Can women cope with combat? A storm of opinions was unleashed last week in response to the US military lifting its ban on women in combat roles. Many saw the move as a positive one. Others were concerned that differences in physical strength would put teams at risk, or that women may be too compassionate for close-quarter combat. âWe need to take a more scientific approachâ to answering these questions, says Mary Cummings at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, one of the first female fighter pilots in the US navy. So what can science tell us about how women deal with being in the line of fire? And is their experience any different to that of men?
Some research comes from women in the US military who have found themselves in front-line action. âThereâs no way in my mind you can tell me I wasnât in combat,â says Rebekah Havrilla, who served as an explosive ordnance disposal technician in Afghanistan (see âTrauma on the front lineâ, below). Most, however, comes from women who work in combat rolesâŻâ including infantry, commando units and tank unitsâŻâ in a number of other countries, including Canada and Israel. But studies are thin on the ground.
Advertisement
One of the main arguments against opening up combat roles to women has been physiological: that they canât hack it, physically. Even among soldiers, women on average have about 30âŻper cent less muscle strength and 15 to 30âŻper cent less aerobic capacity than men ().
However, that doesnât mean they cannot reach the standards needed for combat. Under the new US policy, each military department will have to prescribe new physical standards for each jobâŻâ which recruits will have to achieve regardless of gender.
For example, rather than requiring that an applicant be male and reach certain physical requirements, the job description may specify that applicants should be able to lift a specific weight of ammunition, or throw a grenade a set distance.
These standards will be decided using scientific research and experience of what has been necessary in the past, says Nathan Christensen of the US Department of Defense (DoD).
Automated kit
Regardless, physiology may become moot, says Cummings, âbecause in the end the computer beats us allâ. Exoskeletons designed to reduce stress on the body may be deployed in war zones as early as next year. Other types of automated kit can also take the strain out of heavy lifting (see âTaking the weight out of warâ, below).
Another argument has been that women are more likely to be traumatised by combat than men. Here, the available evidence cuts both ways. In a study of 450âŻsoldiers in the Israeli Defense Forces involved in basic combat training, female soldiers displayed higher stress levels for longer periods of time than male soldiers (, doi.org/d3dxqt).
However, a study of female US soldiers who experienced direct combat during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars found that women felt no more threatened than men in war zones, and were as resilient to combat-related stressâŻâ reflected in the similar rates of mental health problems between veterans of both sexes after they returned home (, doi.org/ch637r).
And what of compassion on the front line? A 2004 analysis from Princeton University suggests that in stressful situations almost anyone can end up displaying uncompassionate and violent behaviourâŻâ regardless of gender (, doi.org/dxpcc5). The authors suggest that behaviour in these situations is influenced as much by authority figures, peer pressure and other social interactions as by the psychology of the individual. Intimidation by authority figures was cited by US soldier Lynndie England, convicted in 2005 for the abuse of inmates at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
One difference is clear: there are more reported cases of women in the US forces experiencing sexual harassment or sexual assault by colleagues during deployment than men. In the latest Department of Defense on sexual assault in the military, 3393 service members reported being sexually assaulted between 2010 and 2011âŻâ 88 per cent of these were female. The DoD report states that they are working to improve response times to assault claims and prioritising prevention strategies and systems to improve accountability.
Ultimately, opening up combat jobs to women will allow more women to advance their careers and break through the âbrass ceilingâ, says Havrilla, adding that this will allow for more social change throughout the military. âWhen we see people as people, and say âeveryone here has met the standard and everyone here is qualifiedâ, that lessens the concept of something being feminine or weak,â she says. âThere are a lot of implications down the road.â
Trauma on the front line
Would Rebekah Havrilla have joined the infantry if she had been allowed? âHell yes!â the former sergeant says. âIâve always thought of myself as being able to do anything I put my mind to. I saw the military as a way
to prove that to myself and to other people, but unfortunately the military didnât see it that way at the time.â Havrilla joined the armyâs Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) unitâŻâŻâ also known as the bomb squadâŻâ because it was the closest she could get to a combat role. She served in Afghanistan from 2006 to 2007, working with infantry and Special Forces units, dealing with anything that could explode. âWe went in and found forensic data that indicated what it was, who made it, stuff like that,â she says.
Thereâs no such thing as a front line, she says, and her role regularly took her into the line of fire. âAnywhere you are you have the potential to deal with combat related incidents. One of my friends was killed because a rocket hit the chow hall tent.â
Havrilla reckons there should be one physical standard across the board. âI know a lot of men who couldnât meet certain physical standards, and I know a bunch of women who could. If you can do it, great. If you canât, move on.â
While Havrilla was in active service, she was often the only woman in the EOD unit. She says this contributed to her having little support when she experienced sexual harassment. âI got stuck with some bad apples, and had to deal with it,â she says.
Havrilla now works with the US national help line. She says she sees more trauma associated with sexual violence than with combat.
âIn the long run, I think we will hopefully see a decrease in sexual violenceâ now that women are allowed in combat roles, she says. âAny time an organisation is more diverse, thatâs beneficial to that organisation.â
Taking the weight out of war
Women who wish to serve on the front line will be subject to the same physical standards as men, but there are some technologies that could give both sexes a helping hand.
Take for example, the HULC Exoskeleton, developed by US defence firm Lockheed Martin. It uses a lithium-ion battery to power hydraulics that allow users to carry up to 90 kilograms for extended periods of time. âMen or women can use HULC to reduce stress on the body, thereby reducing the potential for injury,â says Melissa Hilliard, a spokeswoman for the company.
The XOS2, an exoskeleton developed by UK defence company Raytheon, directly augments upper arm strength as well as carrying ability, allowing soldiers to lift more weight than they could naturally. One model of the XOS2 is designed specifically to help front-line logistics workers who need to move things like weapons crates and missiles.
Humans may not need to do much heavy hauling at all, once Alpha Dog â a four-legged robotic pack muleâŻâ is deployed into war zones. The robot, developed by US research agency DARPA, can autonomously follow a person, while hauling 180 kilograms of gear, as well as serving as a backup power source for a patrolling squad.
