Women in the U.S. military have always had a
"tough row to hoe"; those women who literally broke ground, opened
doors, and made the choice of a military career easier for those who followed,
were the beginning. Today the fight is continuing. Inequality and sexual
harassment towards women continues to persist, because the military¡¦s
leadership when faced with the option of ill repute or justice ignores justice.
Women deserve fair treatment, a non-hostile environment, and a chance to
further their careers on an equal footing with man. The fact that harassment,
discrimination, and sexual assaults are still occurring in our esteemed
military in such numbers is appalling. The military¡¦s overall treatment, lack
of respect in handling sexual harassment accusations and the repeated cover-ups
of sexual harassment/assault crimes committed by generals is a national
disgrace. Nonetheless, we can only make reparation for past injustices, plan to
prevent them from occurring again, and hope that tomorrow will be better than
yesterday.
To make tomorrow better than yesterday The Uniform code of Military Justice
needs a complete overhauled. Last updated in 1983, the code is lacking any
mention of the term sexual harassment. Thought this is a startling realization
to us civilians, it is total normal for the military. Sexual harassment, though
not mentioned in the code, is a crime under Article 134; ¡§Article 134 is the
catch-all of this nation¡¦s military justice system, a compendium of 55 offenses
that the armed forces say are prejudicial to good order and discipline or
likely to bring discredit on the service¡¨(Gross-Justice¡K). Article 134
establishes an extremely high standard of conduct to maintain an orderly
fighting force and prevent abuses of power in a hierarchical system where men
and women live and work together 24 hours a day.
Sexual harassment is an offense committed by both females and males in assorted
measures; it is predominately committed by males against females. It can
¡§occur in a variety of circumstances¡Ksome examples include: sexual insults,
whistling, catcalls, pressure for sexual activity, [seeing girly magazines] and
pinching¡¨(Facts¡K). Very simply, sexual harassment is any unwanted and
unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature that creates a hostile work environment;
usually engaged in by co-worker or supervisor, which renders the workplace
atmosphere intimidating, offensive and can/will interfere with work performance
and group cohesion.
¡§Sexual harassment is an important issue and should not be taken lightly; on
the other hand, it should not be taken out of control either¡¨(Facts¡K). The
military is full of political correctness. Soldiers and officers constantly
have to watch what they say. For instance, a common line heard describing this
atmosphere of political correctness is, "I can't talk to this other person
if this other person is of a different culture or a different sex. I'm very
uncomfortable." This is usually the case because what is harassment to one
person is a joke to another.
Women¡¦s experiences with inequality have been similar to those of black men;
their integration into the military has also differed in several ways. Because
of our society¡¦s fundamental belief that going to war is a man¡¦s job, men
from minority groups have often been accepted more readily in the military than
women.
Women have been viewed as outsiders in this male environment. Discrimination
and harassment occurs for women because they are entering an all male dominated
area. Some areas are still restricted because of it. For example: serving in
direct combat capacities such as infantry, and Special Forces¡Xis limited to
men. Though this policy is rational in light of one, the physical handicaps of
women; and two, the image of sending women home in body bags, which no U.S.
senator wants too take credit for. Even so, this gender bias is a
discriminatory policy, and a limiting of opportunities for women. If women
¡§don't get the same opportunities to go out and compete,¡¨ as men do, then they¡¦ll
have a much less chance of reaching a senior leadership position (generals);
which are usually drawn from combat hardened/experienced officers (Baxter).
¡§By precluding women from the core functions of the military, they define
women as marginal service members, thereby fostering sexual harassment [and
discrimination]¡¨(Tailhook Incident 92).
In 1994, the annual Navy wide Personnel Survey included questions on women¡¦s
role for the first time. Some 65 percent of officers and almost 50 percent of
enlisted respondents said they did not think women were fully accepted in
combat roles. While approximately 80 percent said harassment was not tolerated
at their command, almost half of all respondents disagreed that everyone is
treated equally in promotions and advancements.
Some of this is based on the presumed physical and psychological
characteristics of women, which may interfere with their performances in combat
rich situations. For example: the physical strength of women. People believe
that women are not strong enough to lift and carry heavy equipment or wounded
fellow soldiers and that they lack endurance to perform these tasks over a
lengthened period. In addition, there is the idea that women cannot perform
strenuous tasks quickly, like loading heavy shells into a weapon. Moreover,
combat is not for the weak and slow. Although allowing women in combat remains
a top priority, women are now serving in virtually every other occupational
capacity in all four branches of the military.
Even though women are restricted from direct hand-to-hand combat positions,
their prospects are growing by the day. A large number of previously restricted
areas to women have been opened in the Army, Marine Corps, and the Air Force.
Even the Navy is improving, which is a shock on its own. (Side note: Today in
the Navy ¡§all ships are open to women except submarines and Coastal Patrol
ships¡¨, -because submarines and Coastal Patrol ships are lacking habitability
for women (Women in the Navy).) Even with increasing sexual harassment/assault/
and discrimination (S.H.A.D.) cases, the rising number of women being recruited
is not due to any idealistic vision of the right of women to serve their
country in uniform. One might say this trend is driven by the need to recruit
an increasingly intelligent, well-educated, and fit military in the face of
data that reflects the shrinking amount of qualified male candidates.
Then again, Marine Corps recruiter, C. J. Chivers feels that by ¡§1993, in the
wake of the Tailhook scandal, the military was desperate to show that it could
shed sexism. In recruiting, this translated into hiring as many women as
possible¡¨(Chivers). Accordingly, many servicemen resented their female peers,
because they felt women, who are not as qualified, were allowed to enter into
the military through a side door. Women are asking for fair treatment. However,
officers are pressured to cut corners to increase the number of women in the
ranks for reasons previously mentioned.
The Navy¡¦s greatest modern-day blunder was the Tailhook scandal, which rocked
the country and made aware to all that there was indeed a problem in our
esteemed military. The incident took place during the Navy¡¦s annual Tailhook
Association convention in September of 1991. What occurred at the hotel-wide
party following the convention¡¦s itinerary for the day was a disgrace to the
military, but more specifically, the Navy. Female guests and officers at the
party were surrounded by Navy aviators ¡§and passed down a gauntlet,¡¨ having
their breasts and buttocks grabbed; some of the men attempted to strip off
their clothes. (TAILHOOK INCIDENT 92)
The investigations following the Tailhook incident revealed a most upsetting
trend set by the leaders of the Armed forces. The leadership, knowing that this
same ¡§practice has occurred since 1986,¡¨ demonstrated a tolerance and
overlooked the attitude of contempt toward women held by many military men.
Further, the investigations showed, that military leaders ¡§did not take the
women's reports of the incident seriously and the perpetrators and others aware
of the incident obstructed the investigation.¡¨ (TAILHOOK INCIDENT 92)
A review, conducted by the DoD of the investigations following the Tailhook
incident indicated, ¡§that the scope of the investigations should have been
expanded beyond the assaults to encompass other violations of law and
regulation as they became apparent and should have addressed individual
accountability for the leadership failure that created an atmosphere in which
the assaults and other misconduct took place.¡¨ They concluded these failures
to ¡§collaborative management failures and personal failures on the part of the
Under Secretary, the Navy IG, the Navy JAG, and the Commander of the NIS.¡¨ The
DoD believes that the shortcomings of the investigations ¡§were the result of
an attempt to limit the exposure of the Navy and senior Navy officials to
criticism regarding Tailhook 91.¡¨ (United States)
To its credit, the Pentagon leadership is seriously trying to deal with
volatile and complex issues of sexual misconduct. The brass is now debating
whether and how to prosecute cases of adultery. The Navy has made a strong
effort, since the 1991 Tailhook scandal, to putting an end to sexual
harassment. In fact, all the services have. In March of 1994, the Deputy
Secretary of Defense asked the Secretary of the Air Force and the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to develop a sexual harassment
policy action plan. This plan was provided in April 1994, and included among its
elements (1) the establishment of a Defense Equal Opportunity Council (DEOC)
Task Force on Discrimination and Sexual Harassment to review the Military
Services' discrimination complaints systems and recommend improvements, and (2)
the conduct of a Department-wide sexual harassment survey.
Three survey forms were used in the study. The first survey (Form A) replicated
a 1988 DoD-wide survey that produced the first baseline data on sexual
harassment in the active-duty Services. The sole purpose of administering Form
A was to permit comparisons of the 1988 and 1995 time frames. In summary, these
surveys documented a decline in harassment experiences and cited the DoD¡¦s
increased emphasis on combating sexual harassment for the success.
The efforts of the militaries ¡§equal opportunity training,¡¨ received by
everyone in the military is seen as the main contributing factor to this
reduction in reported sexual harassment cases.
When sexual harassment allegations were made in reference to Sergeant Major
McKinney, the highest-ranking enlisted Officer in the Army; the Army reacted
swiftly and harshly. It even called a press conference to publicize the case.
Fearful of appearing soft on sexual harassment, the leadership never seriously
offered Sergeant Major McKinney the option of retiring, as it has done in
comparable cases¡¨ (Finder). (By comparable cases I am referring to the
¡§Pentagon records obtained by the sergeant major¡¦s lawyers¡K[which] shows in
the last three years (95-98) at least 23 senior and general Army officers were
accused of offenses including child molestation and adultery - and not one was
prosecutes. Each was simply allowed to retire¡¨ (Finder).)
The consequences of the accusations against Sergeant Major McKinney seriously
damaged the Army¡¦s reputation. They were looking for a quick fix. A show trial
that would demonstrate the Army¡¦s determination and in part make up for the
Navy¡¦s Tailhook incident. In the Tailhook trial a number of officers ¡§were
courts-martial, but no one went to prison. The resulting public outcry made the
other armed services sit up and take notice. They wanted to be sure they
didn¡¦t make the same mistakes¡¨ (Finder).
It takes a lot of cases and re-occurring problems for sexual harassment to
finally get the notice it needs. Basis trainees are learning that at all
levels, the word is getting out that discrimination and harassment have no
place in the military profession and will not be tolerated. On a visit to my
local Air Force recruitment office, I came upon a pamphlet concerning S.H. that
read, ¡§The Air Force can not isolate itself from these social trends¡K¡¨ and
must take a zero tolerance position on these issues. On November 13, 1996 in a
speech at the Navel academy in Annapolis, then Secretary of Defense William J.
Perry, conveyed the DoD¡¦s position on sexual harassment, here is an excerpt:
"...Our policy on sexual harassment is crystal clear. We believe that
sexual harassment is wrong, ethically and morally. We believe it is wrong from
the point of view of military discipline. And we believe it is wrong from point
of view of maintaining proper respect in the chain of command. And for all of
these reasons therefore, we have a zero tolerance for sexual harassment."
Prevention is the best tool to eliminate sexual harassment. The DoD following
the Tailhook scandal prudently addressed the sexual harassment issue, by
instituting the Initial Entry Training and Equal Opportunity Program. With a
comprehensive, detailed written policy on sexual harassment they next sought to
relieve tensions concerning the issue of sexual harassment. General Dennis J.
Reimer, the Army Chief of Staff, ¡§videotaped a segment for broadcast on Army
television stations worldwide to reassure the troops that top Army leaders were
taking the [sexual harassment] matter seriously¡¨(Schmitt-Sexual Harassment¡K).
Second, they distribute the written policy to all officers globally. The policy
was distributed, and training to combat sexual harassment begun.
Sexual harassment is believed to be decreasing, but one must remember a lot of
sexual harassment goes unreported. Women are afraid to report cases for fear of
being thrown out of their job. Women can get the feeling of not trusting anyone
in the military command, easier than then men for two reasons. One, 99 percent
of commanding ranks are taken by men, and two, men are more likely to help men
than women. A woman cannot get help from a commanding officer that¡¦s a woman,
because the commanding officer is probably in a rut of her own.
In lieu of these issues, a panel of senior Army officers and civilian military
officials were issued to investigate sexual harassment in the United States
Army. The panel was to ascertain the shortcomings of: the Army¡¦s Equal
Opportunity (EO) program, leadership, and Initial Entry Training (IET). Their
finding, recommendations and conclusions are here summarized:
„« ¡§The Army lacks institutional commitment to the Equal Opportunity program
and soldiers distrust the EO complaint system.¡¨
„« ¡§Sexual harassment exists throughout the Army, crossing gender, rank, and
racial lines; sex discrimination is more common than is sexual harassment.¡¨
„« ¡§Army leaders are the critical factor in creating, maintaining, and
enforcing an environment of respect and dignity in the Army; too many leaders
have failed to gain the trust of their soldiers.¡¨
„« The majority of officers perform competently, but ¡§respect as an Army core
value is not well institutionalized in the IET process.
Their view was that passive ¡§leadership has allowed sexual harassment to
persist; active leadership can bring about change to eradicate it.¡¨ Leadership
is the problem. (Findings¡K)
¡§Leaders set the values compass for the Army; it is from them that respect and
dignity flow¡¨ (Findings¡K). Officers live by an ethos that rules and
regulations are there for a purpose and are to be upheld by all military
personnel. Unfortunately, the military¡¦s leadership, and senior officers have
not lived up to that code. Throughout the military, senior leaders regarding
sexual violations of DoD policies, see their charges overlooked; the offenders
slapped on the wrist and then allowed to retire quietly.
This lack of ethical leadership is what is creating an environment that
undermines human dignity, trust and respect for others. Too many leaders today
are more concerned with protecting their careers than with doing the right
thing. Many leaders do not deal with incompetent personnel or controversial
issues because it is too hard, too time consuming, or may create a problem with
their career.
Leadership should get back on the ethical track and make integrity, honor,
morals, courage, and honesty more than mere words. I read about these
injustices, and I implore the men and women of the military to take the
appropriate action and not to quit fighting the system until the right thing is
done. We should not ignore injustice and inept leadership. The members of the
Armed Forces cannot perform their mission as a team if they cannot trust and
depend on each other to do the right thing.
Preventing sexual harassment requires a considerable investment of time and
personnel. However, investing in these resources the military will benefit from
increased worker productivity and a more hospitable work environment. Sexual
offenses are in a way, abuses of power that can affect order, cohesion and
effectiveness in the life-or-death environment of the military (Gross-Justice).
The military only stands to gain if it takes a no-nonsense, hard-line position
on sexual harassment. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is the smart
thing to do.
Works Cited
Baxter, Roxanne. ¡§Transcript: Interview with Roxanne Baxter.¡¨ PBS Online
(1998).
Chivers, C. J. ¡§Yes, There is a Double Standard.¡¨ New York Times 17 Nov.
1996:
Late Ed.
Facts about Sexual Harassment. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
January 15, 1997
Finder, Joseph. ¡§The Army on Trial.¡¨ New York Times 17 Feb. 1998: Late Ed.
¡§Findings and Recommendations of Army Panel Studying Harassment.¡¨ New York
Times 12 Sept. 1997: Late Ed.
Gross, Jane. ¡§Justice in the Military Has its Reasons.¡¨ New York Times 1 Mar.
1998:
Late Ed.
----. ¡§When Character Counts.¡¨ New York Times 15 Mar. 1998: Late Ed.
Schmitt, Eric. ¡§Senators Doubtful Over Army¡¦s Policies on Women.¡¨ New York
Times
5 Feb. 1997: Late Ed.
----. ¡§Sexual Harassment Case Polarizes Soldiers.¡¨ New York Times 16 Feb.
1997: Late Ed.
¡§TAILHOOK INCIDENT 92.¡¨ National Organization for Women. June 1992
United States. Department of Defense. OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
Report of Investigation: Tailhook 91 - Part 1. MEMORANDUM FOR ACTING
SECRETARY OF THE NAVY: 21 SEP 1992.
Webb, James. ¡§Transcript: Interview with James Webb.¡¨ PBS Online (1998).
Women in the Navy. Navy of Office of Information. 31 Dec 2000