Australian Army Journal

GENDER AND SEXUALITY
Sexuality, Cohesion, Masculinity and
Combat Motivation: Designing Personnel
Policy to Sustain Capability
they may, or may not be, nor the extent to which existing prohibitions and policies
modify behaviour. There is no empirical basis on which to judge the ‘problem’,
or indeed whether there is one.
As Army begins the process of integrating women into combat arms units, there
are several questions it must be able to answer if it is to establish appropriate
policy settings, especially those related to consensual sexuality:
• Do combat units require a higher level of cohesion than that currently
demonstrated in mixed support units?
• What are the appropriate methods, measures and standards for building
cohesion for mixed combat units?
• What is the proper role of masculinity in military culture and the building
of cohesion?
• What are the factors that determine whether sexual dynamics will threaten
trust and thus cohesion?
• What constitutes acceptable sexual behaviour in mixed combat units?
Army needs debate and measurement. Perhaps the concerns explored in
this article are unfounded or wildly overstated. This should be demonstrated,
not assumed. A confidential survey of sexual attitudes and self-reported behaviours
among important sample groups including recruits, leaders of mixed units,
combat unit soldiers and veterans would be straightforward, but has not been
done: perhaps it is ‘too uncomfortable’? Even if the objective risks prove minimal,
until these confronting topics are decisively engaged, clandestine objection to
the presence of women anchored in issues of sexuality remains a wellspring for
harassment and a roadblock to effective integration. Even, or perhaps especially,
ill-founded concerns and incoherent arguments need to be brought out into the
open and met with reasoned analysis and persuasion.
Australian Army Journal
Culture edition 2013, Volume X, Number 3 Page 73