“Force Multipliers” and “Risk Multipliers”: Organizational Myth and Gender Integration of the U.S. Combat Arms Military Occupational Specialties and Units

ABSTRACT

This study examines the employment of gendered frameworks accompanying organizational imperatives to diversify and offer equal opportunities through a content analysis of the Women in Service Review conducted prior to gender integration of the U.S. military’s combat arms in 2015. Through a framework of gender difference, these documents support the organizational position that integrating women into combat arms can enhance, but mostly endangers, military capability. Additionally, the military’s focus on developing gender-neutral standards both claims erasure of gender as a barrier to inclusion while asserting “intrinsic” gender differences that account for (and justify) women’s continued underrepresentation in combat arms units.

KEYWORDS:

• Organizations
• organizational change
• gender integration
• military
• masculinities

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Barbara Risman, Michael A. Long, Andrew S. Fullerton, and anonymous reviewers for their feedback on previous versions of this manuscript.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are made publicly available from the U.S. Department of Defense, and can be found at https://dod.defense.gov/News/Publications/WISR-Studies/.

Notes

1. According to the National Defense Authorization Act, a standard is gender-neutral when the minimum standard to pass a test is the same for men as for women, and when the measure is considered valid by way of accurately predicting performance of physical tasks required for a given military occupational specialty.

2. It should be noted that general physical fitness standards in the military are gender-normed, whereas occupation-specific standards must be gender-neutral. The call for gender-integration of the combat arms MOSs, then, required the study of current occupational standards to confirm they were gender-neutral and, if they were not, to develop new standards that fit this definition.

3. The DoD directive specified only that service branches conduct a review of their current standards and plan for implementation. It did not place restrictions on commissioning outside entities from conducting these studies for a service branch.

4. The Delayed Entry Program allows recruits to postpone basic training for up to a year following their enlistment, typically to complete high school or college.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Janelle M. Pham

Janelle M. Pham is an assistant professor of Sociology at Oglethorpe University. Her research focuses on the development of sexual cultures within organizations. Her current project examines how the United States Army’s efforts to identify threats to the sexual morality of its troops between World War I and the War on Terror are marked by a turn inward, with particular focus to women and LGBTQ service members within its ranks. Her work has appeared in Sociological Forum, The Journal of Sex Research, Journal of Lesbian Studies, Sociology Compass, and Frontiers in Sociology.