
Women are not as strong as men, have fragile bodies, and more biological needs, therefore they are unfit to serve in combat zones. These statements represent a small portion of the misconceptions that create double standards against military women. Women in the armed forces are currently treated as the weaker sex by not being held to the same physical standards as men, and they are treated as a liability to an infantry unit. Treating women as special cases and not holding them to strict standards does not only do a disservice to women, but also the military as a whole. By looking at history, portrayals of women in literature, and physical testing, one can see that women are held to different physical and mental standards than men in the military. Therefore, each branch of the military needs to hold women to the same physical and mental standards as men to demolish the sexist culture created by the world and ultimately ensure success and strength within infantry units and operations. 

Since the Revolutionary War, women have served in various positions in the military such as nurses and cooks. In the United States, the debate on full female integration in the country's armed forces has raged since the 1940s. Although the Pentagon's policy prevented women from fighting on the front-lines, women have found themselves disguised as men to fight in the Civil War and participated in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. Women in these positions never received credit for their combat participation because they were merely connections to their units, not assigned to them. In January of 2013, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta unexpectedly announced that the Pentagon would be lifting the ban on women serving in combat roles, opening up hundreds of front-line positions for them to take part in. The ban on women in combat roles, enacted in 1994, restricted women from artillery, armor, infantry and many other combat roles. Ever since the Pentagon's announcement, the debate regarding this decision has raised endless questions about unit cohesion, physical standards, and female integration. Although this is a substantial step for military women, Panetta's choice to lift the ban has been condemned by many including Senator John McCain and Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer, who both believe that opening combat positions to women will have a negative impact on the military's fighting potential. As of today, women now make up almost 15 percent of the American military (Brook).

Over time, society has created a sexist culture that portrays women as the inferior sex. Many events in history have shown evidence of sexism and double standards towards women in combat. Women have been viewed as physically and intellectually inferior to men; emotional beings that cannot control themselves or their unbridled sexual temptation. In World Wars I and II, women were restricted to medical jobs only based on the societal and cultural norms of the time. Women in the military are still viewed in similar ways, as many believe they are less physically capable than men, too emotionally unstable to handle the horrors of war, and sexual temptations to men in infantry units. This culture is not only evident in past wars, but also in literature. In particular, the literary works of C.S. Lewis and J.R.R Tolkien contain portrayals of female characters that depict a distorted view of the female ability in battle. Lewis clearly recognizes war as a male domain, as his character Father Christmas says "Battles are ugly when women fight" (Frederick 29). His earliest works do not include any evidence of female characters, but in his later works, they are either depicted as inherently good disembodied spirits or inherently bad women that served as temptations to male characters. In his series The Chronicles of Narnia, he includes strong female characters, but makes a strong gender distinction through the types of arms given to each character. Females are restricted to smaller weapons like knives and the bow and arrow, while male characters are given swords, which are much larger and dangerous. Just as Lewis does, Tolkien portrays his female characters as weak in battle. One particular example of this is Shelob, a character from his novel The Silmarillion. Her character has evil qualities and operates on what Sam Frederick and Sam McBride call the "pleasure principle." In battle, she is defeated by both Sauron and Sam Gamgee because she is preoccupied with her lustful thoughts. These characters created by Lewis and Tolkien show just how sexism has contaminated the world in many different ways.

The sexist culture created by history and literature has encouraged men to believe that women are the inferior sex, leaving all to embrace the idea that women are unfit to take on such demanding positions. This has carried over into military units, infecting the minds of male soldiers, who often wrongly blame women for rumors and sexual relations that occur. This mindset needs to change in order to strengthen the overall relationship between soldiers in their units. Anthony King believes that it is a culture problem, stating that "The armed forces need to change their organizational cultures, which legitimate the presumptions of many of their male soldiers about women and their attitudes towards them. To this end, it may be useful to define female soldiers not primarily as women but, on the contrary, in the first instance simply as fellow professionals" (King 26). In other words, the military must ensure that mental standards are the same for both men and women in the military today; women should be considered as equal co-workers. 

Physical testing is one of the largest contributors to the existence of double standards within the military. Both male and female soldiers are required to perform the same tasks on the frontline. For each person to be able and strong enough to handle those tasks, physical testing standards for both male and female recruits should be the same. If standards are lower for women, they are encouraged to train to those lower standards, not the standards needed to perform well in combat. From her time serving in the U.S. Marine Corps, Lieutenant Sage Santangelo reports that females are not prepared in the same manner that males are for the Infantry Officer's Course tests of strength and endurance. Officer Candidate's School, which takes place at the beginning of training, is divided by sex and female recruits only work with male recruits on few occasions. Basic School is co-ed, but physical double standards still exist. For a male to receive a perfect score, he must run three miles in eighteen minutes, do 20 pull-ups, and 100 sit-ups. On the other hand, females must run three miles in 21 minutes, complete a 70-second flexed-arm-hang, and do 100 sit-ups (Santangelo). The Army also has gender-specifics tests in place for recruits. To pass a basic fitness test, the average 22-year old male must run two miles in under seventeen minutes and 30 seconds, while a female must run the same in under 20 minutes and 36 seconds (Wheeling). The difference in physical testing standards supports the idea that women cannot meet the same standard as men due to their physical build. Santangelo's first hand experience in training has led her to believe that equal standards will motivate women to pass these tests. She says "But I believe that I could pass, and that other women could pass, if the standards for men and women were equal from the beginning of their time with the Marines" (Santangelo). Even the female recruits themselves believe that they could would be even more motivated to meet the standards set if they were to be made equal for both genders.

Some believe that having the same standards for both sexes will discourage new female recruits, however choosing to hold different standards weakens the goal of an integrated and diverse military unit. The Marine Corps at Quantico has proven that equal standards are in fact necessary to form strong units. The commander of the Infantry Officer School states that physical standards will never be lowered to accommodate women, and that "They [the standards] are gender-neutral now ... They aren't hard to be hard. These are the things they need to be able to do to be infantry officers" (Egnell 34). This course offers a very accurate indication of what infantry combat is like and if the standards were to be lowered to accommodate women, it would directly affect combat effectiveness.  

Regarding the impact of women and gender perspectives in the military, two particular concerns often surface. The first notion is that women are generally unfit for war due to lower physical abilities and an absence of mental toughness, putting the units at risk to lessen combat effectiveness. The second idea is that adding women will tamper with the culture of combat units, the brotherhood involved with unit cohesion, and the "change the culture of combat units, the fabric of unit cohesion, and the way combat and violence is employed in military organizations" (Egnell). The issue with people who support these ideas is that they presume that current standards are absolutely flawless, and that any change implemented will negatively impact training and the formation of units. This is easily settled by not making adjustments for women and retaining equal physical standards and tests, then allowing the women who meet these requirements be permitted to take these positions. Regarding mental toughness, the complexity of current operations means that all soldiers need to have exceptional problem-solving skills, thinking abilities and a balanced mindset in order to respond to problems and challenges as quickly as possible. According to Robert Egnell, "The immature, ultra-masculine, and extremely aggressive character of the ideal warrior mindset has not done the armed forces any favors in Iraq and Afghanistan. The addition of women -- and preferably in substantial numbers -- may well provide a more mature and balanced unit culture" (Egnell 41). Some may see the addition of women as a problem, but they can bring new perspective and wisdom to their units.

Professor Anthony King of the University of Exeter has completed extensive research comparing the impact of gender integration in different countries, specifically looking at unit cohesion. He finds that in the military today it is not gender that determines the cohesion of a unit, rather training and competence. In other words, the social cohesion of units does not determine the effectiveness of a unit. In an article he wrote for The Three Swords Magazine in 2015, he states that "Precisely because performance has been the unifying factor in socially diverse professional units, it is imperative that entry standards, a symbolic marker of proven competence and ability, have to be maintained for women. To demand the lowering of physical standards to allow for the accession of women is to destroy the very basis by which any genuine integration could take place" (King 25). This is why it is so important for mental and physical standards to be the same; if women are trained properly and can meet the standards that their male counterparts can, they can successfully complete the same jobs. For a military unit to succeed and be united, all members need to trust each other, depend on each other, and have a universal goal. 

If standards are equalized between men and women, qualified women will be recognized as equal members of military units and can begin to play a role within the material aspects of war, ultimately maximizing military power and size. By incorporating women into these combat positions, they can provide certain abilities and perspectives to refine the conduct of operations within each unit that a man might not think to offer. For example, women are able to increase the amount of information gathered in a particular area. They can be used to gain access to local women, allowing a unit to obtain a better understanding of the surroundings and culture, ultimately improving the unit's relationship with and knowledge of the community. They can participate as Female or Mixed Engagement Teams, intelligence officers, cultural analysts, and interpreters who work to yield access to populations and areas in which all-male units are prohibited to search or engage with. In addition, female soldiers are necessary for certain jobs within peace operations. They can interact with women in societies where men are restricted from speaking to women. 

History, literature, and physical testing prove that women are constantly held to different physical and mental standards than men in the military. In order to create successful infantry units and rid them of the sexist culture created by society, the military must hold women to the same mental and physical standards as men. Past wars and the works of J.R.R Tolkien and C.S. Lewis are just a few of the displays of the sexist culture that the world has created, and changing these mental standards will allow for that culture to diminish and put female soldiers on the same level as their male peers. Physical standards need to be the same as well in order to ensure that women recruits will be ready for their jobs in combat positions. Equalizing standards will create a pathway for qualified women to join the military and bring new gender perspectives to increase the success of combat operations.  Women are strong and capable  --  and once we rid our military of this last remnant of sexist foolishness, men and women will truly be able to serve on an equal playing field.

