem... burning Qurans/massacring civilians/etc.)... And I have to wonder, would it be different if there were more females in these types of units? In the military in general? It's not that women don't do things that are completely wrong - I mean, look at Abu Ghraib, and women sure can be mean if they want to - but if you had more of them around and people (or men, because they are the majority of the military) were forced to deal with a different "culture" (women) on a regular basis, would it make any difference in their actions? If they were forced to be more sensitive to other people on a regular basis, would it be easier for them to relate to a foreign culture?  I'm not saying just a couple of women scattered around, as West Point DID have women, but the men STILL acted different from what I've seen in units that have larger percentages of women, but a force where women are the norm, rather than the exception.  Even when I was enlisted, when I was on a temporary duty with ALL guys, they started acting much rowdier/raunchier than how they acted when they were around a higher percentage of women.  These guys were decent men who treated their families well, and when they were in a normal setting, were considerate people, but I will tell you what, they had me pretty upset, and I have fairly tough skin.  They felt pretty terrible when they realized it too, but because they didn't really think about it (being around a bunch of people just like themselves), they kept building off of each other to the point where their "jokes" got pretty bad (not directed at me persay, but I was THERE).  And these guys weren't even in COMBAT... there was no stress of bullets flying... they were just a bunch of dudes spending 12-16 hours a day together working, with only a couple of females around.

So, I guess what I am curious about is whether or not increasing the percentage of women in the Army - in combat units, more specifically - would reduce some of the types of issues that we have had with cultural insensitivities?  I know we have female engagement teams that deal with local women, but what about having more females in male units in general?  I realize that the same reasons a higher percentage of women would be good for the military could also present other challenges such as distractions and new logistical considerations, and I also realize my examples are not entirely relevant, as both units I have been in were non-combat units, so the stressors are different.  However, seeing the similarities between how males in all-male units act compared with how cadets at West Point acted (who also had no combat stress, and many of them wouldn't have to worry about it for a few years) makes me question how having more women would influence culturally sensitive behavior in male soldiers.  

LIFE

I haven't been updating much lately, so I suppose now is as good time as any :)

There's actually quite a bit going on right now.  I've been getting settled into my job, which has been a slightly interesting experience.  I'm in a Captain's position as a brand new 2nd Lieutenant, so I'm having to learn quite a bit of stuff with very little experience.  Fortunately I was prior service, but UNfortunately this is my first time deploying, and, again, I'm new to the unit, so I'm still learning how it all works.  Fun stuff.  Fortunately I have lots of people that are helping me to learn the new job.  I guess West Point taught me at least one good thing: don't act like you know everything, and don't be afraid to ask questions and take advice.

On another different (but slightly similar note), I am taking my Graduate Record Exams (GREs) tomorrow afternoon.  I must say I am NERVOUS.  I have been practicing for awhile; however, the initial book I used wasn't very difficult.  It wasn't until I took the test on the actual ETS (the test-maker's) site that I started worrying, so I ordered THEIR book, and have been practicing since I got it, which unfortunately, has only been for a week.  I still don't feel confident in a lot of the math portions, and unfortunately, because my college GPA was only okay, I would really like to do well on this exam for grad school (not that I'm sure when exactly I'm going to go, but I know it will be within the next five years, which is how long the GREs are good for).

 And on ANOTHER slightly related note, I am ALSO taking my test during the Army-Navy football game!  Ahhhhh!  I am so disappointed I won't be able to watch it.  Those of you who know me know that I absolutely do not care about football.  Except for Army football (or rather, West Point football), and ESPECIALLY this one particular game.   The Naval Academy is West Point's number one sports rival, and this game is huge.  For those who don't know, EVERY cadet and midshipmen (Naval Academy cadet) travels to watch the game.  It's a huge deal.  And Army hasn't won one of these games in nine years.  :(  So, EVERY year everyone gets all excited for the game.  I sure was looking forward to watching the game sitting down, nice and warm, probably drinking a beer (Cadets have to stand the entire game, our uniforms weren't particularly warm, and we couldn't drink during football games, so these were all novelties).  Sadly, I will be sitting, nice and warm, taking a 3.5 hour test.

Finally, I suppose I will talk a little about upcoming months.  First, I am very excited for the next few weeks.  I will be seeing one of my best friend's West Point graduation (she's graduating a semester late because she had to take a semester off our sophomore year), which means I get to head back to West Point for a couple of days :)  Following that, I get to head down South for some French Quarter and some beach goodness :)  Well, I don't know how warm it will be for the beach, but I'm still excited.  And THEN my sister will be visiting before we head up to Canada to go skiing for her birthday and New Year's Eve.  Um, rockin' good time me thinks!

Following my amazing period of leave, I'll be training extensively for a 50-mile race when I deploy.  I've never run a marathon much less fifty miles, but I think fifty miles would just be a completely different type of setting.  Unlike in a marathon where I would think you would try to keep running the whole time (I know I would be trying to run the whole time), it's pretty acceptable to walk during ultra marathons.  As a matter of fact, it's pretty much EXPECTED.  And we get 24 hours to finish.  That's like, barely over two miles per hour to finish (though I really hope that I do NOT ACTUALLY take 24 hours to finish...)  Anyways, I'm excited for it, but nervous at the same time because of my tendency to get injured.  I am combating this as much as possible by lifting more regularly again.  I want to build strength in my hips/legs so that they are better able to handle the stresses of running AND stabilize my body more so I don't end up with all these weird injuries because my hips are weak (what my physical therapist always told me at West Point when I'd walk in with yet another overuse injury).  I will also try VERY hard to slow my long runs down, and add some walking breaks in once I hit higher mileage, that way I actually recover better.  I have a very difficult time running long distances as slowly as I should be when I'm just training.  A 9:30 minute mile is pretty slow for me, but when I think when I start doing longer distances, I should probably be going slightly SLOWER than that.  Not because I'm not capable of running faster, because I very much am (most of my long runs last time I was training for a marathon were around 9-9:15 minute miles, and I wasn't trying to pick up speed), but I think to get the kind of endurance I want for this type of distance, I need to slow it down so I don't hurt myself.  I need to save speed for the speed days I guess :)

Alas, I suppose I have written quite a bit for now.  Those are the big things going on now though that I've been thinking about.  And we all know I like to share my thoughts :)

Love,
Nina 

Women and the Military

Last night I was reading the Army Times and came across a couple of articles that sparked this blog.  One was women in combat, and two were uniform changes.  I won't get into the women in combat article because it's something that has been debated many times.  Some of you know my thoughts on that matter, and if you're interested in knowing more, I can write about that.

The other topic, the uniform standard, is one that has always gotten to me.  Or rather, the reaction that people have to  females being feminine in the military.  Perhaps this issue frustrates me because I am one of those females who does wear makeup, and nail polish (sometimes), and who likes to "look pretty" as some might say.  However, my makeup is always in neutral colors, as are my nails.  There was once a time when I wore too much makeup (back in my junior-enlisted days), but that is something that leadership needs to correct, not something a regulation should prohibit because a few people don't think females in the Army should be feminine.  What irks me most about people who state that females joined the Army and that they knew what they were getting into (some comments on the Sergeant Major of the Army's (SMA) Facebook page, and in the Army Times!) is that I do not see how being feminine affects someone's ability to do their job.  Being in the Army should not mean that females should have to look like males.  Males are allowed to look masculine, and in our society, it is more professional for a male to have shorter hair.  As I stated on my comment on the SMA's page, the Army's emphasis on looking professional generally imitates civilian society's ideals on what looks professional, but is a more conservative version of it.  I don't think that females should be wearing bright red nail polish, or super heavy makeup, but I wouldn't think that would look professional in a civilian workplace either.  Just like I don't think long hair looks professional on men, though I do think that high and tights are unnecessary, and that the Army could loosen up a bit on male hair standards, or rather certain units could stop making high and tights the standard.  

 A couple of comments about makeup and such seemed to point to the argument about equality between the sexes in the military, and that we as women have fought hard to be equal, but makeup basically destroys that.  I do agree we should be treated equally, but EQUAL does not mean that men and women are the exact same.  We should be treated equally in the sense that we are treated based on how well we do our job, regardless of how we look.  We are NOT the same.  It is like saying that males in a predominately feminine field such as nursing, for example, should have to get manicures in order to be treated "equally." Both men and women bring something different to the Army, and because a female wears makeup does not mean that she is incapable of being in the Army and performing well.  Personally, while I wear makeup, and sometimes have my nails painted, you will never hear me complain of a "broken nail," (though I did have a toenail falling off from all of the running I was doing that affected my PT one morning!) or see me avoiding certain things just because I am going to mess up a manicure.  If THAT is what the Army is afraid of, then they need to address the individuals doing these things, NOT all females in the military.  It is the same regarding males who are incapable of their job.  Gender should have nothing to do with this.  

Being feminine does not equal being weak, nor does it equal laziness, an inability to do the job, or expecting everyone else to do their job.  These are all things I heard while enlisted and while at West Point.  It is not this way in the civilian world, so why should people assume it is this way in the military?  Sadly, so many men think that because a female is not as physically strong as a male or because they like to look feminine (the same as most males like looking masculine) that they can't bring much to the military.   As a matter of fact, I can remember when I was enlisted and I would be on some detail moving stuff around, trying to stay busy, while some of my male counterparts were hiding in the corner because they didn't want to work.  I would NEVER do that, and if I did, people would assume I was doing it because I was a lazy female rather than because I was just a dirt bag.   When a male is lazy, it's individual, but when a female is lazy, it's because she's a female.  There are some things I am not as physically capable of  (at 5'1" and 113 pounds, carrying around heavy rucksacks is not easy for me, though I can usually keep up, it just takes me more effort than someone bigger), but that has no bearing on my ability to do a good job.  Anyway, I can still outrun, outpush, and out pull-up a lot of the guys :)  

Anyways, I know that was a little all-over the place.  Probably because these are areas I feel strongly about.  I do think that people's opinions on appearances tend to reflect the general attitude that the Army has about females in the Army and their role in the Army.  The opinion seems to be that if females are not a direct reflection of males, both in appearances and in physical capabilities, that they are less capable of their jobs.  My opinion is that males and females are not the exact same (which is why I'm not so sure about females being in the infantry, though I do think they can bring something to those units if they are attached... there's a small snippet on my opinion on that matter), but that does not mean they are not both capable of doing great at their perspective roles in the Army.  

Thoughts?  I'd be interested to see some opinions.  I know I've gotten into some pretty heated debates over this with people I know.