All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

"A Woman in the Army is Still A Woman": Recruiting Women into the All-Volunteer Force
Unformatted Document Text:  Women Marines must always be the smallest group of women in the military service. In accordance with the Commandant’s desire, they must also be the most attractive and useful women in the four lines services. Within a [small] group of…enlisted women, there is room for none by the truly elite. (quoted in ibid.:181) The Marine Corp decided to raise already-high enlistment standards for women, to make sure the Marines’ standards were as high as or higher than the standards for the other women’s programs, and like the other services at the time, attractiveness and femininity were part of the definition of “quality” for women. However, the Commandant also decided to increase the number of women by 70 percent, which would bring the number of women up to 2,750, or one percent of the Corps’ total strength, to assign women to additional bases, and to open new job categories to women to improve enlistment and retention (ibid.:188). As the number of troops deployed to Vietnam increased, the Marine Corps wanted, as in earlier conflicts, to replace male Marines in non-combat positions with women, to release the men for combat duty. During the war, 36 Women Marines were sent to Vietnam. In the 1970s, all of the services except for the Marines began the gender integration of officer training. In 1976, the Commandant, Gen. Louis H. Wilson, decided to examine the requirement that women be trained separately, in a shorter course. The next year, the Marines allowed twenty-two female second lieutenants into the 21-week basic course, as part of an all-female platoon within Charlie Company. They were soon referred to as “Charlie’s Angels.” The next Commandant reversed course and partially re-segregated the training, because the women’s successful completion of the course had led to charges that the training had “gone soft.” The Marines continued to train enlisted male and female recruits separately, while the other services began coeducational training. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert H. Barrow, according to Jeanne Holm, said more than once of the separate training that “while he wanted his men to be men, he wanted his women marines to remain women” (ibid.: 272-273). In 1981, as the DOD undertook a study of accession and retention policies in relation to women, the Marine Corps initiated its own studies of its requirements for female personnel. There were 6,700 women in the Corps at the time, making up less than four percent of the service. As a result of these studies, completed in 1984 and 1987, the number of enlisted positions open to women doubled, from 5,000 to 12,000, and the number of officer positions increased from 655 to almost one thousand. With the opening of new positions to women, in 1984, the Corp decided to incorporate defensive training that included weapons training into the women’s recruit indoctrination program. By that time, all of the other services had already 34

Authors: Brown, Melissa.
first   previous   Page 34 of 41   next   last



background image
Women Marines must always be the smallest group of women in the military service.
In accordance with the Commandant’s desire, they must also be the most attractive and
useful women in the four lines services. Within a [small] group of…enlisted women,
there is room for none by the truly elite. (quoted in ibid.:181)
The Marine Corp decided to raise already-high enlistment standards for women, to make sure the
Marines’ standards were as high as or higher than the standards for the other women’s programs,
and like the other services at the time, attractiveness and femininity were part of the definition of
“quality” for women. However, the Commandant also decided to increase the number of women
by 70 percent, which would bring the number of women up to 2,750, or one percent of the
Corps’ total strength, to assign women to additional bases, and to open new job categories to
women to improve enlistment and retention (ibid.:188). As the number of troops deployed to
Vietnam increased, the Marine Corps wanted, as in earlier conflicts, to replace male Marines in
non-combat positions with women, to release the men for combat duty. During the war, 36
Women Marines were sent to Vietnam.
In the 1970s, all of the services except for the Marines began the gender integration of
officer training. In 1976, the Commandant, Gen. Louis H. Wilson, decided to examine the
requirement that women be trained separately, in a shorter course. The next year, the Marines
allowed twenty-two female second lieutenants into the 21-week basic course, as part of an all-
female platoon within Charlie Company. They were soon referred to as “Charlie’s Angels.” The
next Commandant reversed course and partially re-segregated the training, because the women’s
successful completion of the course had led to charges that the training had “gone soft.” The
Marines continued to train enlisted male and female recruits separately, while the other services
began coeducational training. Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert H. Barrow, according to
Jeanne Holm, said more than once of the separate training that “while he wanted his men to be
men, he wanted his women marines to remain women” (ibid.: 272-273).
In 1981, as the DOD undertook a study of accession and retention policies in relation to
women, the Marine Corps initiated its own studies of its requirements for female personnel.
There were 6,700 women in the Corps at the time, making up less than four percent of the
service. As a result of these studies, completed in 1984 and 1987, the number of enlisted
positions open to women doubled, from 5,000 to 12,000, and the number of officer positions
increased from 655 to almost one thousand. With the opening of new positions to women, in
1984, the Corp decided to incorporate defensive training that included weapons training into the
women’s recruit indoctrination program. By that time, all of the other services had already
34


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 34 of 41   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.