In a new study of current and former U.S. soldiers, researchers at UC Irvine and Queen’s University found that those deployed to Afghanistan in mixed-gender units were more likely to view gender integration positively than all-male units. Coauthors Heidi Hardt, UC Irvine political science associate professor, and Stéfanie von Hlatky, Queen’s University political studies professor, explain that, in interviews, many soldiers viewed women’s involvement in military operations as critical to operational effectiveness.

“Many of those who participated in our study – particularly male soldiers and veterans – stressed the comparative advantages that female soldiers offered as it was suggested that female soldiers could engage more easily with local women in Afghan communities,” says Hardt. “Evidence of soldiers’ instrumentalist approach to gender integration showed up in story after story of female soldiers establishing trust with local women, cultivating positive relationships, accessing intelligence and improving units’ situational awareness. We heard soldiers reflect on how missions would have been jeopardized without the participation of female soldiers, particularly in cases where cultural norms prevented male soldiers from offering medical assistance.”

Findings, published online in Contemporary Security Policy, shed light on evolving attitudes of gender integration within the U.S. military, where women now represent 18% of the personnel.

The study draws on interviews and surveys conducted with 43 active-duty military personnel and veterans who served in the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) – an almost two-decade long NATO-led military operation – in Afghanistan. Service branches represented in the study included Army (54%), Marines (24%), Navy (15%), and Air Force (7%). Interviews with 24 of the participants were conducted via phone, virtual meetings and in-person at think tanks, veterans’ associations in Washington, D.C. and at several university ROTC offices in the U.S.; 19 participants completed an online questionnaire. Of those surveyed, 16% were women. Through a series of primarily open-ended questions, participants shared their attitudes and experiences serving in Afghanistan, focusing on the degree to which women servicemembers impacted operational effectiveness and unit cohesion.

Among mixed-gender units, servicemembers viewed integration favorably and a key component for overall operational effectiveness. By contrast, among all-male units, soldiers were more likely to retain negative views on gender integration, despite citing operational examples in which the absence of female soldiers hindered their unit’s ability to communicate with local women. And across both groups, more than half – 55 percent – felt gender integration had no effect on unit cohesion, a finding Hardt says stands in stark contrast to long-held debates in security scholarship which presume a negative effect.

“Scholarship in security studies suggest that attitudes are growing more accepting of gender integration over time, perhaps with women’s increased presence and rise through the ranks,” she says. “Our findings are consistent with others in that our work points to the importance of exposure alone, as a pathway to changing attitudes toward gender integration. A key contribution that our research makes is in providing a new explanation for why some of the resistance to integration may be eroding in the military; operational experiences matter. With men and women increasingly serving together, views appear to be becoming more favorable. Stereotypes about women as liabilities are not just proven wrong but female soldiers are increasingly perceived as providing unique advantages to the battlefield.”

Additionally, Hardt and von Hlatky broke down overall attitude by respondent age and found something surprising: older soldiers were more likely to express favorable attitudes about gender integration and links with operational effectiveness than younger soldiers. And on average, all major age groups viewed the benefits of having women in units as exceeding the costs.

“Taken together, these findings provide insights into the changing attitudes toward gender integration in the U.S. military, and as the U.S. military continues to train, conduct exercises and carry out operations in multilateral contexts, such as with fellow NATO troops, soldiers can expect to increasingly find themselves in not just mixed-gender but mixed-nationality and multicultural settings with the expectation to serve cohesively and effectively,” says Hardt. “Future research is needed on the complexities of these contexts and also on the durability of changes in attitudes due to operational experiences. Do positive attitudes sustain over time after experiences serving together - as was shown in early research on racial integration in the military? We also need to know more about how attitudes toward gender integration and other types of integration vary across different branches of the military and across different contexts (air, land, sea, cyber, etc.).”

Hardt noted also that the study offers a word of caution: linking women’s integration in the military to operational effectiveness adds a layer of complexity to broader efforts within the military to work toward equal opportunity for moral or legal reasons.

“As much as women are increasingly being accepted as equal contributors, our research suggests that instrumentalist reasons are also driving acceptance.”

Funding for this work was provided by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Science for Peace and Security under grant number 985080.