In the aftermath of the Army's sexual harassment scandals, some lawmakers have demanded the military end gender integrated training. These naysayers see a link between young men and women training together and inappropriate sexual behavior.
Women are too distracting, they say. The solution is to train men and women separately. Balderdash!The problems at Aberdeen and other training commands do not involve young men and women with raging hormones seeking out sexual partners. The men found guilty of sexual harassment and assault are, for the most part, family men in their thirties who are non-commissioned officers in positions of trust and responsibility. Their actions are not innocent hanky-panky; they are guilty of misconduct and abuse of power.
Separating the sexes during training is not the solution. As Gen. Dennis J. Reimer, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, has said: "I do not believe the current sexual harassment problem is as much a policy issue as it is a right-wrong issue."
What's needed is strong leadership. A 1995 Department of Defense sexual harassment survey reported that barely half of military women thought their leaders were making honest and reasonable efforts to stop sexual harassment.
Leaders need to make it very clear to subordinates that sexual harassment is unacceptable behavior that is detrimental to the unit. They also must take action. A superior introducing a sexual harassment training session or having an open door policy is not enough. A leader must talk to troops informally about what's going on in the unit, and punish when inappropriate sexual behavior occurs.
In reporting sexual harassment, women must feel they will be taken seriously - that they will not be brushed off as "not being able to take it." They also must be confident they will not suffer reprisal.
The 1995 Department of Defense sexual harassment survey showed that only 20 percent of women feel free to report sexual harassment without fear of "bad things" happening to them, such as a lower performance rating.
The demand that the services return to single-gender basic training is based on the assumption that, because the sexual harassment scandals happened at training commands, gender-integrated training is a failure. The assumption is wrong.
A three-year Army study, released in 1996, found that women's performance in mixed-gender basic training improved and men's performance remained the same. In addition, men in mixed-gender units had a higher percentage of passing grades on various requirements than men who trained in all-male units. This even included the basic rifle marksmanship test. Perhaps the guys did not want the women to best them?
At Navy boot camp, some units have women and men while others have only men. Do the all-male units do better? No. Objective measures in a 1992 study revealed that on performance tests both types of units did equally well, and mixed-gender units had improved teamwork.
Furthermore, the Army's sex scandals have not occurred at basic training; they have been at commands where soldiers learn specific job skills after boot camp. Such skill training, in many instances, has been integrated for more than 20 years, and has proven to be an effective way to train.
Women and men will be doing the job together in the workplace. It's better to work together in training rather than waiting until reaching their unit.
The United States has the best military in the world. One reason is because our forces train the way they fight - as one military.