DISTRIBUTION A:
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Document created: 6 September 00
Published Aerospace Power Journal - Fall 2000

The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America’s Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars? by Stephanie Gutmann. Scribner (http://www.mlr. com/scribner/index.html), The Gale Group, P.O. Box 9187, Farmington Hills, Michigan 48333-9187, 2000, 300 pages, $25.00.

The Kinder, Gentler Military is a scathing critique of policies that, according to the author, have created a military force perhaps incapable of protecting the very society to whose standards it must adhere. The author implies that her problem lies not with the women currently serving in the military or with those who have already served. Instead, efforts to create a gender-neutral environment have led to a fatal loosening of standards. Her book makes some very good points and has some well-researched sections. However, her overall disregard for many important aspects of a modern military and her choice of subject-matter experts make some parts of the book almost laughable. She defines readiness as simply a measure of morale. One would be hard pressed to find a real military expert who would define readiness in such a limited manner. The book, while purporting to be a critique of the military, is really a critique of the Army, with some attention paid to the integration of women aboard Navy ships. It seldom mentions either the Air Force or Marine Corps.

Gutmann’s self-professed “military illiteracy” pervades the book. She often mocks terms and situations she does not understand, thinking them another example of succumbing to political correctness. This serves only to lessen her credibility and weaken her argument. For example, while recounting her visit to Army basic training, she mocks the term reception (the in-processing that begins the first day). Had she been “militarily literate,” she would have known that reception is a logistical term (ask any logistician about reception, staging, onward movement, and integration [RSO&I]) rather than a “gentler” term referring to a social gathering.

Gutmann should have spent some time trying to learn about military operations and force employment. Her ignorance in this area is stunning. For example, many of her references to commanders are drawn from the movies. In fact, the book cites more movies than it does books on the military. She even speaks of today’s generals moving little pieces around a big map board, à la World War II movies.

One of her accounts of morale-readiness problems takes place on several wasted pages where she describes the whines of sailors aboard the USS Stennis—their chief complaint is that they aren’t having fun. Similarly, regarding the port call in Bahrain, the sailors are upset over curfews. Somehow, she is able to reconcile this with her earlier contention that men join the military because they crave discipline. Therefore, we are left to assume that discipline is fine as long as it doesn’t interfere with having fun. She also tells us of soldiers prohibited from drinking aboard ship or buying a Playboy magazine. One wonders if the fact that she is a contributing writer to Playboy has anything to do with her relating this huge, morale-killing complaint.

She does, however, do a good job of recounting events she feels have contributed to the military’s current gender-integrated culture. We see this in her handling of the Aberdeen and Tailhook scandals, for example. Exhaustively researched, well written, and backed up by documented evidence, this section is also the easiest one in the book to read. She would have done well to have concentrated all of her efforts here.

Perhaps the greatest detriment to her argument and credibility is her “subject-matter experts”—sometimes named, sometimes anonymous, usually company-grade officers, and often lieutenants. She does express her regret that many of her sources wished to remain unnamed, fearing that their comments would negatively affect their careers.

Overall, the book makes some interesting points. One should note that this is a people-issues/ human-relations book—the heart of her argument, after all, is that readiness is all about how people feel. This is perhaps what is most troubling about both the policies she detests and her argument. There are many factors to be considered besides the warmth and fuzziness of being together. Bonding and teamwork are important, and they still take place very often, in spite of—or sometimes due to—the policies in effect.

Capt Natalie S. Russell, USAF
Maxwell AFB, Alabama

Disclaimer

The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.

[ Back Issues | Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor ]