Theory to practice - women in the military
Isabelle Lenton is a second year International Relations and Dutch student. She currently writes for The Diplomacy Review and The Rendezvous. (zclmile@ucl.ac.uk)
Introduction
Why does gender inequality persist in the military, a key actor in international politics? Scholars in the field of international relations (IR) have turned to feminist theory to better understand this enduring issue. Feminist IR scholars examine women in combat, the challenges they face in military settings, institutional barriers and broader security issues. This contrasts with mainstream (or ‘malestream’) traditional approaches in IR. Moreover, feminist IR theory is relevant to military studies as this perspective offers valuable insight into the barriers within defence and opens up opportunities for further discourse on security. This essay explores the evolving dynamics of gender within defence institutions with feminist theory as a foundation.
Feminist IR Theory
Feminist IR theory uses gender as a critical lens through which to challenge the traditionally state-centric perspectives in IR, such as ‘manly states’. In doing so, nuance is added in analysing the role of power, hierarchy and patriarchy within international security. Furthermore, this approach broadens the definition of security to shine a brighter light on human security and gender-specific issues. Such as instances where women and children are affected by conflict, military occupation and migration. This can manifest itself through human trafficking, sexual and other forms of slavery and forced prostitution [1]. Crucially, feminist IR theory tackles topics such as the exclusion of women in the military and decision-making processes - emphasising how this limits a sufficient understanding of military and conflict studies.
Youngs’ (2004) work examines the limitations of masculinist assumptions and structures. She looks at the gendered dynamics within warfare, where the male subject is often seen as protector/conqueror/exploiter of the feminised other [1]. This is the reason for the occurrence of ‘manly states’ where politics is male-defined and male-dominated. Nevertheless, in the discussion of gender and politics, ‘hegemonic masculinity’ further underscores how power dynamics among men are perpetuated by socio-economic and racial inequalities [1]. Thus, feminist perspectives require a focus on gender as a whole, rather than solely on women.
Women in combat
Since 2013, all 28 NATO members have specific policies supporting women’s participation in armed forces [2]. There is evident progress made by Western militaries in integrating women into combat roles, for example 16,220 women make up for 11.7% of the UK Regular forces on 1st April 2024 [3].
In the United States, integration measures and their timing have been brought about from particular socio-political contexts. Particularly in the Bush administration, military gender integration was influenced by “representations of women as peace-makers and proof of US ‘cultural sensitivity’” [4] For example, women’s rights became part of foreign policy and “the protection of women from violence was a rationale for military interventions” [4]. This narrative framed women’s rights as central to foreign policy and justified military interventions as “US superiority over the backwards misogynist enemy” [4], thus linking female empowerment in the military with American security interests.
The United Nations’ UN Security Council Resolution 1325 calls for gender to be mainstreamed into all aspects of the UN’s peacekeeping missions and post-conflict reconstruction to avoid human rights abuses and sexual violence. Nevertheless, feminist critiques caution against the use of feminism to legitimise militarisation. As well as the possible consequences of female exploitation in the armed forces based on ‘female empowerment’. An example of this is Marvel’s first female superhero film, “Captain Marvel” (2019) which has been criticised for exploiting feminism for military propaganda, “it seems that her strength, intelligence and courage are tied inextricably to her Air Force training” [5]. Cude (2022) highlights the role of the Air Force in the production and advertisement for the film - concluding that “exploiting feminism to market an organisation like the United States military” is deceitful [5]. This emphasises the need to focus not just on the equality gap, but rather the systemic issues concerning women in the military.
Institutional barriers
Yes, there are fewer women in the military due to misogyny and discrimination. But what about the internal issues they are faced with? Sexual harassment, under-representation in leadership roles, and the persistent ‘glass ceiling’ which hinders career progression. There have been contemporary policy responses to these issues, such as the UK’s Women in Defence Charter and Scandinavian models of gender-neutral conscription and inclusivity. Harding (2021) highlights the UK’s focus on recruitment of female personnel rather than retention. For instance, while the Royal Air Force (RAF) has the highest percentage of women due to the greater number of technology-based roles rather than physical, women remain underrepresented in the Royal Navy and Royal Marines [6]. Moreover, women have only been able to engage in ground close combat since 2018 and were only “able to serve in frontline roles such as medical and support positions” [6] before then.
Saskia Stachowitsch (2013) explores the tension between feminist and pacifist arguments surrounding equality in the military [4]. For example, the “equality ethicists” sometimes have patriotic overtones in their “integrationist” positions. This is because ‘right to fight’ feminists frame military service as a democratic right - “the only way to be worthy of equal rights is to do equal duty” [7]. Additionally, there is an emphasis on rights of access to military participation equal to those of men, as combat exclusion “perpetuates women’s inferior military and social status” [7]. As well as the opportunity to reach the highest levels of command with allowed access to combat roles.
Conversely, “peace ethicists” are radically anti-militarist and do not view the “‘right’ to fight, kill, and die as a desirable objective”. They question whether women should even seek inclusion, rather than whether women are incapable of performing military roles [3]. On top of that, they argue that women’s military participation does not aid in creating a more peaceful world order and “merely legitimises an institution that is antithetical to the goals of feminism” [7], particularly the discrimination and abuse still present. Overall, Stachowitsch underlines that women should not be required to prove superior abilities “or bring any specific qualities to military and other institutions to be allowed to participate” [4].
Conclusion
Overall, as Youngs notes, feminist IR seeks to “explain the fuller dynamics of political and economic power that lie beneath the masculinist surface” [1]. Duncanson and Woodward’s (2016) literature on the “regendered military” advocates for further research on the circumstances for greater participation of military women, identifiable shifts in self-understanding and the future contexts of conflict. Future studies must address the challenges of practical implementation of feminist IR theory, such as resistance from military institutions to feminist reforms. Ultimately, a feminist lens is essential for understanding the complexities of gender inequality in the military and beyond.
Works Cited
[1] Youngs, G. (2004). Feminist International Relations: a contradiction in terms? Or: why women and gender are essential to understanding the world ‘we’ live in *. International Affairs, 80(1), pp.75–87. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2004.00367.x.
[2] UN Women (2023). Facts and figures: Peace and security. [online] UN Women. Available at: https://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/peace-and-security/facts-and-figures.
[3] Dempsey, N. (2021). UK Defence Personnel Statistics. commonslibrary.parliament.uk. [online] Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7930/.
[4] Stachowitsch, S. (2013). Feminism and the Current Debates on Women in Combat. [online] E-International Relations. Available at: https://www.e-ir.info/2013/02/19/feminism-and-the-current-debates-on-women-in-combat/ [Accessed 26 Dec. 2024].
[5] Cude, B.S. (2022). I Want YOU, Girl: How Captain Marvel Exploits Feminism for Military Propaganda. [online] scribe.usc.edu. Available at: https://scribe.usc.edu/i-want-you-girl-how-captain-marvel-exploits-feminism-for-military-propaganda/.
[6] Harding, M. (2021). Representation of women in the Armed Forces. commonslibrary.parliament.uk. [online] Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/representation-of-women-in-the-armed-forces/ .
[7] Duncanson, C. and Woodward, R. (2016). Regendering the military: Theorizing women’s military participation. Security Dialogue, [online] 47(1), pp.3–21. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26293582.
