Shattered illusions in the military

Last month, the U.S. Army announced with much fanfare that two women out of 19 had completed Army Ranger training to qualify for the elite corps. Though Capt. Kristen Griest and 1st Lt. Shaye Haver are not deployed yet, they represent a milestone on the rocky road to full combat participation by women, a goal prescribed by the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Jan. 24, 2013.

Elsewhere, the project isn’t going as well. Last month, the Marines wrapped up a training exercise at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, Calif., that tested women in desert combat conditions—“the closest any female Marine has been permitted to get to infantry life and training,” according to Marine Corps Times. Scientific apparatus used in the evaluation included heart-rate monitors for comparative readings and devices that determined rifle accuracy. How did the women do? Not so well: Almost 100 women signed up for the ordeal that began with four months of training at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. Reportedly, two dozen went on to Twentynine Palms with their platoons. Of those, only two survived to the end.

Plenty of men dropped out too, but the rate was much higher among women. Official reports rationalized why, claiming that most of the women had less experience, therefore less of the “sense of elitism” and “combat mindset” than the men. As for the inevitable emotional tension, Sgt. Curtis Clifton figured, “You had a whole bunch of guys who had never worked with women before now working with them and developing feelings for them. It’s like jumping from a Jacuzzi into the pool.” Supposedly these feelings will level out once the guys get used to rubbing shoulders with the tough-talking blonde or brunette next to them.

Another grunt on the ground isn’t so sure. Lance Cpl. Chris Aguello joined the experiment with an open mind, more in favor of female combat participation than not. But up close and personal, he began having second thoughts. When the exercises ended he submitted a 13-page observation to his commanding officers: “The female variable in this social experiment has wrought a fundamental change in the way male NCOs [non-commissioned officers] think, act, and lead: a change that is sadly for the worse, not the better.”

All objective measures indicate that female trainees will, by and large, never measure up to their male counterparts. Britain’s Tri-Service review recently unveiled a study detailing physical and physiological differences that contributed to the underperformance of co-ed units. U.S. Marine Capt. Lauren Serrano goes further, frankly charging that women disrupt cohesion and focus: “Even those select women who can physically endure the infantry are still posing a threat to infantry mission and readiness.”

Our perceptions are becoming more unreal by the day. Black is gray, female is the same as male, we snub our allies and make generous offers to our sworn enemies. Reality doesn’t gently nudge stubborn illusions back in line; it opens fire on them. A strong military, as history proves over and over, is the first line of defense against merciless reality. But if even the top brass buys into the illusions, who can stand?