The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PRIORITIES AND ECONOMY IN GOVERNMENT
OF THE
,JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
NINETY-FIFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JULY 22 AND SEPTEMBER 1, 1977
Printed for the use of the Joint Economic Committee
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1978
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE
(Created pursuant to sec. 5 (a) of Public Law 304, 79th Cong.)
RICHARD BOLLING, Missouri, Chairman
HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Minnesota, Vice Chairman
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
HENRY S. REUSS, Wisconsin
WILLIAM S. MOORHEAD, Pennsylvania
LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana
GILLIS W. LONG, Louisiana
OTIS G. PIKE, New York
CLARENCE J. BROWN, Ohio
GARRY BROWN, Michigan
MARGARET M. HECKLER, Massachusetts
JOHN H. ROUSSELOT, California
SEN.A.TE
JOHN SPARKMAN, Alabama
WILLIAM PROXMIRE, Wisconsin
ABRAHAM RIBICOFF, Connecticut
LLOYD BENTSEN, Texas
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JACOB K. JAVITS, New York
WILLIAM V. ROTH, JR., Delaware
JAMES A. McCLURE, Idaho
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
JOHN R. STARK, Ea:ecutive Director
Lours C. KRAUTHOFF II, .Assistant Director
RICHARD F. KAUFMAN, General Counsel
ECONOMISTS
G. THOMAS CATOB
WILLIAM .A.. Cox
THOMAS F. DIIBNBUBG
ROBERT D. IL\KBDI
KENT H. HUGHIIS
SABAB JACKSON
JOHN R. KARLIK
L. DOUGLAS LJam
PHILIP MCMARTIN
DIIBORAB NORELLI
GIIORGII R. TYLER
MINORITY
STEPHEN J. ENTIN
CHARLES H. BRADFORD
M. CATHERINE MILLER
GIIORGII D. KRUMBHAAR, Jr.
R. POLICINSKI
MARK
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIORITIES .AND ECONOMY IN GOVERNMENT
WILLIAM PROXMIRE, Wisconsin, Chairman
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
SEN.A.TE
LLOYD BENTSE:!i!, Texas
OTIS G. PIKE, New York
EDWARDM.KENNEDY, Massachusetts
GARRY BRiOWN, Michigan
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
JOHN H. ROUSSELOT, California
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(ll)
CONTENTS
WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS
FRIDAY, JULY
22, 1977
Proxmire, Hon. William, chairman of the Subcommittee on Priorities and
Economy in Government: Opening statement_______________________
Nelson, Hon. Robert L., Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and
Reserve Affairs, accompanied by Ma,_i. Gen. J. P. Kingston, Assistant
Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, U.S. Army_____________________
Hidalgo, Hon. Edward, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower,
Reserve Affairs and Logistics, accompanied by Vice Adm. James D.
Watkins, Chief of Naval Personnel_________________________________
Chayes, Hon. Antonia Handler, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for
Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Installations, accompanied by Lt. Gen.
Bennie L. Davis, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, U.S. Air Force__
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER
Pal'e
1
3
6
9
1, 1977
Proxmire, Hon. William, chairman of the Subcommittee on Priorities and
Economy in Government: Opening statement_______________________
Goodman, Jill Laurie, staff counsel, Women's Rights Project, American
Civil Liberties Union____________________________________________
Hallaren, Col. Mary A., U.S. Army, Retired, and former Director of the
Women's Army Corps____________________________________________
Holm, Maj. Gen. Jeanne M., U.S. Air Force, Retired__________________
Parr, Carol C., chair of the National Coalition for Women in Defense,
accompanied by Pat Leeper, military expert, National Organization
for Women_____________________________________________________
69
72
89
90
97
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
FRIDAY, JULY
22, 1977
Chayes, Hon. Antonia Handler, et al.:
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's query regarding
women having higher scores on standardized tests than men in the
armed services______________________________________________
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's query regarding
what specialty fields are open to enlisted Air Force women and the
number being trained________________________________________
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's request for a breakdown of women Air Force officers serving as line officers, doctors,
lawyers, nurses, or other professions____________________________
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's request for the
percentage of the line officers women represent in the Air Force___
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's request for the
percentage of women Air Force officers who are majors or above___
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's request for the
percentage of Air Force women who are master sergeants or above__
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's request for a comparison of the number and percent increases among Air Force
enlisted women trained in traditional and nontraditional career
fields for year 1977 versus year 1972___________________________
Response of General Davis to Senator Proxmire's query regarding the
number of positions in oversea areas not open to women in the Air
Force because of limited housing facilities_______________________
Response to additional written questions posed by Senator Proxmire__
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(m)
25
41
46
47
47
47
48
48
62
IV
Hidalgo, Hon. J!;ctward, et al.:
Response of Admiral Watkins to additional written questions posed by
Senator Proxmire ___________________ ---- __ ----- ______ ----------__
Nelson, Hon. Robert L., et al.:
Paper entitled "Utilization of Women in the Army, as of July 18,
1977"------------------------------------------------------
Response of Gene1al Kingston to Senator Proxmire's query regarding
what has happened, careerwise, to Army women officers who have
completed the Combat Arms Advanced Courses_________________
Response of General Kingston to Senator Proxmire's query regarding
how many ROTC scholarships are awarded to women in the Army
as compared to men ________ ,.________________________________
Response of General Kingston to additional written questions posed
by Senator Proxmire_________________________________________
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1977
Goodman, Jill Laurie:
Prepared statement with appendixes A and B_____________________
Holm, Maj. Gen. Jeanne M.:
Prepared statement____________________________________________
Parr, Carol C., et al.:
Prepared statement____________________________________________
Response to Senator Proxmire's query regarding lost time from duty
by women in the military due to pregnancy __ -------------------Response to Senator Proxmire's query regarding rules and regulations
preventing women in the military from serving in roles for which
they were trained____________________________________________
'.Page
57
5
44
46
51
75
94
102
114
117
POINTS OF INTEREST
FRIDAY, JULY
22, 1977
Eisenhower quoted ___ --------------------------------------------Navy employment goaL____________________________________________
Percentage of women in the Navy___________________________________
Danger of sea duty versus land duty examined_______________________
Number of women in the military _________________________________ _;_
Pause in growth of women in the military____________________________
Growth of women in Army statistic through 1982_____________________
Assessment of women employability due ___ -------------------------Congressional budget office study shows difficulty recruiting males_______
Services to fall 40 percent shy of recruitment goals through 1985________
DOD study suggests changes in law barring women from ships----~---,--Proposed change in law would allow women duty on only 15 percent of
ships___________________________________________________________
Definition of "combat" precludes women being assigned duty in some
safe areas_______________________________________________________
Assistant Secretary Chayes agrees definition of "combat" needs to be
resolved________________________________________________________
Women characteristics examined for duty acceptabilitY----------~----Air Force goals could be more ambitious______________________________
The average female recruit tests better than male _____________________ .
Admi:nl yVatkins says present poor female retention is a byproduct of past
preJud1ces _______________________________________________ •--- __
Proxmire suggests prejudices still exist_______________________________
Women reenlistment rate lower due to limitations on upward mobility___
Army "policy not law" restricts women's mobility_____________________
Army feels doors are open to women________________________________
Senator Proxmire disagrees with Army assessment of open door polipy -.- _
Army cites need to study stress_____________________________________
Senator J>roxmire suggests gathering present materiaL ___________ '---- ~Percentage of combat and support roles discussed _____ -----------~---Army teets uses of women in the military __________________ :_ ______ ..,_:__
Air Force examining special "flight control pressures" for women __·__,--'--Senator Goldwater cites women flight performance _________________ , __ _;,
Male "lost work time" twice women's lost time _______________ ~----,.:Army tests show only difference in sexes is physical strength____________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
16
17
17
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
22
23
26
27
28
28
29
30
31
32
34
35
36
37
V
Brookings study conclud,es predominant male composition of Air Force is
possibly the result of preference___________________________________
General Davis raises question of resource availability__________________
50 percent of Air Force jobs are mechanical and electronic______________
GAO study finds recruiters fail to inform women about all career options_
Senator Proxmire suggests major efforts are needed to overcome biases___
Army figures show more women in nontraditional occupations__________
Enlistment standards higher for women______________________________
No surveys of public attitudes by services underway___________________
Survey research oriented toward men________________________________
Women overwhelmingly desire flight duty____________________________
'.Page
38
38
38
40
40
41
45
48
49
50
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1977
Senator Proxmire questions physical perceptions of women____________
Participation of women cited as improving effectiveness of military____
Decreasing costs to military________________________________________
General Holm says women should be given jobs if capable____________
Procrastination by military seen by General Holm____________________
The test of acceptability should be the individual not the gender______
Senator Proxmire asks how to determine the thoroughness of the DOD
report on recommendations to improve role of women in the military____
Military issue examined____________________________________________
General Holm makes reference to Eisenhower's views________________
Lawsuit challenges constitutionality of discrimination against women
in the Navy____________________________________________________
Pregnancy issue examined __ ---------------------------------------Sex education programs effective____________________________________
Parr suggests men 'Blso have single parent responsibilities_______________
Limitation to training provided to women____________________________
Senator Proxmire examines the traditional perceptions of the military____
Air Force promotions based on "rating"----------------------------Concern for women's safety not valid________________________________
Mood of the Nation toward women in combat________________________
Few women promoted to top ranks__________________________________
Lack of promotions laid to mistakes in the 1950's---------------------Lack of housing restricts using women in military_____________________
Rate women enter military declining_________________________________
Quotas and restrictions bar women from entering military______________
Racial experience showed integration encouraged acceptance____________
Effect of the equal rights amendment on the military__________________
75
90
107
108
109
109
110
111
112
113
114
116
ll7
118
120
121
122
122
123
124
126
125
126
128
129
APPENDIX
Letter from Ruth C. Clusen, president, League of Women Voters of the
United States, dated September 16, 1977, endorsing the goals outlined in
Ms. Parr's testimony at the September 1, 1977, hearing______________
Letter from Mira Nan Marshall, dated August 1, 1977, describing her recent
experience with the Army recruitment process_______________________
Articles from the LADYCOMmunications magazine, June 1977 edition:
"Women Aboard Ships: A Positive Step," by Pat Leeper___________
"Women Aboard Ships: A Serious Mistake," by Linda Pinegar______
Text of civil action suit No. 76-2086, in the U.S. District Court, District of
Columbia, requesting that defendants, the Secretary of Defense and the
Secretary of the Navy, respond, under oath, to certain interrogatories
in accordance with rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure_____
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
131
131
132
134
137
THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
FRIDAY, JULY 22, 1977
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON PRIORITIES AND
ECONOMY IN GOVERNMENT OF THE
J oINT EcoNoMrc Co:~nltTl'EE,
W a,shington, D.O.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3 :12 p.m., in room
5302, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. William Proxmire ( chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present : Senator Proxmire.
Also present: Richard F. Kaufman, general counsel; M.ark Borchelt, administrative assistant; and George D. Krumbhal»', Jr., M.
Catherine Miller, and Mark R. Policinski, minority profession11,l staff
members.
OPENING STATEMENT oF SENATOR PRoxMIRE, CHAIIUt•w
Senator PROXMIRE. The subcommittee will come to order. The Joint
Economic Committee has done considerable work in the area of
women in the labor market, including government service. As a. matter of fact, we have a study that has been in process for a very considerable period of time on women in the economy. Today's, hearing
is on the role of women in the military and is a continuation of those
efforts. It is most appropriate that we study women in the military because the military is the biggest single employer in our s,ociety. Far
bigger than any company; far bigger than any agency qf the federal
Government; and, if all opportunities are not available on an equal
basis, it obviously represents a very severe discrimination against
women.
After today we plan additional hearings to obtain information
from spokesmen for women's groups and others.
Today's proceeding is intended to elicit from the three military
services their assessment of the changes that have taken place in recent
years and present policies and prospects for the future.
The subcommittee is interested in the results of the actiqns taken
regarding the employment, and utilization of women and the results
in terms of economics, economic savings, costs and productivity gains
or losses. From the evidence I've seen, large savings and efficiencies
can be achieved by greater utilization of women in the milit11,ry. Of
course, there is a national security factor involved. There is. too little
known about the possible effects on military effectiveness as the number of women increase and as they occupy more than nontraditional
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(1)
2
jobs and for this reason, changes in policy need to be well thought
out. There has been considerable progress in expanding job opportunities for women in the military and increasing the categories of jobs
they are eligible to fill. Recognizing the steps that have been taken
and without detracting from the importance of what has been accomplished, a number of questions need to be raised. First; have we entered a pause, have we made progress in the past, but, this year, begun
to slow up?
After the strides taken from 1972 through 1976, have the services
now decided to go slower, even to turn back the clock?
Second, do we have a problem of inconsistent laws and policies as
between the services?
Third, are the quotas established for female participation arbitrary
and unreas6nable? For example, is it possible to greatly increase the
numhe_r'of women in the military without changing current policies
regarding combat?
One· of the objection~ raised_ by the ~ervices r~garding expan~ing
the role of the women is that it is agamst the will of the American
people as expressed through the Congress. Now, I would like to put
that to rest. As a Member of the Senate, I wanted to find out just
what the will of the American people was on this issue.
In June, I sent a questionnaire to my constituents in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin is about as typical a State as I think you can find. It is a
great cross-section of urban and industrial big cities and small cities
and it represents 2 percent of the area, 2 percent of the population, 2
percent.of the national income; so I think it is a good cross-sectional
State.
I sen{ a questionnaire to these constituents including the question
of role ·of women in the military, and I asked two question in this
letter. The first question was whether all noncombat jobs sho-qld be
availabie to women in the military; 67 percent of all the answers said
"Yes." Only 31 percent said no, while the remaining 2 percent didn't
answer;
What is inore interesting, however, is the second question. I asked
whether women should be allowed to volunteer for combat duty. The
response to this was 67 percent, again, who said yes, and only 3 percent said no, far better than a 2-to-1 response. The people in my
State have indicated they favor this. I believe the American public has
made up its mind on the issue and we in the Government must now
~atch up wit~ the public. We have been catching up but the question
1s are we movmg fast enough?
I niight add that the results of the questionnaire are based on 10,000
responses, a very large number, much larger than the Gallup or Harris
polls which typically are based on about 1,700 responses.
Finally, the issues of justice, equality and fairness have to be
brought into any discussion of women in the military. Feminists'
movements time and again have reminded the Nation and the Government of discriminatory policies that were later corrected. The
antiwomen discrimjnation practiced by the military in the past and
to som~ extent in thP. present, is not different very much than the unreasoned d~scrimination practiced against various races, religions and
ethnic groups. One finds many of the same kinds of myths, the same
arrogance on the part of some males, and a quota system that ex-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
eludes qualified persons. Again, I don't want to belittle the progress
made, but old prejudices, like old soldiers, sometimes never seem to die
and they don't fade away. Our witnesses are six distinguished public
servants representing the civilian and military side of each of the
three military services.
The assistant secretaries each have brief written statements that
they will present and we will get into the questions. I might conclude
by saying that almost nobody in this society, particularly in the U.S.
Senate, can speak by pointing to their own institution. Of the 100 Senators, there is not a woman who is a Senator. This institution is completely male.
We are ignoring half of our intelligence, half of our population, half
of our resources. The House 1has a little better situation but not much,
with just a very few women in the House. Only 2 of our 50 Governors are women. So, throughout our society, we have certainly failed
to provide the opportunity that we should provide that would serve
our country so well.
I am going to ask in order each of the services to deliver their stafoment. The statements are all concise. Then, we will get into questions.
Our first witness will be the Honora:ble Robert L. Nelson, Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.
STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT L. NELSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
OF THE ARMY FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, ACCOMPANIED BY MAJ. GEN. J.P. KINGSTON, ASSISTANT DEPUTY CHIEF
OF STAFF FOR PERSONNEL, U.S. ARMY
Mr.
NELSON.
Thank you, 1Mr. Ohairman, it is a pleasure for me to
be here today to testify on the utilization of women in the Army. While
I have been in my present position but a short time, I have had the
opportunity to visit Army units and observe soldiers_Jboth men and
women-in garrison and in the field. I have been impressed. The Volunteer Army, insofar as the active component is concerned, is, in my
view, a great success. The soldiers are motivated, disciplined, and wellled-the units are performing ·admirably. It is an Army of whieh we
can all be proud. Much of that success is a direct result of the interest
and support displayed by the Congress toward the volunteer concept
such as are evident by this hearing today. I look forward to working
with you as we, together, work to improve further the Volunteer Army.
Our leadership recognizes that women provide a significant manpower resource that can perform a vital role in today's Army. The
Army has been at the forefront in the utilization of women. The Army
policy is a positive one; providing full and effeotive employment of
women consistent with our primary role of ground combat.. Simply
stated, the: Army has ·a mission to perform; a mission which requires
almost R00.000 people in the Active Force. If the Army's wartime mission can be accomplished with increased numbers of women, the·Army
will take the nec:essary steps to enlist or commission them.
Currently, 92 percent of all military occupational specialtiesMOS-are open to enlisted women and all but the combat arms-infantry, annor, field artillery, and air defense artillery-are open to
women officers. vVhy are they not all open and why does tJhis7 i~ fact,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4
represent a relatively small portion of the force i By Army policybased on the intent of Congress as reflected in the legislative history
that established the Women's Army Corps and, the realities of the
battlefield-women are excluded from serving in -a direct combat rolethat is, they are excluded i-rom those areas and restricted from those
positions the probability of becoming a combat casualty is the greatest.
In 1972, the Army planned to level off its female strength at 12,500.
This goal was soon doubled to 25,000, which goal was soon again
doubled to about 50,000 enlisted and 9,000 officers. This represented
about a 300 percent increase from fiscal year 1972 female strength
levels, but does not represent our final position on the issue. Although
the principal reason for such increases was to fulfill personnel requirements of the Volunteer Army, another reason was to provide 'a data
base so that the future direction for t!he utilization of women in the
Army could be determined on hard facts. As you lrnow, we have more
than 200 years of experience with millions of men, but little experience
with large numbers of women. With national security at stake, the
Army had to know how many women would enlist in what skills, their
effect on the force, what policies have to be changed, what reenlistment rates and Joss rates we could expect and a myriad of other pieces
of information. Moving too slowly was unfair to the women who desire
to serve; moving too fast could result in decreased readiness.
Where does the Army find itself today i We are learning how and
where to use women; to'lead them ·and to put them in positions to lead
men. We have women in ROTC, West Point, and have just integrated
them in Officer Candidate School, Women are now trained alongside
their male counterparts and work on a day-to-day basis with men
throughout the Army.
Women officers command males ·and male officers command women.
There are women military police. Women perform as truckdrivers,
mechanics, personnel administrators, finance clerks, military ·attorneys,
doctors, signal technicians, and in many dther necessary functions. We
lrnow that women can serve effectively in ·a variety of skills. However,
we have learned that about 10 percent of our women get pregnant and
we do not deploy pregnant women; that there are certain positionssuch as ambulance drivers who must lift stretchers with wounded on
them-that many women do not have the physical strenf?'t'h to perform.
Field commanders who praise their women soldier's 'ability to accomplish the individual facets of their skills-MOS-in garrison and on
short-field problems, are also expressing- doubts that under sustained
combat conditions women have the physical strength and stamina necessary. We know that loss rates among women of similar educational
background and mental category are higher than for men and that
women tend to move from the nontraditional to the traditional female
skills. This phenomenon may be improved through chang-es in our
management procedures, and we are looking ·at that now. All of these
factors relate directly to increased costs and decreased readiness and
are, therefore, matters of concern.
Since the picture is still not clear, we have a massive data col1ection
and analysis effort underwav to determine the appropriate number of
women for the Army. In this effort, we must consider and balance
readiness, cost, and equal opportunitv. This effort includes redefining
"combat"; reexamining our combat exclusion policy ; examining the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5
performance of women for prolonged periods under simulated combat
conditions; collecting and analyzing data on lost and nonproductive
time--for both men and women-prE\,unancy, dependency, attrition, reclassification from "nontraditional" skills to "traditional" skills; developing total costs comparisons between men and women; and assessa
ing the total impact on the Army of increased female strength levels.
In the cost assessment mentioned, we must consider the problem of
ove:sea tour equity, promotion equity and professional development
eqmty as between males and females. It is rmportant that the Army
know what the impact of 59,000 women will be before we program
further increases in :female strength levels. We know that we will always need substantially more men than women to insure mission accomplishment. I might stop there to say that, that is, i:f the mission
remains the same. We must not institute policies which will drive
men away from the recruiter and reenlistment counselor. ,v-e plan to
be well on our way to answering many of the now unanswered questions by early 1978, and, based on the results of our study cfforts, will
modify our program accordingly.
In response to the specific questions you asked be covered in the
testimony, I have attached an information paper which should be both
enlightening and useful to the subcommittee. While it does not answer
all of your questions, as I mentioned previously, the answers are not
yet available. The Army has, I believe, moved in a very positive way
and has been rewarded through the effective performance of thousands
o:f outstanding young women. 1V"hat the near future holds will be determined in the next 9 or 10 months.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to be with you
today and discuss this important issue.
Thank you.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you very much, Mr. Nelson. The paper
you referred to will be printed in the hearing record at this point.
[The paper follows :]
UTILIZATION OF WOYEN IN THE ARMY, AS OF JULY
18, 1977
1. POLICY OHA.l.'IIGES
1971: Married women allowed to enlist or be appointed; waivers of pregnancy/
parenthood discharges authorized on a caBe-by-case.
197f: Female ROTC program began; USAR female basic training battalion
formed; women eligible for overseas service immediately after completing training; EW limited to peacetime assignment in about 25% of skills; WAC officers
given equity in selection for command in other than combat units.
197!1: Housing policies liberalized. Gradual disestablishment of WAC units
initiated, with women being assigned to joint-use housing facilities.
1974: Weapons familiarization training with M16 rifle included in WAC basic
training; Female line officers permanently detailed to Army branches ( except
Infantry, Armor, Field Artillery, and Air Defense Artillery); duty assignment
limitations for women liberalized.
1975: Discontinued involuntary discharge for pregnancy/parenthood; mandatory defensi'fe weapon111 qualification training for women implemented; women
ROTC cadets wrmitted to participate in summer training ; women permitted to
attend service academies; further equalized treatment of males and females in
correctional facllltiee ; pregnant serricewomen inligihle for overseas assignment ;
warrant officer program for women expanded to about 80% of specialties ; women
ROTC cadets permitted to participate in ROTC flight program.
1976: Overseas tour length for men and women equalized; all females particfpate in individual weapons training, same as male counterparts; minimum en
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6
listment age equalized for men and women at 17; Officer Candidate School began
'integrated program ; Army established standing committee to identify and rectify
issues concerning women, in the Army; 356 of 389 MOS (92 percent) opened to
enlisted women.
1977: Concept approved to adopt a common basic initial entry training
program for enlisted men and women ; WAC officer Orientation Course to be
discontinued.
2. SPECIALTIES/MOS OPEN TO WOMEN
Percent of
population in
specialty/MOS 1
Specialty/MOS
Officer _______________________________________________________ 52 of 56 (93 percent)__________ _
Warrant officer ________________________________________________ 67 of 85 (79 percent) __________ _
Enlisted ______________________________________________________ 356 of 389 (92 percent)________ _
1 Source:
6.4
.3
9.0
DCSPER-46, April 1977.
3. PROMOTION RATES
(PERCENT)
Primary zone
Male
Officer (fiscal year 1976):
Colonel ____________________________________________ -- -- __ -- -- -Lieutenant colonel.. .. __________________________________________ _
Major _________________
-- -- ---- -- ------------ -- -- --------------_
Captain
.. _____________________________________________________
Warrant
officer
(fiscal year 1976):
CW-4
•• _______________________________________________________
_
CW-3 _________________________________________________________ _
Enlisted
(fiscal
year
1977):
E-9 ___________________________________________________________ _
E-8
____ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ------ --_
E-7 ___________________________________________________________
E-6 •••• -- -- -- -- -- -- ------ -- -- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- -- ------ ------ --
Secondary zone
Female
Male
Female
23.8
47. 2
47.3
90.1
55. 6
50.0
68.4
86.0
2.6
6.1
3.0
51.2
68.2
100.0
100.0
1.8
4.7
0
0
40.3
28.4
46.3
63.6
26.8
65.6
2.9
5.0
4. 5
0
(')
(•)
(•)
(')
0
18. 2
8.0
(')
9.0
5.3
(')
No secondary zone.
,
• Cutoff scores are published by DA and promotions are then handled by field commanders. No rates available.
1
Senator PROXMIRE. Our next witness is the Honorable Edward
Hidalgo, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower, Reserve
Affairs and Logistics.
· ·
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD HIDALGO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
OF THE NAVY FOR MANPOWER, RESERVE AFFAIRS AND LOGISTICS, ACCOMPANIED BY VICE ADM. JAMES D. WATKINS, CHIEF
OF NAVAL PERSONNEL
Mr. HIDALGO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is a pleasure for me to appear before the subcommittee today
representing the Secretary of the Navy to discuss the .employment
and utilization of women in the Department of the N a.vy. I am supported by Vice Adm. James D. Watkins, Chief of Naval Personnel,
who wiH assist me in answering any questions that you m:ay have.
Since you specifically requested only myself and Admiral Watkins
as witnesses, I have limited my oral statement to the issues as they
apply to the N a,vy hnJf o-f the Department. I intend to review the
various actions the Navy has taken since 1970 and will highl~ght the
initiatives taken since January to move forward in the .are'a of employment and utilization of women. I would point out.for: the record
that, as you are no doubt already aware, the Marine Corps; half of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
the Department of the Navy has made similar progress in its util_ization of women. I will be happy to attempt to answer your quest10ns
concerning the Marine Corps today or for the record as you may
prefer.
In opening my remarks, Mr. Chairman, I am mindful of your
interest in this vital subject and of the fact that it was your floor
amendment to the fiscal year 1978 military procurement authorization
bill concerning utilization of women in the military that produced
the ultimately adopted substitute language offered by Senator Nunn
which now guides the study within the Department o:f Defense. I am
also aware, o:f course, o:f the bill recently introduced by you, Mr.
Chairman, designed to eliminate job discrimination against female
members o:f the armed services. I believe, however, that any testimony
concerning these two pending matters would be premature and there:fore have not addressed them in my statement.
As I think you are aware, shortly after assuming office as Secretary o:f the Navy, Mr. Claytor moved :forward with a proposal currently before the House Armed Services Committee, H. R. 7431,
which seeks to amend title 10 o:f the United States Code, section
6015, in order to increase the role o:f women in the Navy and Marine
Corps. vVe continue very actively to sponsor that bill. In preparation
for this proposal, the Navy has given cletailerl consideration to the
complex issues surrounding the employment and utilization of ,vomen.
Department of Defense policy calls for an integratf,d approach to
total f0rre manpo,Yer p1anning, programing and utilization. W'e
are actively engaged in the process of integrating all our manpower
assets, male and female, active military and reserve, civilian and contractual personnel. Within the :=i.ctive military portion of the total
manpower requirements of the Navy, women have been assuming an
ever-increasing role since the early 1970's. This expanding role has
been driven not only by a desire to assure equity and equal opportunity but also by the need to avail ourselves of a valuable source of
talent and productive capability. It is the policy of the Navy to
expand reliance on the female manpower resource wherever practical
and pel'IJllissible by Jaw.
Early in the 19'70's, a task force was convened by the Chief of
Naval Operations with the aim of identifying legal, policy and regulatory instructions requiring change in order to provide equal opnortunity to Navy women. In 1972, as a result of that task force's findings, several administrative actions were taken which included;
Entry of women into the chaplain and civil engineer corps.
Entry of women into all the 102 enlisted ratings whereas previously
they were only eligible for 24; 15 sea-oriented ratings were again
restricted in 1975.
Expansion of the number of NROTC units onen to women students.
Increased assipnment of women to service colleges.
Assignment of women to prototype programs in a via ti on and on
sea duty.
The aviation progr31m has become a permanent ong-oing pro,~ram
with a yearly accession plan for women. The sea dnty experiment,
although successful, was terminated as you know after the decommissioning of the U.S.S. Sanetuary, AH-17, the last ship in commission to which women could be assigned because of the 1948 Federal
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8
statute restricting the service of women aboard naval ships to hospital
ships and transports.
It is this statute precisely-title 10, United States Code, section
6015-which our legislative proposal, now in the form of H.R. 7431,
seeks to modify in order to provide appropriate latitude in the assignment of women to sea duty. We seek to allow women to go aboard
certain naval ships to pursue noncombatant assi~ents, an option
which present law, as mterpreted, precludes. Assignment of women
to service craft such as tugs, and various harbor vessels continues and
it is now a common sight in naval ports to see women working side
by side with men, handling lines and operating deck equipment on
these vessels.
As a result of a 1974 special study group which considered career
patterns for women officers steps have been taken to parallel, to the
extent possible, the careers of male warfare specialists counterparts, to
expand shore billets open to women line officers not possessing actual
sea or aviation experience, and to select a number of line women in
the rank of lieutenant commander and commander for an expanded
number of executive officer and command billets ashore. There are
today, for instance, six women in command positions ashore. The
Navy's first woman line officer has been appointed a rear admiral and
currently serves as Director of Naval Educational Development.
Other administrative actions taken to maximize the utilization of
women in the past 5 years have included a liberalization of the
pregnancy policy to permit women to be retained on active duty
during pregnancy and after childbirth. To date, 1,070 Navy women
have elected to remain on active duty out of approximately 2,000 who
became pregnant. This policy alone has resulted in a cost avoidance'.
of $7.5 million-the estimated cost to replace those women had they
been discharged.
Congress mandated the opening of the service academies to women
and I am pleased to report that of the original 81 women who entered
the Naval Academy class of 1980, 63 have satisfactorily completed
their first year and 90 have already been accepted for this year's starting class of 1981. Male and female officer training has been consolidated at the Officer Candidate School in Newport, R.I. and recruit
training at the Recruit Training Center in Orlando, Fla.
Althongh there are no Navy billets specifically reserved for women
officers, there are a number to which only enlisted women are assigned
such as managers of women's barracks and women company commanders at the recruit training center.
The billet hierarchy about the enlisted company commander level
at the training center is completely integrated.
Turning now to promotional opportunities, male and female enlisted personnel compete for promotion together and must meet the
same requirements, tests, and selection criteria. Criteria for management of officer promotion is contained in title 10, United States Code.
That law provides, among other things, that women officers in all
competitive categories except the line, supply corps, chaplain corps,
and civil engineer corps will compete for promotion with their male
counterparts. In the excepted communities--which are importantwomen officers compete separately from the males. The Defense Officer
Personnel Management Act, DOPMA, pending since January 1974,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
g
would provide absolute equality for promotion of women by repealing
such separate provisions and requiring all women officers to compete
with their male counterparts in all communities. Although current law
does not require the same promotion timing for women officers, it has
been and will continue to be the policy of the Secretary of the Navy to
provide such timing equity. Promotion opportunity for women officers
is similiarly protected by secretarial policy.
Efforts to eliminate sexual discrimination ha.ve been reflected in the
Navy affirmative action plan and in the ongoing equal employment
opportunity training programs.
As I review our progress to date, Mr. Chairman, I believe the Navy
can be reasonably gratified by the strides it has taken toward integrat~
ing women into its total force. There is potential for even greater
utilization if we can obtain congressional modification of the 148
statute, as we have vigorously requested. The current contraint precludes our assigning more women to a larger variety of jobs within
the Navy and limits the number of women we can utilize. Our current
plans call for increasing the number of women 63 percent over present
levels by fiscal year 1983. That percentage can be increased by statutory modifications and the ongoing DOD study in response to the Nunn
amendment concerning women may yield even greater possibilities.
Sound management dictates an evolutionary process in the integration of women into our total Navy, as we sustain steady progress in
the utilization of rising numbers of women.
Mr. Chairman, I hope I have generally covered most of the items
in which you have indicated interest. Thank you.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you very much, Secretary Hidalgo.
Our last witness is Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Installations, Antonia Handler Chayes.
We are happy to have you.
STATEMENT OF HON. ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR MANPOWER, RESERVE
AFFAIRS, AND INSTALLATIONS, ACCOMPANIED BY LT. GEN. BENNIE L. DAVIS, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR PERSONNEL, U.S.
AIR FORCE
Ms. CHAYES. Mr. Chairman, I also welcome the opportunity to
appear before the subcommittee. I am pleased to focus on this very important issue of the employment utilization of women in the military.
This is an issue that goes beyond simple equity to the success of the
All-Volunteer Force. As you may know, I am new to the Air Force. I
don't have all the details. But, I am not new to the area of equal employment and compliance. To assist me in answering your specific
questions, I have brought with me Lt. Gen. Bennie Davis who is deputy chief of staff, personnel, headquarters, U.S. Air Force.
The Air Force has made considerable progress in utilizing women
in recent years. Current plans or increases to the number of women
are modest. The Air Force is committed, however, to the principle of
equal opportunity and is working to expand the utilization of women
in an orderly and in a systematic manner.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
Today, my presentation will first cover some history and then briefly
discuss three specific areas :
One, actions taken by the Air Force since 1970 to improve policies
and practices regarding the employment and utilization of women.
Two, present Air Force policy on these matters.
Three, the future outlook.
The Air Force had 12,265 women on active duty on June 30, 1969,
or 1.4 percent of the active duty strength. Today there are approximately 39,000 in the active duty force, or 6.8 percent. The major
increase has been in enlisted personnel, which has risen from 7,400
in 1969 to over 34,000 currently. We plan to bring in 13,000 nonprior
service enlisted women in the next fiscal year. This number of new
women is an increase of 3,100 from fiscal year 1977 and Pstablishes a
rate which we propose to continue through fiscal year 1979.
Thus, we have not slacked off in our increases.
vVomen were admitted to the Air Force Academv in 1976. after
careful preparations for integrating this traditionally all-male environment. Planning began well before the attendance of women was
authorized by Congress, and it was based upon an extensive study of
the experiences of other institutions that had recently made similar
transitions.
It is the overall policy goal of the Air Force, as part of an efficient
management effort, to match the qualifications of the individual with
job requirements developed by regularized and sophisticated industrial engineering techniques. Job requirements we feel should be jobrelated and not subject to stereotype by race or sex. There is, of
course, in the Air Force, one exception to this gtmeral approach. Title
10, United States Code, section 8549, provides that: "Female members
of the Air Force except those designated under section 8067 of this
title or appointed with a view to designation under that section, may
not be assigned to duty in aircraft engaged in combat missions."
This statutory restriction has been interpreted by the Air Force
to exclude women from positions where there is the high risk of
capture or injury bernmse of hostile fire. For officers, this has meant
that women are not eligible for pilot and navigator training.
The Air Force has also, as you know, excluded women from assignment as missile launch officers, categorizing these as combat positions. The deeper concern there is not only isolation, but the responsibility for release of nuclear weapons. Both military and congressional
leadership at present seem to feel uncomfortable about imposing this
responsibility on women. For enlisted persons, the exclusions extend
to the positions of aerial gunners, inflight refuelers, flight engineers,
aircraft loadmasters, pararescue recovery specialists, securitv force
specialists, and the radio operator/maintenance/driver specialists assigned to forward combat control teams.
The Air Force recognizes that the issue of women in combat needs
further thinking. At a minimum, the exact scope of the exclusion
should be redefined. While this process occurs, however, and to ofl'er
a more practical insight into both the possibilities and constraints, the
Air Force has undertaken a test program to train and evaluate women
as pilots and navigators on noncombat aircraft. Of interest in this
regard, is the experience of World War II when over 1,100 women
served with distinction as delivery pilots, flying all tvpes of aircraft
to sites both within the United States and overseas. 'In fact, current
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11
legislation before Congress to provide veterans benefits to the vVASPS
is based on the superb record of their wartime service. These women
performed every kind of noncombat flying operation. Not counting
training missions, the WASPS flew 60 million miles for the Army
Air Forces, or about 2,500 times around the Earth at the equator,
including 30,000 hours in the multiengined B-26 and B-29 superfortress. This experience should be considered as we look at the
combat question.
Since Congress has imposed the combat restriction, this crucial issue
cannot be resolved within the military. We have to ask ourselves, are
we ready to ask women to serve as crew members on aircraft that
may be shot down in hostile territory? Are we ready to require women
to turn the keys to launch nuclear missiles? On the other hand, I worry
about any career restrictions since capable, career-minded women tend
to veer away from professions where lines of advancement are closed.
The vast increases recently in numbers of women entering business,
law, and medicine have been a result of the expansion of career lines
without restriction, albeit, under certain statutory requirements. These
are value questions with the military, rather than matters on which
professional military considerations are decisive. The Air Force
believes they should be resolved in the light of the public guidance
that only an open discussion will provide.
Apart from combat-related restrictions, the plan used by the Air
Force since 1972 to access and distribute women in the specialties open
to them has been designed to achieve a distribution of women in traditional and nontraditional specialties. Air Force job classification
standards are carefully developed and regularly 11pdated using a
process that does not specify either a male or female incumbent.
For example, some individual jobs require certain physical strength
qualifications. These are not sex-limited. To address this probkm, the
Air Force developed the "x-factor" medical profile to identify differences in physical strength of new recruits without regard to gender.
Continuing research is underway to refine the process and link it to
our accession programs.
The Air Force has removed many traditional barriers to the use
of women in the Air Force since our original expansion objectives were
developed in 1970. We have assigned greater numbers of women in
nontraditional, blue-collar job areas, made our temporary duty assignments equitable, and we have attempted to remove all vestiges
of separate management systems.
The May 1977 Background Study on the Use of Women in the
Military, completed by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Manpower, Reserve Affairs, and Logistics, at the request of
Secretary Brown, has been widely quoted and circulated. The study
indicates that the Air Force has over 369.000 officer and enlisted positions which could be filled by women. The background study is included in a soon-to-be-published book by Martin Binkin of the Brookings Im,titute and Air Force Lt. Col. Shirley ,J. Bach. The Binkin
and Bach stndy indicates that the Air Force could conceivably fill
~63,000 job>i by men or women without a change in title 10 or in
current policies. These figures represent the number of positions that
hopefully could be filled by either sex. However, I would need to see
a careful analysis of the size of the pool of women qualified for the
23-366-78-2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
many scientific/technical Air Force positions, and I want to assess
the difficult question of the propensity of women to fill these positions. These factors may mean that, as a practical matter, the figures
included in the above studies require closer examination. I am confident, however, that our goals can be more ambitious.
In summary, the Air Force is committed to the All-Volunteer
Force concept and recognizes that availability of enlistment-eligible
youth and costs require adjustments in our personnel structure. While
we have met recruiting objectives for both men and women, we do
see problems ahead and agree that fuller participation by women is
a key to the success of the All-Volunteer Force. We will continue to reassess individual job requirements, career patterns and numerical
goals, while cooperating fully with Congress in airing the issue and
reaching a position that has public support.
We would be glad to answer any question that you want to ask.
Senator PnoxMIRE. Thank you very much, Secretary Chayes.
I understand Secretary Hidalgo has to leave at 4 :10 p.m. We regret
that but I understand you will leave the admiral here to take the heat.
Mr. HIDALGO. I am sorry. [Laughter.]
EISENHOWER QUOTED
Senator PROXMIRE. I understand why you have to leave. Let me
say before I start the questions that I was very, very impressed by the
statement of former general and former President Eisenhower who
has such admiration on the part of all Americans. He said :
Like most old soldiers, I was violently against women soldiers. I thought
a tremendous number of difficulties would occur not only of the administrative
nature but others of more personal type that would get us in trouble. None of
that occurred. In the disciplinary field, they were a model for the Army. More
than this, their influence throughout the command was good.
The point is that it is not only good to have women in the military
because they do a good job and fulfill their responsibilities just as
well as men but because their presence creates an atmosphere that
is more wholesome and healthy, that improves the conduct and performance of men, too.
I think all of us, male or female, are interested in impressing the
-:>pposite sex and I think that is a good motivation.
And something we should take advantage of.
NAVY EMPLOYMENT GOAL
Secretary Hidalgo, first I want to commend the Navy for the initiatives it has taken to end discrimination against women and for the
fine record you have established in recent years. In your statement,
you say current plans call for increasing the number of women 63
percent over present levels by fiscal 1983.
How many women will there be in the Navy at that time and does
this figure represent a revision of the previous goal i
Mr. HIDALGO. Mr. Chairman, it is currently planned that there
will be 5,088 officers and 30,651 enlisted women.
Senator PRoxMIRE. And how does that compare with the total personnel i What percentage would you then have of women in the Navy,
both in the enlisted positions and in officer positions i
Mr. HIDALGO. I would like to have Admiral Watkins address that.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
13
PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN IN THE NAVY
,v-
Admiral
ATKINS. Mr. Chairman, that would be about 6.4 percent
Navy-wide, women; and in the event the legislation which we have
asked for is passed, it would move up to close to 8 percent, about
another 6,000.
Senator PRoxMmE. All right. Now that is 6 percent-plus without a
change in thf' law, and 8 percent-plus with a change in the law i
Admiral WATKINS. That is correct.
Senator PRoxMim:. But I asked for enlisted personnel in the first
place and officer personnel in the second. Can you tell me that i
Admiral WATKINS. Yes, sir; I can. The number of enlisted projected with the amendment would be 36,529.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is what percent i
Admiral WATKINS. That would be 7.6 percent, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. And how about officer personnel i
Admiral WATKINS. Officer personnel would be 5,088 women officers.
Senator PRoxMIBE. That is what percent i
Admiral WATKINS. That would be 7.9 percent.
Senator PROXMIRE. How many male officers are there i How many
officers are there altogether in the Navy i
Admiral WATKINS. Currently our male officer strength is 60,669, and
our total officer strength is 64,384.
DANGER OF SEA DUTY VERSUS LAND DUTY EXAMINED
Senator PROXMIRE. Mr. Secretary, the Defense Department study
concludes that many ships oould accommodate women easily. They
could serve on support ships without being directly involved in combat
but during the Vietnam war the chance of women being injured by the
enemy was less for a male air controlled on an aircraft carrier than for
women air controllers in Danang or Saigon.
Do you agree with these conclusions, and do you also agree it would
be far easier for an ·aircraft carrier to accommodate women than for
support ships because of the problem of providing separate facilities
for men and women i
Mr. HIDALGO. Sir, I would like to address that perhaps in two parts.
Mr. Chairman, first of all, whether women should go on 1aircraft carriers or other combatant ships essentially comes down to the question
of whether the Nati.on wishes to put women into combat duty, potentially combat areas.
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, before you come to the judgment in that
area-and I respect your desire to isolate that as a value judgment-first, it was the response with respect to whether or not you ·agreed with
the conclusion that the chance of a woman being injured by the enemy
was less for a male air controller on an aircraft carrier than for women
air controllers in Danang or Saigon i
Mr. HIDALGO. I can't speak from personal experience, sir.
Senator PRoxMIBE. Do you have any reason to suspect that study
may not have been true i
Mr. HIDALGO. I have no reason either way, Mr. Chairman. I really
havenoSenator Pnox:MIRE. If the studi is true, of course, it indicates the
safer position would be as a controller on an aircraft carrier.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14
Mr. HIDALGO. 1 would think so, yes.
Senator PROXMIBE. If that is the case, doesn't it seem rather illogical
to say that women couldn't go on an aircraft carrier because somehow it is a combat ship whereas they could serve in other capacities in
which their life and their limb is in greater danger i
Mr. HIDALGO. In that hypothesis, yes, sir, but in other hypotheses that
we may not be able to predict that may not be true.
I was on a carrier in World War II and I don't think any woman
would have enjoyed that particular experience.
Senator PROXMIRE. I don't think any man would, either.
Mr. HIDALGO. That is right, Mr. Chairman.
Senator PROXMIBE. So, 1t is not a matter of whether they would enjoy
the particular experience or not, it is whether we should recognize
these artificial notions of danger and if we are g-oing to have the notion
that women should be protected and should not have the same dangersuffer the same danger as men-we should do it on that basis rather
than have some combat definition that doesn't apply.
Isn't that correct i
Mr. HIDALGO. I believe so, yes. I didn't answer the second part of
your question.
Senator PROXMmE. All right. Go ahead.
Mr. HIDALGO. About accommodating women on our ships that would
have to be the subject matter of a very detailed study. On some ships
women could be accommodated, again, drawing no distinction between
combatant and noncombatant ships.
In other ships it might take a good deal of adjustment so that would
be a matter for study if this legislation we strongly endorse is passed.
There are already studies under way by secretarial directive and other
studies as to how women could be accommodated.
Senator PROXMIRE. You say the point there was the aircraft carrier
could provide separate facilities more easily, it is a larger ship and
more elaborate than some of the smaller support ships.
Mr. HIDALGO. That is right, sir.
NUMBER OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
Senator PROXMIRE. Secreta.ry Nelson, from 1972 to 1976 the numberof women in the military increased from 45,000 to 109,000.
Enlisted women increased from 32.4 to 95.4, almost a threefold
mcrease.
But the goals for increasing the number have been on a plateau for·
several years and the period of significant expansion seems to be over.
This pause seems inconsistent with public opinion and the positive
results of studies of women's performance and would be ironic if•
progress came to a halt in the Carter administration when the President has emphasized the equal opportunities for women and is very
conscious of it, has made two of the only four appointments to theCabinet of women in the history of this country.
How do you explain this, what seems to be, this pause i
PAUSE IN GROWTH OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
Mr. NELSON. Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, I would like to say that
I don't believe that we have reached a firm plateau from which we will:
not move.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
15
We have-come to a point where we feel we must examine the results
of changes we have made over the past 4 years, which, as I pointed
-out in my oral statement, has quadrupled the number of females in the
Army.
We are looking at various ways in which women might be even better
utilized. During that period we opened up a number of MOS's but
we have to look at what the effect down the road is going to be.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Can you give me a schedule of your goals 1
When did you decide on the goal that roughly 59,000 would be in 1
Mr. NELSON. General Kingston might better be able to answer that
question than I, sir.
General KINGSTON. Sir, that goal was established in 1974 with an
expectation that we would reach it in 1981. We have now backed off
and we expect that to reach that in 1979.
I might point out, sir, that we are expecting in 1979 to have a total
of roughly 9,000 officers and 50,000 enlisted.
We currently have about 6,000 officers and about 46,000 enlisted.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Let me interrupt to say that I think my disappointment is whereas the Navy was able to have 63 percent projected
increase over the next 3 years, the Army seems static.
The actual number of enlisted personnel in the Army, for example,
in 1976 was 43,900; in 1977, 46,300, and in 1982 it only goes to 50,000.
It is on a very static basis, it would seem. This is the projected expectation that we have here.
General KINGSTON. Senator, the key to this is the statement that
Secretary Nelson made where we are currently. We have a number of
studies ongoing in which we are looking at where we should go from
here.
We had, at one time, projected that we would be at that figure in
1981. We have backed off to 1979, and now we are conducting a number
of studies that will be completed early next year and at that point in
time we expect to make decisions and recommendations as to where
to go in terms of increasing the number of women.
What has happened is we are ahead of our schedule and we are
taking steps to do a - GROWTH OF WOMEN IN ARMY STATISTIC THROUGH 1982
Senator PROXMIRE. You are not denying the fact that at the_ present
time as we look at this projection you seem to be on a flat trajectory,
leveling off at abont 46,000 in 1977, 48,000 in 1978, 50,000 in 1979,
50,000 in 1980, 50,000 in 1981, 50,000 in 1982.
You have got 4 years there with precisely the same number.
General KINGSTON. That is right, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. No increase.
General KINGSTON. That is correct, sir.
We have these tests ongoing that we will evaluate early in the next
year and make recommendations and decisions as to where w'e go in
terms of increase.
Senator PROXMIRE. When will those studies be available 1
General KINGSTON. In the spring of next year, sir. We expect them
to be completed in early 1978, March or April of 1978.
Senator PRoxMIRE. I don't understand why you have such a much
flatter expectation that we have had in the past in view of these, as
you say, acknowledged successes of this program.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PRoXMIRE. The fact it has worked so well. There doesn't
seem to be abuses. There doesn't seem to be any economic problems involved here. The Army has the most serious problem of recruiting of
any of the services as we know, and you have done very well.
I have been a great supporter of the Volunteer Army. But, if it is
going to work, it seems to me we should take advantage of the :potentiality for women. I don't see that you are doing so with that kind of
limited horizon.
ASSESSMENT OF WOMEN EMPWYABILITY DUE
General KINGSTON. Sir, I would like to emphasize that we are not
fixed on that 50,000. We are assessing where we are, the successes we
have had and where we should go from here.
That is basically where we are. We are not fixed on that figure. That
is a planning figure.
I might also say that in the U.S. Army Reserve we currently have
about 19,000 women and we are programed to go to 36,000 in fiscal
year 1982.
We have a major increase in numbers programed in the National
Guard-approxiinately 11,000 and we are going to 20,500 in fiscal
year 1982; so we already have definite plans to increase the number
of women in the reserve components.
Senator PROXMIRE. As far as the Army is concerned, though, you
have that flat trajectory. Now, can we expect that there is every likelihood when you have completed those studies you will revise these
projections~
General KINGSTON. Definitely.
Senator PRoxMIRE. And we would expect, then, that you would have
a sharp increase in the years 19'79, 1980, 1981, 1982, something of the
kind you have had in the past.
I don't mean the same proportion but a very sharp increase. Is that
a likely conclusion~
General KINGSTON. I wouldn't like to be pinned down to the term
"sharp increase," but we certainly expect to have a reevaluation of
that figure and an increase in the number of women.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. Chairman, if I might add to the general's statement, I wouldn't want to leave here with the impression having been
created that this goal that you have alluded to here is a static thing
with which we are going to stick over the next few years.
It is something that is under review right now. We feel that before
we come forward and sav what number and what MOS's we should
plan for, we would first"like to have the results of the studies now
nnderwav.
In other words, what we are saying is that we know we have some
very important information forthcoming and we would like to see
what that is so that we can plan effectively for the utilization of
women.
That is the most important thing I think that we are doing right
now.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
17
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE STUDY SHOWS DIFFICULTY RECRUITING
MALES
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me ask General Kingston the Army plans,
as you pointed out the problem on the projection.
You say you need further studies and I think you say we should
err on the side of national security in the statement.
Now, in view of the very serious recruitment problem I have alluded
to, that the Army faces, I wonder which side of the national security
you are erring on?
The January 1977 Congressional Budget Office study shows a huge
gap in the supply and demand of prime male recruits up to 1980, a
20-percent gap of unemployment at 7.5 percent, and 40 percent if
unemployment is at 4 percent.
Now, isn't the present policy getting to be a luxury we cannot afford?
Don't you have to take this into consideration?
General KINGSTON. That definitely will be one of the factors to be
considered as a result of our tests and evaluation to determine where
we go from here, sir.
I might point out that we are meeting our goals on recruiting for
the Active Army at the present time, sir.
SERVICES TO FALL 40 PERCENT SHY OF RECRUITMENT GOALS THROUGH
1985
Senator PRox11nRE. I might point out, also, that I think it is prohably even truer of the Army than it is of colleges.
I know that one of the reasons why young men go to a particular
college or did a few years ago when so many of them were segregated
was because it was coeducational and young women for the same
reason.
It would seem to me you have a better opportunity to attract male
recruits in the Army if you had more women in the Armv.
Let me refer briefly "to the CBO study. Beyond 1980 there is only
a pessimistic assumption about the economy. Only at a 7.5-percent
unemployment rate will the services fall 20 percent below their projected recruiting goals for high school graduate recruits in the middle
categories 1 to 3.
Then, at 4 percent, the services will fall more than 40 percent shy
of their recruiting goals in those categories until 1985.
General KINGSTON. And we are extremely concerned about it and
that is certainly a part of our evaluation of where we go from here, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Admiral Watkins, the Navy has proposed revision of the law barring women on ships. I am happy to see that. I
congratulate you on it.
But it is a very modest revision. It would only allow temporary
assignment on hospital ships and transports of which the Navy has
none and vessels [laughter] of similar classification not expected to be
assigned combat missions.
DOD STUDY SUGGESTS CHANGES IN
LAW
BARRING WOMEN FROM SHIPS
The DOD study on the use of women in the military suggests in
several pla~ that the la.w be entirely repealed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
18
,vhat ships would women serve on if your bill is enacted and
doesn't it make sense, Admiral, to repeal 6015 altogether, leaving it
to the discretion of the Secretary of the Navy as to where women
should be assigned?
Admiral WATKINS. I think there are two issues, Mr. Chairman.
First, I think your interpretation of our proposed bill is erroneous.
I think you are quoting the current law which in fact does permit
women to serve only on transports and hospital ships, of which there
are none.
This is the very inequity we are trying to eliminate, sir; arid, that
is not what we are proposing in our legislative package.
vVe are proposmg to allow permanent duty in other than those
vessels we expect to see engaged or that could be engaged in combat
duty and we expect to be able to assign on a temporary duty basis
women to any ship in the Navy.
Senator PROXMIRP., Now, you said you still would exclude women
from vessels to be assigned combat missions.
Admiral WATKIN'-. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me read it, since it would only take 10 seconds to read.
Be it enacted, et cetera, section 6015 is amended by deleting the last sentence
and substituting the following: However, women may not be assigned to duty
in vessels or aircraft that are engaged in combat missions normally assigned
to other than temporary duty on these vessels of the Navy except for hospital
ships, transports and vessels of a similar classification not expected to be
assigned combat missions.
Admiral WATKINS. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is what I said.
Admiral WATKINS. Turning that around, then, Senator, the amendment states that we will permit the assignment of women to vessels,
permanent assignment of women to vessels of a similar classification
to transports and hospital ships which have been now redefined by
the Secretary of the Navy.
Senator PnoxMIRE. Such as?
Admiral WATKINS. These would be auxiliary and service craft, sir.
PROPOSED CHANGE IN LAW WOULD ALLOW WOMEN DUTY ON ONLY
15 PERCENT OF SHIPS
Senator PROXMIRE. Can you give me anv notion of how large a proportion of the fleet that would represent? Admiral ,VATKINS. Yes. sir, I could provide that for the record,
if you would like. It would include billets for about 1,200 officers and
about 30,000 enlisted, if you were to fully "man" all. of. those ships
with women.
Senator PROXMIRE. How many ships would there be under your
legislation that would be available to women to serve on?,
Admiral vVATIUNS. I don't know the number offhand.
SC'nator PROXMIRE. Do you have any rough estimate?
Admiral WATKINS. Yes, I think-Sena~or PRox111rnE. Ten, ~fteen, one-hundred ships?
Adm1r3:l '\~ATKINS. I thmk by the fact that we have 30,000 .billets
on the ships mvolved and there are 200,000 billets at sea that gives
you a rough factor of about-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
19
Senator J>RoXMIRE. You are saying about 15 percent of the ships;
is that right~
Admiral WATKINS. Yes, sir, that is correct. It sounds like it should
be morij than that.
Senator PnoxMIRE. 30,000 to 200,000 would be 15 percent.
Admiral WATKINS. Fifteen percent, correct.
Mr. HIDALGO. If I may add, Mr. Chairman, I think it is obvious that
there is a further added element of flexibilty that we would then-if
this provision were to go through-the Secretary of the Navy would
then have the option of assigning women on temporary duty to combatant vessels.
Senator PROXMIRE. How do you explain the :fact that the Coast
Guard ,permits women to serve on the combat ships? Why not repeal
the law outright and leave it to the discretion of the Secretary?
Admi11al WATKINS. I understand, sir, but the Coast Guard-Senator PROXMIRE. The Army doesn't have any law with respect to
combat vehicles.
Admiral _WATKINS. Yes, sir; but on the other hand the Coast Guard
in peacetime reports to the Secretary of Transportation and he reports
to the Secretary of the Navy under mobilization, which means in a
wartime· status. This would, under the ]aw, rearrange the authority
exercised ,a.nd they would have to actually pull their women off those
vessels assigned to combat missions.
Senator PROXMIRE. So, you would take them off the Coast Guard
ships?- . ,, ,,
Admiral WATKINS. I would not take them off, sir. The law would
preclude their service on those ships.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is what we are talking about, your recommendations to change the law.
Admiral WATKINS. But we have not taken the law beyond combat
exclusion-we have taken it up to the combat exclusion :feature, but
not beyond it.
Senator PROXMIRE. What kind of ships would women serve on on
temporary duty?
Mr. Hm.A!LGo. Any, sir. They could go on submarines. Is that right,
AdmiraliAdmiral WATKINS. That is right.
Senator PROXMIRE. There is no limitation on temporary duty?
Admiral WATKINS. That is right, sir. At the present time, women
in the Air Force or Army, officer or enlisted, could be assigned to naval
vessels on temporary duty; however, women in the Navy cannot. vVith
the amended· section 6015, women of ,all services could be assigned to
any naval vessel :for temporary duty.
DEFINITIO'.N. OF "COMBAT" PRECLUDES WOMEN BEING ASSIGNED DUTY IN
SOME SAFE AREAS
Senator PROXMIRE. Secretary Chayes, you ask in your statement,
Are we ready to ask women to turn the key to launch nuclear missiles?
By raising this question, are you saying there are characteristics
inherent in women that make them less responsible or less capable of
making decisions than men?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
20
W11y in the world should we hesitate to give women this responsibility any more than say appointing women as Assistant Secretaries of
Defense or Assistant Secretary of the Air Force?
Ms. CHAYES. There is no reason. The only issue here is the definition
of "combat."
I only raise it to indicate that currently it falls within the definition
of "combat," and, because there is no clearcut definition, interpretations do occur.
Senator PROXMIRE. I don't understand why you raised that as a
question, a question apparently in your mind.
Why do you ask that j
Ms. CHAYES. The question already has been raised, not in my mind,
Senator, but as I said previously the question is in the minds of many
Congressmen and in the minds of many military personnel. I only
raised it to illustrate the deep concern of military and congressional
leadership. At present they seem to have an uncomfortable feeling
about imposing this responsibility on women.
.
Senator PRoxMIRE. What is your own personal feelmg ! Can you
make a _good, clear, strong recommendation one way or the othel'f
The Congress is very much guided in these matters by the views of,
you experts who have the responsibility of living with this every: day,
day after day, and not just on a part-time basis the way Oo~en
face these decisions.
Ms. CIIAYES. We are doing a hard study on the definition of combat
now. That is what you requested us to do and I think that is a good
request.
I think this issue has to be resolved in that context. I think m;y own
personal views, which you are welcome to, are the same as your views.
Senator PROXMIRE. To wit, I want to get your views. I want to get
your views.
Ms. CHAYES. My personal views 9
Senator PRoxMIRE. Yes, indeed, your views on whether or not
women should be -in the position of turning the key on a. nuclear
missile.
Ms. CHAYES. I guess I would be more comfortable with lllY views
after the study. My view going in is really a wide open o n ~ t is,
theoretically, I expect the study to offer a practical military viewpoint
that will enhance my understanding.
Senator PROXMIRE. I can't understand any difierence here. Heresome people argue that men have some different characteristics, certainly, there may be a difference in characteristic with respect to
physical strength, that is the only one I can think of offhand. .
I don't know how people can ar~e that women are more ernQt1onal
or less emotional, whatever. This is the thing that concerns me as to
the reason why some people in the services seem to think women
shouldn't be allowed to have this critical position.
Certainly, there is no greater danger than in many ot}ier po$itions
and proba:bly a lot less.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY CHAYES AGREES DEFINITION
OF "OOHB.All.'t, ~
TO BE RESOLVED
Ms. CHAYES. Senator, I think really it is the combat definition that
is clouding the issue now. I think that that issue is going to be cleared
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
21
up and I don't mean to duck your question in any way because I feel
very strongly that women can do anything that men can do or I
wouldn't be in this position in this agency.
CHARACTERISTICS EXAMINED FOR DUTY ACCEPTABILITY
Senator PROXMIRE. Are there any characteristics of women which
in your view would make them unacceptable in this position of being
able to turn the key on a nuclear weapon 1
Ms. CHAYES. Are there any 1
Senator PRoxMIRE. Yes, you say that you have an open mind before
you see the study. Frankly, I don't have an open mind because I don't
careMs. CHAYES. I didn't say I have an open mind. I think you have to
look at the definition of combat in the context of the statutes. In my
view, there are no qualities which disqualify women from d<:>ing any
job that a man can do except certain factors of strength.
In my personal opinion, there are no qualities of emotions, or attitudes that would seriously disqualify them from any job.
Senator PROXMIRE. Very good.
I understand your position, then. That would apply· in missile
silos, too1
Certainly, they have the strength to turn that key.
Ms. CHAYES. And they need to be able to obey orders.
Senator PROXMIRE. What was that!
Ms. CHAYES. I said they need to be able to obey orders and-Senator PROXMIRE. Do you have any feeling there is any difference
between men and women in obeying orders~
Ms. CHAYES. If anything~ women tend to be more obedient.
[Laughter.]
Senator PROXMIRE. I want to introduce you to my wife sometime.
rLaughter.] Admiral Watkins, I understand in the test wnng the
U.S.S. Sanctuary/ hospital ship, women performed every lilhipboard
function with equal ease, expertise, and dedication as men did.
Can you elaborate on the Sanctitary experience and give your opinion as to whether it makes more sense to assign women to aircraft carriers and support ships i
Admiral WATKINS. The Sanctuary experiment, Mr. Proxmire, was
very successful. It was made up of ,a small cadre of about 60 enlisted
women over and above those that would have routinely been assigned
to the hospital department of that ship.
We found no significant problems that couldn't easily be overcome.
The handholding in balmy seas was handled through regulation very
nicely.
Significant problems simply didn't arise. The commanding officer
felt. the morale was high, the interchange between the male and female seamen was excellent and on a high level. I see no reason why
that situation won't pertain as we move in an evolutionarv fashion
into our auxiliarv nnd service force ships. However, the Sanctuary
experiment was limited to a 400-day period in which women were assigned to the ship. Only 42 days were spent underway.
WOMEN
Am
FORCE GOALS OOULD BE MORE Al\IBITIOUS
Senator PROXMIRE. Secretary Chayes, in your statement you say
that the Air Force goals for women can be more ambitious.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
22
Can you explain why the Air Force goal was reduced from 74,800 in
fiscal 1972 as stated in the DOD study of May rn77 to the present plan
of the 48,200 and tell us how ambitious the goals should be i
Ms. CHAYES. Those figures are not correct. The Air Force goal, for
enlisted women, is now over 72,000 under our present plan. We plan an
increase, and as I said in my oral statement, the increase is steady.
It is moving up from 14.2 to 15.1 percent.
Those are not accurate figures that you have quoted.
Senator PRoxMmE. Tha,t is good to know. Then the figures that I
have from the Defense Department study use of women in the military, May 1977-Ms. CHAYES. Those are old figures, sir. They have been changed.
Senator PROXMIRE. Since May i
Ms. CHAYES. Yes.
Senator PRoxMrnE. OK. Why were they changed 1 I am glad they
were, but how did they happen to be changed i
Ms. CHAYES. They were not sufficiently ambitious.
THE AVERAGE FEMALE RECRillT TESTS BETTER THAN MALES
Senator PROXMIRE. Very good. I run glad you are making progress.
It is almost time for Secretary Hidalgo to leave. Before you leave,
Mr. Secretary, I wanted to ask the panel of the three Secretaries to
respond and perhaps you could respond and then you are going to
have to go because you said you have to leave at 4 :10.
Do you a~e that for the 1972-76 period the averaa-e woman recruit stitpassed the average male recruit in terms of educational attainment and the standardized test and females more likely to have
a hi,!!h school diploma had a much lower attrition rate than men and
th!!~ in gener!l-1 the ] 972-76 recruits raised the average quality o-f the
m1htarv services and served longer than their male counterparts i
Mr. HmAt,oo. Sir. I would like to ask Admiral Watkins to answer
that in detail but I think the answer to your question is "Yes."
Senatnr PROXMIRE. Thank von, sir.
I want to thaPlr vou so much for your responses. I understand you
havP to ]eave, anti so you are {'XCUSed.
l\fr. HmAGLO. I arri sorry I have to leave, Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator PROXMIRE. Admiral, please go ahead.
Admiral WATKINS. ould you like me to continue 1
~enator PROXMIBE. Yes; please respond.
,v
ADl\IIRAL WATKINS SAYS PRESENT POOR FEMALE RETENTION IS A BYPRODUCT
OF PAST PREJUDICES
Admiral ,¥°ATKINS. The answer is "ves" in al1 areas, Mr. Chairman,
with the exception of retention, which· is a very difficult thin,!! to monitor rig-ht now as we move ont of the nontraditional or-from the
trflditional into the nontrflditional areas.
For example, the retention of women under the prior rules of the
game was very poor, for obvious reasons. Their upward mobilitr was
simply not there, the attractiveness was not there.
·
e have now offered that attractiveness in an effort to trv to split
out the group under the two different sets of rules.
·
,ve s:imply don'thavethe data base-
,v
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
23
Senator P:noxMIRE. I want to be sure I understand. That seems to
contradict a large part of my question. The question was not only
whether she was more likely to have a high school diploma and educational attainment in the standardized test, but also she had a lower
attrition rate and served longer than the male counterparts.
Are you saying they did not serve longer in the 1972-76 period i
Admiral WATKINS. No, sir. Their attrition rate is definitely better
than males, but their retention is not up to the males at this time.
Senator PROXMIRE. vVould you explain the difference between those
twoi
Admiral WATKINS. The retention rate is a rate of those who after
the end of their initial contract remain in the Navy for a career.
That is what we normally refer to as retention in the Navy for their
career.
On the other hand, the attrition rate could take place any time
within that first 4 years of enlistment.
PROXMillE SUGGESTS PREJUDICES STILL EXIST
Senator PRoxMmE. Are you saying women serve out their term
better~
Admiral WATKINS. Yes; that is correct.
Senator PROXMIRE. Would you agree that they serve longer than
their male counterpart in spite of the retention rate~
Admiral WATKINS. This would be speculative only at this time, sir.
I believe they will serve longer, yes.
Senator P:noxMmE. Then you explain the fact that they didn't reenlist as commonly because their career opportunities are more limited
than meni
Admiral WATKINS. They were in the past, sir; they are not now.
The new data is not clear as to whether or not the retention into the
career force would be superior. It is very close to the male counterpart.
Senator PROXMIRE. Boy, I am astonished bv that answer because it
seems to me the women's opportunities in the Navy dbn't--or an:v
service-we know that in all the combat positions with a g-reat deal
of opportunity for promotion and higher pay, women are denied the
onportunity to volunteer for combat even if they wish to do so very
vigorouslv.
So, in that sense, they certainly are more limited than men in their
career opportunities i
Admiral WATKINS. Maybe I have not explained this correctly. sir.
In the past women have not stayed with us for a caTeer. I believe
the reason for that was because we did not offer the upward mobility
opnortun itfos.
We have unlimited opportunities except in a handful of enlisted
rating-s today.
The rest is wide open. We do not have the experience yet because
we only started this experiment 5 years ago. We are _inst begi~ning
to see women flow into the career force: so our data right now 1s not
clear as to what the outlook is for the future.
At present, we are feeding- the career force with women at about
the same percentile rate as the male. That is all I am saying, sir.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
24
Senator PROXMIRE. I am still unclear in my mind. Are you saying
that women have the same opportunity in the enlisted ranks?
Admiral WATKINS. Yes, sir.
Senator PRoxMIRE. But, of course, many people in the enlisted ranks
do move up to become officers.
Are you saying that women have the same opportunity in the officer
ranks1 too?
Admiral WATKINS. They have the same opportunity, sir. In fact,
you may be-Senator PROXMIRE. Why doesn't this contradict-you just agreed
that they were denied an opportunity in combat area even if they
wanted to volunteer for it, where a great deal of rank lies?
Admiral WATKINS. Well, that may be another factor, sir, which
would be impacted on were the combat exclusion feature eliminated,
without any question.
I just don't know what it would be. I can speculate that combat opportunities may improve retention for those who would aspire to duty
at sea aboard a combatant vessel.
I just don't know, sir.
Senator PRoxMIRE. All right. May I ask Secretary Chayes to respond, or General Davis?
General DAVIS. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Let me address the first part of
it in terms of quality.
The women we recruit or bring to the officer corps are of the highest
qualitv.
Senator PnoxMIRE. I am not talking about just generalizations with
respect to quality, but as far as the objective test, that is, the number
of proportion with a high school diploma, their score on the standardization tests, and so forth.
There they are superior; isn't that correct? So, it is a, matter of our
just saying that the women you have attracted are of higher quality.
These are objective tests where it is not a matter of judgment. It
is a matter of fact.
General DAVIS. Yes, Senator.
I wouldn't say superior, but let me furnish for the record the exact
numbers.
I would not sa.y they were superior.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Well, we are told that more than half has high
school diplomas and that is a superior achievement.
More of them have higher scores in standardized tests, or is that
not true1
I want to know whether it is true or not.
General DAVIS. All right, I will have to provide the standardized
test answer for the record.
Senator PRonrIRE. All right.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
25
MENTAL CATEGORIES AS DERIVED FROM ARMED SERVICES VOCATIONAL APTITUDE BATTERY
(In percent]
Mental category
Male
Female
Fiscal year 1976 accessions:
'--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"----------------- -- -- -- ---- -- -- ------------ ---- - ------- -- - --- -- -- -- -- - -111________________________________________________________________________
___ ------ -- _-- --- -- _- _-- --- ---- -- ------ -- ---- -- _--- -- --- -- --- -- __ -- --- ___
IV
Fiscal year 1977 accessions:
'--------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 __ -- -- --- ----- _____ --- -- ------ -- __ -- -------- -- -- -- ---- -- -- _-- _-- -- _--- __ _
111________________________________________________________________________
___ ---- -- -- -- -- -- -- ------ -- ---- --- --- -------- --- --- -- --- _-- -- -- ---- -- __ _
IV
5. 7
45. 7
48.1
.5
6.2
42. 5
51.1
•2
10.6
52.5
36.6
.3
11.8
53. 7
34.4
.1
Male
Female
88. 7
6.2
5.1
91. 4
6.0
2.6
88.8
4. 1
7. 1
85. 8
6.3
7.9
86.3
8.2
5.5
37.3
8.3
3. 7
EDUCATIONAL LEVEL
Fiscal~,
yearschool
1976 accessions:
diploma ________________________________________________________ _
Nongraduate ______________________________________________________________ _
Fiscal yearschool
1977 diploma
accessions:
________________________________________________________ _
~I
Nongraduate ______________________________________________________________ _
Fiscal _year 1977 accessions (through June):
~~ school diploma________________________________________________________ _
Nongraduate ______________________________________________________________ _
AVERAGE STANDARDIZED TEST SCORES, FISCAL YEAR 1977 ACCESSIONS (JANUARY THROUGH MARCH)
Armed Forces qualification test. _____________________________ _
Mechanical. _______________________________________________ _
Administrative _____________________________________________ _
General ________________ - -- -- - _- _-- - ___ - __ - _--- -- -- -- -- -- --Electronic _________________________________________________ _
1
Male
Female
Requirements
in aptitude
area (percent)
67.6
69.3
64.3
74. 7
73.8
69.0
37. 5
73.3
75.6
61.4
25.5
12. 9
38.1
23.5
(1)
Not available.
General DAVIS. In terms of the attrition rate, the percent lost in
their first 3 years of service, women are slightly higher by about 1 to
2 percentage points.
As far as turnover rates, our experience-Senator PROXMIRE. When you say "higher," who do yo11- mean i
Do you mean the attrition is worse W
General DAVIS. Yes.
Senator PROXMIRE. They leave more than males-General DAVIS. Yes, slightly more in their first term of service.
Senator PRoXMIRE. I see.
General DAVIS. When we are talking about departing the service--Senator PROXMIRE. You say the difference is only 1 to 2 percent, so it
is almost the same W
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
26
General DAVIS. ·rhe same; that is right, Senator.
Senator PROXMIRE. All right.
General DAVIS. As far as the turnover rates, the percentage has
shifted since 1972.
For women, in 1972, the turnover rate was 26.6 percent; men was
20.2 percent.
By 1976 women were down to 17.7 percent; men, 19.6 percent.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let's see if I understand the turnover rate.
That is the term I didn't understand.
What does "turnover" mean?
General DAVIS. The men and women who are replaced each year.
WOMEN REENLISTMENT RATE LOWER
DUE
TO LIMITATIONS ON UPWARD
MOBILITY
Senator Pnox~nRE. Are you saying that in the past, .more women
would leave than men and now it is the reverse?
General DAVIS. It's gradually shifted. Again, it is within 1½ percentage points of each other.
Senator PROXMIRE. I want to make it clear that we are talking-that
we agree because maybe we disagree. You are saying your latest observations show that more women would not leave, now more men leave
than women?
General DAVIS. Yes.
Senator PROXMIRE. So in that sense the women's per:formance is
betteri
General DAVIS. In terms of replacement; yes.
Senator PROXMIRE. Because you want to prevent that necessity of
turnover, it is expensive.
General DAVIS. In terms of reenlistment, women reenlist the first
term at a higher rate than men do. Now another phenomenon occurs
and that is second reenlistment at the 8-year point, men reenlist at a
higher rate than women.
Senator PROXMIRE. All right, sir.
Then I think we should hear from the Armv.
•
Secretary Nelson.
Mr. NELSON. In the case of the Army, Senator, the attrition rateand by attrition, I mean those who do not complete their first term of
enlistment; those who for one reason or another leave the service
early-is higher for women of the same mental category and high
school diploma graduate status than it is for men.
Overall, when compared with the total number of men, it is a little
bit higher.
Were the Army not placing restrictions on the women, that is, limiting enlistmen to high school graduates in mental categories I through
IHA, :female attrition would be significantly higher than that of men.
Isn't that correct i
General KINGSTON. Yes.
. Senator PROXMIRE. vVhat you are saying, as far as women attrition
1s concerned, women are better?
Mr. NELSON. Overall. it is not.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me back up and start at the beginning. I
should have done this with each o:f you. Let me do this with you.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27
In educational attainment, high school diploma, how do they compare in the Army~
Mr. NELSON. The women compare better than men.
Senator PROXMIRE. Because that is the requirement for women~
Mr. NELSON. That is a requil'ement for women.
Senator PRoxMmE. In the standardized tests~
Mr. NELSON. They also fare better than the men generally.
Senator PROXMIBE. Better than men in the standardized test. How
about length of service~
Mr. NELSON. In length of service in terms of retention, the women
are reenlisting, if I can put it that way, at a higher rate than the men.
Senator PROXMIRE. Then in every category it seems the women improve the quality of the Army. Every one of these categories, at least,
there may be other elements, but these are important objective criteria
and you are saying their educational attainment is higher, because of
the requirements, but it is higher~
Mr. NELSON. That's right.
Senator PROXMIBE. You are saying their performance in the standardized test is better.
Mr. NELSON. That's right.
Senator PROXMIBE. And their retention rate is better~
Mr. NELSON. That's col'rect.
Senator PROXMIRE. So in all these categories, the more women you
get, the higher quality Army you got~
Mr. NELSON. In terms of the mission that you have to perform, if you
had to-I would say that would be true if you had this case; if you had
a 50-50 split, of course, it would be true. But now where we have what
we feel is a limited amount of women we can access until we determine
better the utiliz.ation of women, we have to fill the combat arms with
men, we have to fill many of the direct support MOS's with men.
As long as that requirement is on the Army-ARMY
"POLICY NOT LAW" RESTRICTS WOMEN'S MOBILITY
Senator PROXMIRE. Why do you have to fill the combat arms with
men i There is no law with .respect to the Army.
Mr. NELSON. There is no law, but it is policy.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is it, we are asking about the policy. Women
want to volunteer, why not let them volunteer for it i
Mr. NELSON. Let me answer this way:
The current policy is that there will be no women in the combat arms
branches and that is, of course, based on the original legislative intent,
plus the fact that there are laws in both the Air Force and the Navy
that limit women in noncombatant roles and we assume there must have
been some legislative intent behind that, and they were limited in the
Navy and Air Force, and they would be limited in the Army, which
has by far the largest combat role.
Senator PROXMIRE. You are talking about policy, not talking about
lawj
Mr. NELSON. Right.
Senator PROXMIRE. You say there may be implication in the law, but
there is no law which prohibits the Army from having women in combat roles if they volunteer or if they want to--23-366-78-3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28
Mr. NELSON. There is no law, that's correct. But as long as the policy
is there, and as long as the policy-Senator PROXMIRE. The policy is only there because you and the
Army want to keep it there. You don't have to have it there. The Secretary of the Army and Secretary of Defense at present, if they wished,
could say, "We are going to change that policy."
They could do that tonight. Isn't that correct 1 It doesn't require an
act of Congress to do it.
Mr. NELSON. That's correct. Yes, it is. They could change the policy
tonight, I suppose. But, you see, one of the things we are doing
here-Senator PROXMIRE. So that when I ask you about the quality of the
Army and you say that one of the reasons why you cannot improve the
quality of the Army by having more women in it, and you admit
under present circumstances the women that you bring in improve the
quality of the Army, you say you cannot do that because you have
combat restrictions and you have combat restrictions because you
chose to have those restrictions, not because of Congress or any other
power imposing that on you.
Mr. NELSON. Well, so there won't be any misunderstanding one of
the reasons we opened up some of those MOS and are running these
tests is to see exactly how many women we can access and still perform
the mission of the Army. This is one of the things we are doing now.
This is what I alluded to earlier. Perhaps General Kingston might
want to add to thatr-General Kingston at one time was commanding
general at Fort McClellan which, of course, was the WAC training
center where a lot of the testing has gone on, and a general officer who
has been in combat and in the combat branches, he might add to this
with his own experiences with women in the force.
ARMY
FEELS DOORS ARE OPEN TO WOMEN
General KINGSTON. I would like to add to that, sir, and say there is
no question about the high quality of the young women we have gotten
into the Army. The impact they have had has been a very favorable
one generally speaking, both in terms of their retention and their impact on the men as you alluded to earlier.
Where we go from here is the Army's situation now. We are basically
assessing what the impact is of having 50,000 women in our Active
Army and roughly 9,000 officers, and how :far we go and still do the
job from the standpoint of the physical requirements and the combat
issue.
I don't think we have any doors closed as far as how we are approaching the problem, and we are prepared to make policy changes
based on the results of the tests we are currently running.
SENATOR PROXMIRE DISAGREES
WITH ARMY
POLICY
ASSESSMENT OF OPEN DOOR
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, I get the impression, and I don't want to
'be unfair, but I get the impression you have closed the door as far as
combat is concerned, even though it is not a law. It is very frustrating
for us because even with the best success in the world, we can't do anything about a policy that you are stubborn about, if it is not in the law.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
29
General KINGSTON. I think that is an erroneous impression because
we are reviewing the whole definition of combat and the MOS, the
few we have left, 33 we have precluded the women from entering because of combat risks, we are now reviewing those to see if they should
be opened up, some of them, at any rate.
So really there are no doors closed at the present time.
Senator PROXMIRE. I would like to ask both you, Mr. Secretary, and
General Kingston, how you personally feel about women in combat
positions1
Mr. Nelson.
ARMY CITES NEED TO STUDY STRESS
Mr. NELSON. ·well, of course, that is difficult to answer. I have never
been in the position of, say, a commander in the field or as a soldier.
Let me say this, and I think it is important, that the combat role is
one in which an immense amount of stress is found. In the testing we
are doing, we are looking at that stress.
Up until very recently women were not given any combat training
at all. They are now given 7 weeks basic training; the same basic combat training as men.
This is being done because in today's world even those people in the
relatively far rear areas could come under attack.
We think it is very important for everyone in the Army to know the
basics so that they can defend their position and defend themselves
if they have to.
And I think that is important. That is a little bit different than
carrying the primary responsibility of direct combat with the hopeful
result that you will engage and kill the enemy. The defense is a little
different.
But we have changed many things; for example, not long ago
women were not allowed to throw a hand grenade. That is no longer
true.
I was at Fort Dix yesterday watching women, along with men,
takin~ basic combat training.
I also saw that at Fort Jackson.
I think that women not only handled themselves well, they did as
well as the men.
Senator PROXMIRE. Then rou imply, however, in the first part of
your answer that women might stand stress less well than men.
Mr. NF.LSON. I think that is something we are trying to find out.
Senator PROXMIRE. Why should there be-is there any indication,
any study anywhere-it seems to me with all the comprehensive studies of sex differences, there should have been some finding on this. I
never heard of anybody making that contention, that women are less
able to withstand stress than men.
Mr. NELSON. General Kingston.
General KINGSTON. Not that I know of, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. I think we ought to make the assumption, unless
there is evidence that there is a difference, that some women can stand
stress and some can't, some men can stand stress and some can't, there
is no sex difference.
Mr. NELSON. That's true.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
30
13ut, as I pointed out, we have experienced in the Army over the
-years with millions of men, but we have handled few women. This is
one of the reasons we are trying to run these tests.
There are stress factors involved. For instance, some tests are for a
3-day period, some for a 5-day period; in the Reforger exercises which
are longer and very difficult tests, where women will be a part of a
heavy transportation company, for example, we hope to learn more.
SENATOR PROXMIRE SUGGESTS GATHERING PRESENT MATERIAL
Senator PROXMIRE. Why wouldn't it be an intelligent thing to do
to make a search of the psychological literature and find out if expert,
competent, reliable studies have been made of stress to determine
whether or not there is a difference between sex, and I think it would
be helpful and save an awful lot of time, and also enable us to make
decisions here we are not able to make now.
General KINGSTON. We are doing that, and that is part of our
studies; for example, at the military academies, and the other
academies, as well.
Senator PROXMIRE. When did you start making those surveys?
General KINGSTON. This has been in the last year or two.
Senator PROXMIRE. Why should it take that long? It would seem
to be a matter of a few weeks for one good Ph. D. study.
General KINGSTON. I think it is a little more complex than that, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. I bet if you sent a good scholar to the Library
of Congress, he could tell you 1n a couple weeks, list all the tests, and
in a couple more weeks he would give you the conclusions of the tests.
It wouldn't take 2 years.
General KINGSTON. We can do that, sir. But we are talking about
what the impact is in sustained environment of stress or in a combat
organization. I have spent a little time-Senator PROXMIRE. We were talking first about-that I agree, that
is something we need to study and know about. But in terms of just
plain stress, there it would seem to me that we can at least determine
what the best findings are.
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Within a matter of weeks rather than years.
General KINGSTON. There is very little data, as far as this situation we are talking about, as far as the stress in a combat environment.
vVe have some historical examples of the Russians and Israelis and
so :forth, and it might be interesting to note that Israelis do not have
women in combat roles, and they are not even trained for the combat
role, and this is based on their experience where there has not only been
an adverse impact on the women, but on the men as well, because of the
societal values and so forth.
My personal view, and having spent a little time in combat starting
as a second lieutenant in the Inchon invasion, I don't have any qualms
whatever about women being a;ble to withstand the stresses of combat
and sustained hardships if properly trained for it and prepared.
But the question, I think, is whether we really want to do that as
a society and what is the impact on the men as well as the women?
Senator PRoxMIRE. Well--
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
31
General KINGSTON. That is what we are trying to find out before
we do something dumb, and we are trying to get the facts as best
we can to make a sound judgment as to where we go from here.
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, I certainly wouldn't want you to do anything dumb. [Laughter.]
General KINGSTON. We would rather not.
Senator PROXMIRE. I don't understand, in view of that judgment,
which seems a solid and sensible one of a man who has been in combat, it seems to me that you are requiring women, those who volunteer,
I am talking about, who want to be in combat, you are requiring them
to meet a tougher test for some reason I don't understand-General KINGSTON. No, sir, we are notSenator PROXMIRE [continuing]. Tougher than men. You might
argue that some ethnic group or racial group, you know how ridiculous
that would be to say blacks are better or worse, that's nonsense, we
know that. Or that some religious group is more or less cowardly
or more or less brave. We know that is baloney.
Why should we have that view that we have to test women at this
great length and that somehow they perform less well ?
General KINGSTON. I think the question is what is the type of training, what is the interrelationship, and what is the psychological and
physical impact, physical strength requirements, for example, and to
gear up our training programs that will fit those requirements.
Senator PROXMIRE. Now we have devoted a considerable amount of
time to discussing combat, and maybe we have gone oft' on the wrong
tack because, after all, in a modern Army, I wonder what proportion
of the jobs require physical strength.
Certainly flying a plane, driving a tank, which are combat positions, very important combat roles, require in most cases very little
strength, or if they do, you can certainly adapt your equipment so
the strength could be handled by an average young woman.
Isn't that the case?
General KINGSTON. Well, I would say this is part of what we are
trying to figure out right now.
PERCENTAGE
OF
COMBAT AND SUPPORT ROLES DISCUSSED
Senator PROXMIRE. Isn't it also true that the overwhelming majority
of positions in the military, Army, for example, don't require direct
combat activity? So many of us think of the Army-I was in the Army
in World War II-think of the Army as a fellow carrying a bayonet
and a rifle and the typical foot soldier, and there was a day when he
was the overwhelming majority; but he certainly is not now. Isn't
that correct?
General KINGSTON. Sir, our combat-to-combat support is about a
!>0-50 ratio.
Senator PRoxMmE. How a;bout support now, combat support?
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir, I - Senator PROXMIRE. How big is that? What percent does that represent of combat?
General KINGSTON. 50-50, sir, between the combat elements and
combat support in broad terms. About 25 percent of the Army is the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32
element that closes with and destroys the enemy, the infantry and
the armor.
Senator PROXMIRE. 25 percent?
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. And the women now represent what, 7 percent?
General KINGSTON. 6.6 percent of the Active Army, and they will
represent about 7.5 percent in fiscal year 1982.
Senator PROXMIRE. And 75 percent are not in the position where
they close with and destroy and engage in combat with the enemy;
is that correct?
General KINGSTON. In direct combat where you move out to take
the hill, close with and destroy the enemy. This doesn't mean other
elements won't be involved; for example, military police that have
missions in the combat zone.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Of course.
Wouldn't you agree with the exception of that 25 percent, where
I think it may be debatable, although it is not in my mind, but it may
well be debatable, a lot of people feel as you do, that this is something women shouldn't serve in-except for that 25 percent, there is
no reason that women can't do anything men can do?
General KINGSTON. As far as I am concerned, if properly trained,
sir.
Senator PRoxMIRE. All right. Fine.
Now, 6.6 percent of the Army are women.
General KINGSTON. Right.
Senator PROXMIRE. And 75 percent of the functions in the Army
can be performed just as well by women as well as men, without
involving the combat issue?
ARMY TESTS USES OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir. But it is much more complex than that
when you look at the whole thing in the terms of your interchangeability of positions and the strength required and so forth.
This is why we are doing these tests to determine just how far we
can go between the 6.6 percent and the 75, is what you are talking
about.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Davis, the Air Force advises the interpretation of barring women from serving as crew on combat aircraft
in 1976, and began a training program for women pilots and
navigators.
General DAVIS. Yes.
Senator PROXMIRE. What are the results so far, and does the Air
Force intend to cut back the program, enlarge it, or keep it the way
it is?
General DAVIS. Our training program was comprised of 20 women.
Now, the program is a continuum. Those 20 were broken into 2
groups of 10 each entering in September and the following February.
The first group of women will be concluding their pilot training
next month. Our experience so far is that they have done very well.
,:ve knew women could fly airplanef -t?l.'om our World War II
experience.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33
Senator PROXMIRE. You say they have done well. Is it better, the
same, or not quite as good as men~
General DAVIS. I would say about the same, Senator, in the training environment.
Senator PROXMIRE. "What do you expect to do, what assignments
will these women have~
General DAVIS. These women will have assignments in our noncombat aircraft, transport support, C-141's, KC-135's, and C-9's.
Senator PROXMIRE. Have you cut back the program?
General DAVIS. No, sir. vVe have not cut back the program. We had
two increments of 10 each. We initially publicly released 9 because
the other two programs of 10 each had 9 active duty candidates and
1 from the Reserve Forces.
Our Air Reserve Forces were not sure whether they wanted ·a slot
in the next group entering. It appears now, Senator, they will have,
so the next one should include 10, so it is 10, 10 and 10.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me read from a brief article that appeared
in the Washington Post, July 9, this year.
The Air Force has secretly cut back the women's pilot training program. The
program will be continued with a selection of nine officers in October for undergrad pilot training, the Air Force announced. The program was announced
with selection of 20 women officers scheduled to complete that training this fall.
The Air Force spokesman gave no reason for the reduction in number.
General DAVIS. The wording in the release is bad, Senator.
As far as the 9, the Reserve forces will participate so we will have
10. The total 20 will not graduate this fall. Ten will graduate this
fall, the next 10 will graduate after the first of next year.
It is a continuum.
Senator PROXMIRE. That sounds like a really tiny program.
General DAVIS. Yes, it is a small program.
Senator PROXMIRE. Considering the size of the Air Force, 10
officersGeneral DAVIS. It is a test program while we determine assignment
factors, utilization factors. We are planning to continue the program
and it will probably dovetail with our first women graduates from
the Air Force Academy so that they can enter their T-41 training if,
in fact, we decide to continue the program, if it is successful, Senator.
We have not gotten the first graduates out of pilot training yet to
integrate them into the units.
Senator PnoxMIRE. What percentage does this represent of the number of men pilots that you have trained, or overall pilotsi
General DAVIS. The number of overall flying aulthorizations is in
the neighborhood of 24,000. It is a small group.
Senafor PROXMIRE. I am talking about the comparison of this 10
graduates to compare with what~
General DAVIS. Of the 10~
Senator PnoxMIRE. Yes.
General DAVIS. 1,050.
Senator PROXMIRE. So this is less than 1 percent.
General DAVIS. Yes, sir, it is, and it is a test program so we can determine a lot of utilization factors.
Senator PROXMIRE. And you can't tell us whether you expect to expand the program and move ahead on that W
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
34
General DAVIS. Not yet, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Do you favor modifying the legal restrictions
or would you favor repealing the law entirely?
General DAVIS. That question is under study.
Senator PROXMIRE. When would you expect to have a decision on
that?
General DAVIS. I believe our requirement to report to the Armed
Services Committee is 6 months, Senator.
Senrutor PROXMIRE. Didn't the Navy make that decision without
a study, without this kind of a study?
Admirnl WATKINS. Yes, sir, we did.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Why, then, is the Air Force dragging its feet,
comparatively speaking?
General DAVIS. We wanted to make sure, Senator.
AIR FORCE EXAMINING SPECIAL
"FLIGHT
WOMEN
CONTROL PRESSlIBES" FOR
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, it seems like a very limited slow way to
see.
General DAVIS. There are some unknowns, Senator, that we will only
findoutSena.tor PROXMIRE. Such ,as?
General DAVIS. Well, control pressures, for instance.
Senator PROXMIRE. Control pressures?
General DAVIS. Flight control pressures. There are differences now
that we are just not sure of, Senator.
Senator PROXMIRE. Women pilots have been flying ever since the
Wrig-ht brothers or shortly after the Wright brothers went up in
the air.
General DAVIS. I understand.
Senator PROXMIRE. And we have two or three generations of women
fliers.
General DAVIS. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. And no indication of any difference in terms of
their being female.
General DAVIS. No.
Senator PRoxMIRE. ,Vb.at is control pressure? Why is that a facltor
yon suspect might be different?
General DAVIS. I use that as one example which has to do with
physical strength. We are not sure, but we are testing it to find out.
w·e are talking about large aircraft now.
Senator PRox111IRE. Dia women fly in great numbers in World War
IH
General DAVIS. Yes, sir, they did.
Senator PROXMIRE. Was there any indication of a problem with control pressure for women pilots or anything else?
General DAVIS. I am sure there were problems. I don't have the details.
Senator PROXMIRE. How can you be sure there were problems 9
Eve:ry:tJhin,r I heard, there was no difference.
General DAVIS. Well, not everybody-I believe you flew, Senator;
not everybody completed pilot training. There were problems, and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
35
even after you got out of pilot triaining, you have varying degrees of
proficiency.
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, we have had now 30 years since the end
of ,v-orld War II.
General DAVIS. I realize that.
Senator PROXMIRE. And no indication that I have ever heard of
that women had problems or had any kind of a deficiency or weakness or anything of that kind in all that period.
General DAVIS. I am not aware of, for instance, Senator, of definitive studies done in the commercial world of flying large multiengine
aircraft by women. I am not aware of that. That 1s what we hope to
find out.
Senator PROXMIRE. Again, just think, i:f we were talking ,about
blacks, or we were talking about Spanish-speaking people, or talking about some other minority group, how ridiculous this would seem.
It Reems to me the same thing here.
I have never heard of or seen any projection, any theory, any
notion of why women should not be able to fly just as. well as men,
and why pressure should make a difference. Maybe there 1s.
But I think that the ethnic difference, as well all know, is
ridiculous.
C'-reneral DAVIA. Senator, if the question is a resource issue--and I
believe the question js-and if we attach it to the All-Volunteer Force
as a resource question, then we should look to the larger numbers that
we can take.
We think the test is the way to go, at least at this juncture. I think
we will not string it out forever. ,v-e will be making a decision as
soon as we get some experience. We don't have that experience yet.
SENATOR GOLDWATER CITES WOMEN FLIGHT PERFORMANCE
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, I just would like to suggest you might
read the speech that Senafor Goldwater made on this magnificent
performance of women on flying in World War II.
General DAVIS. I have read it.
~enator PROXMIRE. You have~
General DAVIS. Yes.
Senator PROXMIRE. Isn't that kind of-after all, Senator Goldwater
is not one who is biased against men, exactl:y-General DAVIS. I understand. [Laughter.]
'Senator PROXMIRE. And he has a great experience in this area.
G-eneral DAVIS. Yes. Rir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Very cautious, careful man with careful judgment.
All right, Secretary Nelson, studies have consistently shown that
recruiting women is less costly than recruiting men, that there is less
lost time with women in the military considering alcohol abuse, drugs,
desertion, and other· problems considered along with abortion and
pregnancy and women have fought well during periods of national
crisis.
Do you disagree with any of those studies?
Mr. NELSON. Would you care to comment, General?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36
General KINGSTON, Could I ask you to repeat your last statement
again, sir~
:Sena.tor PROXMIRE. I will state it more slowly.
The studies show that recruiting women is less costly than recruiting men.
Do you agree with that!
General KINGSTON. We have not been able to determine, £or example, sir, what the specific costs of recruiting the woman versus the
man is, because we have a recruiting force in the field-but that is
probably correct, because the women are volunteering well. But I
couldn't give you specifics on that.
Senator PROXMIRE. And there is less lost time with women in the
military than men, with alcohol abuse.
General KINGSTON. That is true.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Do you agree~
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Drugs~
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Desertion i
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. And then the other is other problems are considered along with abortion and pregnancy which, of course, is strictly
a female problem; but you might balance that and tell us whether
that would counterbalance the alcohol abuse, drugs, and desertion or
noU
General KINGSTON. That is one of our studies now, that we have
the large number of women we have, we feel we can get definitive
statistics on those particular points.
Senator PROXMIRE. I am sure that women won't be happy about
comparing alcohol abuse and drug abuse with pregnancy.
General DAVIS. I am sure you are right there, sir, but we are taking
a very objective look at it.
MALE
"LOST WORK TIME" TWICE WOMEN'S WST TIME
Senator PRoXMIRE. Now let me say I have a study that we just got
today from the General Accounting Office, I just received it. It saysand I will read one short paragraph:
The services provided by the Department of Defense with lost time data on
women for the background study. All four services have found that pregnancies
account for most of women's lost time, and desertion, alcoholism, and drug abuse
resulted in most lost time for men. According to the study, women lost 0.63 percent of total days available, and men lose 1.10 percent of total days available.
In other words, men lost just about twice as much as women did,
including the pregnancy situation.
All services are initiating studies to specifically compare lost time
for men and women.
So that would seem to me to be a rather interesting and relevant
statistic.
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir, that doesn't surprise me, but, frankly,
sir, what we are doing now is-there are more women in the nontraditional skills in units out in the field for extended periods and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
37
we do not know exactly what the impact of pregnancy and so forth
in those areas are.
That is part of the data we are collecting. Whether it will affect
that particular ratio or not, we don't know.
Senator PROXMIRE. I understand also that the Army's MAXWAC
study measuring performance of women in support units showed very
favorable results for women, and the basic entry training test was
favorable to women.
Can you tell us the results of the two studies and when MAXWAC
will be released i
ARMY TESTS SHOW ONLY
DIFFERENCE
IN SEXES IS PHYSICAL STRENGTH
General KINGSTON. Sir, we have just basically completed the
MAXWAC test and we are evaluating the data now. We are continuing a part of that with the Reforger exercise to take place in
Europe this fall, which will be a large unit and they will be in the
field for a sustained period.
I was the director of the basic initial entry test run by the Army
at Fort Jackson when I was the commanding general of Fort McClellan and it was a very successful test.
We took 880 men and 880 women and found that the women had
no particular problems even including throwing the hand grenade,
all of them successfully threw it.
The only difference, of course, is the physical area, and again the
question of training, not only in terms of what we do in the Army,
but what they hav<' done prior to coming into the Armv, and this is
an area we just don't know what women are physically capable of
yet. We are already seeing the results of those women who have been
required to take physical training programs in high school under the
new law, and those that were not in terms of what their physical level
is as they come into the service.
Then as we train them, they become much more capable of doing
the jobs we are asking them to do.
Senator PRox:MIRE. This is very helpful, General. It seems on the
basis of the studies you have, you find that women who are trained
the same as men are-there is not any significant difference in
performance.
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir. And we have approved the basic entrance test, in fact, you have heard of the BOT, but it will no longer
be used in the Army. It will be basic training and women and men
wilJ :receive exactly the same basic training, the first 7 weeks of
tramrng-.
We also have integ-rated the women into several, what we call onestation unit training' programs, and this is in those branches that have
women and men; for example, the Military Police, the Engineers, and
SiP-nal Corps.
Those tests-or those programs which have just been tested and
ap_Proved will be starting, in fact they are starting at Fort McClellan
thrn month.
Senator PROXMIRE. Now the Brookings study concludes that 175,000
noncombat jobs for women in the Army in units expected to operate
outside the area could be open. 175,000.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
38
As women were assigned to Vietnam during the war, what is the rationale for the present restriction? Why should't those jobs be opened
up to women?
BROOKINGS STUDY CONCLUDES PREDOMINANT MALE COMPOSITION OF AIR
FORCE IS POSSIBLY THE RESULT OF PREFERENCE
General KINGSTON. I think the present restriction was our best judg;ment as to what to shoot when we started taking a large number of
women in the Army. All of the studies we have ongoing at the present
time are designed to determine just how much further we should go
in that 175,000 area.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Davis, the Brookings study, "Women
in the Military," by Martin Binkin and Shirley Bach, concludes the
Air iForce could open up 450,000 enlisted jobs to women without
changing the law barring women in combat, without changing the
law.
· Yet only a small percentage of that number are planned to be filled
by women by 1982.
The study concludes that the sex composition of the Air Force is
possibly the result of the Air Force's preference to remain a predominantly male institution.
How do you respond to that?
GENERAL DAVIS RAISES QUESTION OF RESOURCE AVAILABILITY
General DAVIS. I believe the Binkin-Bach study also, Senator, did
not consider the resource availability. It looked at the jobs that were
not closed in terms of combat. What I am talking about is a concept
that looks at resource factor times opportunity factor in order to take
a look at those-. Senator PROXMIRE. I am not on your wavelength. You are talking
about resource. What do you mean by resource?
50
PERCENT OF AIR FORCE JOBS ARE MECHANICAL
A:ND
ELECTRONIC
General DAVIS. I am talking about over 50 percent of the Air Force
skills that are open to women are in the areas requiring aptitudes in
mechanics and electronics.
,Vhen you look at the qualifications of women who take the vocational aptitude battery and score high enough in those particular
skills, then you look at the number that enter the labor market, plus
the number who want to go in the service, the number comes down
quite considerablv.
We have done great deal of analysis on that.
Senator PROXMIRE. Are you saying as far as jobs like being a mechanic for an aircraft-General DAVIS. Yes, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. It seems to me that we really have a cultural
block that is the problem there. There is no reason why women can't
be good mechanics. I always thought I had no aptitude in the mechanics area. 1Vhen I went in the Army, I took a test and found I did
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
a
39
have the aptitude but like so many people, I didn't want to do it, so I
just said I wasn't able to do it.
General DAVIS. That is the point. You took that aptitude test. All
our applicants take the same aptitude test and what I am telling you,
Senator, is they do not have the aptitude.
I say they do not, plenty of them do, but the percentage, if you look
at iust jobs, aptitude aside, you can come to that conclusion.
What I am telling you, Senator, is that, based on extensive testing,
thfl resource is not there.
Senator PROXMIRE. But of such a small quota of women who come
into the Air Force-are you really tapping the high number of
women, the high proportion of women to do these jobs¥
General DAVIS. I thought we were in agreement at the outset that
our program of rn.ooo in fiscal year 1978 and at the end of the 5-vear
period, upwards of 80.000, was fairly good progress, Senator. N o·j
Senator PROXMIRE. I didn't mean to imply that at all.
General DAVIS. We didn't agree1
Senator PROXMIRE. It is better than the Army, no question about
thnt.
General DAVIS. Right.
Senator PRox11nRE. But I think it is not nearly as good as it can be.
General DAVIS. And I think our experience has told us that-we
have tripled the number of women in the Air Force since 1972.
Senator PRoxMIRE. They did in the Army, too.
What disappoints me in the Army is their goal. Tha.t is something
they explain on the basis of taking a look at our goal.
General KINGSTON. We are so far ahead already.
General DAVIS. If we could get back to the basic question,
Senator-Senator PROXMIRl~. All right.
General DAVIS. The resource to fill that 450,000 jobs, if that is the
right number, is not there.
Senator PROXMIRE. How do you know? Have you made any real
snrvey, market survey to find out whether or not there are women to
. JO
· b s.i
.
fi]l these
General DAvrs. We make market surveys-Senator PROXMIRE. And tried to recruit them for theoo iobs ~
General DAVIS. Oh, yes, sir. Yes, sir. We have been doing that since
1973.
Senator PROXMIRE. How much money have you spent on recruiting
women1
General DAvrs. How much money have we spent 1
Senator PROXMIRE. On recruiting women~ We spend a whale of a lot
of money on recruiting men.
General DAVIS. It is part of a total budget. We don't break it out for
men and women. When you say recruiting women, you are obviously
talking advertising dollars, and our advertising dollars have been so
constrained, $7 million for Air Force recruiting-Senator PROXMIRE. I am not talking about advertising dollars. There
are ways to recruit women besides running ads. Let me read what the
General Accounting Office says in this report:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
40
Although we do not know exactly how many positions are available to,women,
both the Defense Department studies in the past indicate that most women
enter the traditonal occupational areas such as administrative, clerical, medical,
dental.
The GAO study revealed that in the recruiting of women, the women
did not elect other areas because combat requirements for men restrict the jobs open to women, and that many women preferred the
administrative, clerical, medical, dental jobs and in the past recruiters
failed to tell women about the occupational options open to theni.
So what we are trying to find out here is that there is just a kind
of a lethargy, an inertia that women have done in the past, they will
continue to do this, and the opportunities in the other are3:s are not
called to their attention.
General DAVIS. Oh, no, Senator, just the opposite. In 1973 we established goals across all of our career fields.
As a matter of fact-GAO STUDY FINDS RECRUITERS FAIL TO INFORM WOMEN ABOUT .ALL CAREER
OPTIONS
Sem1Jor PROXMIRE. You mig-ht have established the goals, but the
GAO-which I have found to be completely responsible, I have never
seen them in error in a significant way in the 20 years I have used them,
and I have used them a lot-they say recruiters failed to tell women
about all the occupational options open to them.
I think it takes a particularly aggressive action and attitude on the
part of the recruiter because vou can almost assume that a recruiter
is going to say "Women are ali right for clerical jobs, typing, medical
work, nursing, peri0d."
And unless you break through that bias that so many have, women
are not goin~ to know about these other jobs.
General DAVIS. I don't think you understood my point, Senator.
My point is we have a specific objective in nontraditional areas in
order to spread women across all except the 7 combat specialties-only
7 out of 234 job specialties are closed to women.
Senator PROXMIRE. Again, I don't mean to push that, I know you
have that intention, but the GAO finds that as a matter of factGeneral DAVIS. What is the date of the GAO report, Senator, and
does it refer specifically to the Air Force i
Senator PROXMIRE. The date o:f this is July 22, 1977, today. That is
when I got the letter.
General DAVIS. And is it service-relatedi Because I have 1974 and
1975 GAO reports that say just the opposite.
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, this is later than yours.
General DAVIS. I mean say just the opposite.
SENATOR PROXMIRE SUGGESTS MAJOR EFFORTS ARE NEEDED TO OVERCOME
BIASES
Sena,tor PRoxMIRE. You apparently are getting worse. I don't mean
to be too critical. And I must say, with all of you witnesses; I am imPressed by your own personal determination to provide greater opportunities for women. I didn't mean to be critical in that way 1at all.
I just think there is a lag in the service, and we have to make extraordinary efforts to overcome it.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
41
Mr. NELSON. Mr. Chairman, oan you tell me, the GAO study that
came in today, does it say the Army discourages or has more women
in the traditional than nontraditional fields~ Because our figures are
that less than 50 percent of the women iare in what you call traditional
skills for women.
I would be interested if that goes for the Army, too i
Senator PRoxMIRE. I will read the paragraph:
Although we don't know eXlllctly how many positions are available to women,
both the Defense Department studies in the past indkate that most women enter
the traditional occupational areas.
ARMY FIGURES SHOW MORE WOMEN
IN
.NONTRADITIONAL OCCUPATIONS
Mr. NELSON. We have fi~res here-and that part is not correct as
to the Army. I can't speak for the other services.
Senator PRoxMIRE. You mean most women are not in administrative, clerical, dental or medical i
Mr. NELSON. No, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. Can you give us a breakdown i
General KINGSTON. 20,000 are in the traditional skills, and the rest,
25,000, are in the nontmditional skills.
Geneml DAVIS. Senrutor, I would like to furnish you :for the
record-Senator PRoxMIRE. Very good. I congratulate you on that.
General DAVIS [continuing]. A list of the specialties open to
women, and the numbers in them.
Senator PRoxMmE. Fine.
[The :following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
The following includes those Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSC's) open to
enlisted women. It should be noted that the figures for 1972 and 1977 do not
include women who were being included under miscellaneous reporting identifiers (e.g.: patients, officer trainees, etc.). For 1972 there were 877 and in 1977
there were 1013 women in these categories. Information follows :
Women as of June 30
AFSC Title
m~g
igm !~~l:t,ii\~i~~"p~~~~~---_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-:_-_-_:
m~~ ~:~~~fi~r!~~~r~1~~i==: =:::: :::::::::::::::: :: :: :::::::::: :::::::::::::::: :::::::
rn~~
205XO ~r~1l~ii:f~f!~i;1\~~;;t~t-====::============================================
Electronic intelli~ence operations _______________________________________________ _
206XO Imagery interpreter _________________________ ---------------------------------··
~~ad~ir~:ual media specialist ____________________________________________________ _
231X2
photo
helper_------------------------------------------------------------232XO Still
Motion
picture
camera specialist_ _______________________________________________ _
232Xl TV production ________________________________________________________________ _
~m~ Safety
~i~:~n~~iie~~~~
lo'~fr~tn!_-_-_~ ~::::::: :: : : : : :: : : :: : : : : :: : : : : :: : : : : : : :: : : : : :: :: :
_______________________________ ---------------- ________________________ _
1972
1977
0
129
~8
7
0
5
107
1
0
14
0
12
?4
60
1
0
38
4
231XO
242XO
251XO
252Xl
271Xl
Disaster preparedness _________________________________________________________ _
Weather _____________________________________________________________________ _
Weather observer _____________________________________________________________ _
Airfield management _________________________________________________________ _
6
176
291
~~m
2rre:r~t~~~~~::it
~~~~~~'.".~~~-=~=::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
263
274XO Command and controL ________________________________________________________ _
276XO Aerospace control and warning system operator_ __________________________________ _
276Xl Electronic warfare countermeasures _____________________________________________ _
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0
0
0
3
45
4
2
95
1
43
~7
299
162
1556
3
6
5~
fO
74
6
2
90
1
3
8
310
21
350
256
411
101
389
13
42
Women as of June 30
AFSC Title
276X2
291XO
293X3
295XO
296XO
297XO
302XO
302Xl
303Xl
303X2
303X3
304XO
304Xl
304X4
304X5
304X6
305X4
306XO
306Xl
306X2
307XO
308XO
309XO
316XO
316Xl
316X2
316X3
321XO
321Xl
321X2
322X2
324XO
325XO
325Xl
326XO
326Xl
326X2
328XO
328Xl
328X2
328X3
328X4
341Xl
341X2
341X3
341X4
341X5
341X6
341X7
361XO
361Xl
361X2
362Xl
362X2
362X3
362X4
391XO
392XO
403XO
404XO
404Xl
423XO
423Xl
423X2
423X3
423X4
423X5
426XO
426Xl
426X2
427XO
427Xl
427X2
427X3
427X4
427X5
431XO
431Xl
442XO
443XO
461XO
462XO
463XO
Intercept director _____________________________________________________________ _
Telephone communications operatoins specialist_ _________________________________ _
Radio operator ________________________________________________________________ _
Automatic digital switching specialist__ __________________________________________ _
Communications/electronic programs specialist_ __________________________________ _
~ae~fh~;~~~r;fu:;.;~:i~\rriian~~=::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Airborne metro/atmospheric research equipment__ ________________________________ _
Air Traffic control radar repairman ______________________________________________ _
:u~o
fr:kf~:~~~~~~~a~~s~:::::: :::: : : : : :: : : :::::: : : : : :: : : : ::: : : : : : : : : : : : : :: : : : ::
Radio relay equipment specialsist_ ______________________________________________ _
Flight facilities equipment specialist__ ___________________________________________ _
Ground. radio equlP!TI~nt specialist_ _____________________________________________ _
TV equipment spec1ahsL ______________________________________________________ _
Space communications equipment operator sp.scialist_ _____________________________ _
Electronic computer systems specialist__ _________________________________________ _
Electronic communications and crypto equipment specialist__ _______________________ _
Electronic-mechanical communications and crypto equipment specialist__ ____________ _
Telephone commun!cat!ons system/equipment l!la!ntenance specialist_ ______________ _
T,lephone commumcat1ons system control spec1ahst_ ______________________________ _
Space systems command and control equipment operator specialist_ ________________ _
Missile warning and space surveillance sensor specialist_ __________________________ _
Missile systems analyst specialisL _------------------------- ____________________ _
Missile system maintenance specialist_ __________________________________________ _
Missile system equipment specialist_ ____________________________________________ _
Instrumen)ati~n mechanic ______ ,- ______________________________________________ _
Bomb-nav1gat1on system mechamc ______________________________________________ _
Defensivecontrol
fire control
mechanic_-----------------------------------------We_ap~n
systemsystem
m3~h~nic
__ • ____________________________________________ _
Av1omc sensor system spec1ahst_ _______________________________________________ _
Precision measuring equipment specialist_ _______________________________________ _
Auto 1ti11ht control system specialist_ ____________________________________________ _
Av!on!c instrument system sp~ialis\- __ -,-,--------------- ______________________ _
Av1omc aerospace ground equ1pmen spec1al1st_ __________________________________ _
Integrated avionics component specialist__ _______________________________________ _
In~eg\ated avion!cs ~ystem s~ef-ialisL ___________________________________________ _
Av1omc commumcat1ons spec1a 1st _______________________________________________ _
Avionic navigation systems special.is~-- __________________________________________ _
Airborne early warning radar spec1al1st_ ______________________________________ _
Electronic warfare systems specialist_ _________________________________________ :::
Avionic inertial and rad~r ~avigation system specialist _____________________________ _
Instrument trainer spec1ahsL __________________________________________________ _
Defensive system trainer specialist__ ____________________________________________ _
Analog flight simulator specialist__ ______________________________________________ _
Digital flight simulator specialist_ _______________________________________________ _
Analog navigation/tactics training device specialist_ _______________________________ _
Di_git_al nav_igation/l~ctjcs training device specialist_________________________________ _
M1ss1le trainer spec1al1st_ ___________________________________________________ _
Outside wire and antenna maintenance repairman ______________________________ --Minuteman hardened intersite cable maintenance ______________________________ ::-Cable installation/maintenance specialist_ _______________________________________ -Telephore S\'!itc~ing equipment r~p~irman electronic/ mechanical__ _________________ _
Electromc switch mg systems spec1al1st___________________________________________ _
Missile control communication systems specialist _______________________________ _
Telephone equipment installer _______________________________________________ .:::
Maintenance analysis specialist_ _____________________________________________ _
Maintenance management specialist__ _________________________________________ :::
Biomedical equipment maintenance specialist_ __ ------------------------------ __
Precision
specialist_---------------------------------------::
Aerospacephotographic
photoRraphicsystem
systems
specialist_ ___________________________________ _
Aircraft electrical system specialist___________________________________________ .:::
A!rcraft environment systell) specialist___________________________________________ _
Aircrew egress system spec1a1ist_ ____________________________________________ _
Aircraft fuel
system specialist_._-----------------------------------------------Aircraft
pneudraulic
system mechanic _________________________________________ :::
Aerospace ground equipment mechanic __________________________________________ _
!t~1if:;~Ii~~l~~~~irftI~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nondestructive inspection specialist_ __________________________________________ : __
Fabrication an~ parach~t~ specialist. ____________________________________________ _
Jti~t,~::~==~~==~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~==~
umt1onsmaintenance
m~mtenancemechanic
spec1ahsL.
_---------------------------------------------_
Weapons
________________________________________________
Nuclear weapons specialist.• ___________________________________________________ _
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1972
1977
0
152
3
961
165
28
3
0
61
2
109
105
63
102
69
329
19
6
146
134
46
11
112
2
5
105
67
12
63
51
14
204
89
114
110
115
60
117
114
172
94
1
131
106
25
7
44
41
4
8
5
1
0
1
74
26
8
25
51
40
7
10
14
284
151
60
117
221
514
31
0
795
10
73
77
100
62
187
80
1, 761
3
75
I
10
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
1
43
Women as of June 30
AFSC Title
464XO
472XO
472Xl
~XX2
7 3
511xXol
511
511X2
541XO
542XO
542Xl
543XO
544XO
545XO
546XO
:7
m~g
551Xl
552XO
552Xl
552X2
m~:
553XO
554XO
555XO
566XO
~m
1972
1977
0
0
1
2
0
18
Explosive ordnance disposal specialist. __________________________________________ _
Base vehicle equipment maintenance mechanic ___________________________________ _
Special vehicle maintenance mechanic ___________________________________________ _
ee~eral puJPose _vehicle mecha~ic, ______________________________________________ _
e 1cle bo y maintenance mec anic _____________________________________________ _
Computer operation specialist_ _________________________________________________ _
Programing specialist__ ________________________________________________________ _
Computer sfistems analysis and design ___________________________________________ _
Missile faci i!ies specialist__ ___ ---------------------------- _____________________ _
Electrician ____________________________________________________________________ _
Electrical powerline specialist__ _________________________________________________ _
Electrical power production specialisL __________________________________________ _
Cryogenic fluids production specialist____________________________________________ _
Refrigeration and air-conditioning specialist_ _____________________________________ _
Liquid fuel systems maintenance specialist__ _____________________________________ _
0
1
0
194
48
3
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
~==!i~~~~s:~~t~~~~~~pecialist~~== :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :::: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::
Construction equipment operator ________________________________________________ _
Carpenter ____________________________________________________________________ _
Masonry specialist_ ___________________________________________________________ _
Sheet metal specialist__ _______________________________________________________ _
~f~~g~;e coating specialist_ ________________________________________ ----:-:- ___ _
Site development specialist__ ___________________________________________________ _
Real estate-Cost management analysis specialist__ _______________________________ _
Programs and work control specialist_ ___________________________________________ _
Entomology ___________________________________________________________________ _
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
3
0
0
0
0
0
frr~r~:oT:~fo~upport specialist__ - - ---- -------------------------- -- ------ -- -----591XO Seaman ______________________________________________________________________ _
IDi!~~~~~!l!~!l!)~~~)~~i~~!!\'! ! l~! ! ~l~!~l'~~:
2
115
54
1
78
16
40
0
0
621XO
Baker••••______________
-----·- --·----·······--·---···-··-·--·-·
------·-----------··-·
____ _•
622XO Cook
•• __ -·_ ••• __ ._·-_._._
•• _______________
-· _________ • ______
~~~ ~hp~~isipecialisL---··---·---·--·-·----·-··--------------------·--------
m~i
645XO Inventory management specialisL·-···-·-·-·-······ --·-·-·---·-----·-··-··--- __ _
645Xl Material facilities special1sL.·-·-····-·-- --···-··-···········-- __ -·····-· __ -· __ _
2
3
0
1, 36~
li!~I ~~f!fil~~i~1
672Xl
672X2
673XO
691XO
m~g
0
~~i~=======================================================
General accounting specialist_
__ ---·-·--···-····-·--··-···-·----·-··-·--·----·-·.
Disbursement accounting specialisL----······-···--····-·····- -···· __ ---·-·-- __ _
Auditing specialist_ ____ ---------··---·--···-··---·-······-·----··-·-·----·--- __ _
Management analysis specialist.·······---·-·················-··----········ ____ _
~~~~11sTr!~i~ie~p~~, ~ricialist_ _________ ------------------ ------ ---------- -- -- ---
1 i1~ii:~,\t\\~~lt\\l\\~\t\\\I\\\~~\\~~\\~\\
732X3
Personnel
systems
management
specialisL _-------------------------------------732X4 Career
advisory
specialist.
________________________________________________
-· ••••
~~~~~ Ma~power manage!"'l~nt specialist. •• ·····-·---·--···--···-·-·-·····-··----······
~l!~~
m~~
if]i\\~~~~r:i:~~~~~~i~~~!::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
f
~~i~~~~ir:aw~~:: :::::: :: :: :: :::: :::::::: ======== :::: :: :: :: :::: :: :: :: :: :: ::
751X3 Instructional
systems specialist.
•••••• _•••••••••• -·-··-·········--·····-···-----~~:~~~f/;1s specialist__
___________________________
• ____________________________ _
m~~
791XO Information __________________________________________________________________ _
m~l
811X2
821XO
8TIG
872XO
~gm
~gm
~~~!~Ji~~:~p:~r:i~s\~~t~~!::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Law enforcement
specialist._--------------------------------------------------Special
investigation
and counterintelligence __________________________ • ____________
B~d ____________________________________
Instrumentalist. ______________________________________________________________ _
~~gi~a~d1~~!i~~:cialist__ __ -- -- -- -- ---- -- ---- ---- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- ---- -- -- -- -- -- --
rs ie~i!8:fspecialist.
!~~~~= __________________________________________________ _
904XO ~~~ri~~Fc
Medical laboratory
904Xl Histopathology specialist__ _____________________________________________________ _
0
23-366-78-4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
18
54
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
11
152
312
0
11
17
3,
5l~
37
0
804
32
12
0
1
0
19
2
7
14
0
0
0
50
6
0
10
2
0
0
40
973
94
77
101
3
371
90
5
48
105
0
157
7
92
26
98
46
4
91
0
4
20
72
40
42
25
8
8
2
1
5
190
30
512
255
10
82
0
25
280
50
4
2,119
1,216
51
114
11
11
269
527
0
23
70
5,308
27
137
3
1129
55
7
21
10
56
142
27
15
73
0
19
0
107
20
5
1,043
11
72
31
31
1,782
152
189
321
17
44
Women as of June 30
AFSC Title
904X2
905X0
906X0
907X0
908X0
909X0
909X2
911X0
912X0
912Xl
912X2
912X3
912X4
912X5
913X0
913Xl
913X2
914X0
914Xl
915X0
916X0
917X0
921X0
922X0
981X0
981Xl
982X0
983X0
Cytotechnology
specialist. ________ -------------------------------------_______ _
Pharmacy
_______________________________________________
· ____________________
_
Medical administration _________________________________________________________ _
Environmental health __________________________________________________________ _
Veterinary special isL _________________________________________________________ _
Nuclear medicine _____________________________________________________________ _
Neurology special isL __________________________________________________________ _
Phhsiological training specialist_ ________________________________________________ _
~rf~~1l~fjfi~i;t;i~r~t~
1
1
Allergy/immunology special isL
~==_________________________________________________
== == == == == ==== == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == ==_
Optometry special isL _________________________________________________________ _
1972
0
45
198
29
45
1
3
0
0
1
4
1
7
4
15
i~l~f
Mental t~mt~1~~;~;~~~~fi1~~t~~==================================================
health ward specialist__ ______ ------------------------ ___________________ _
Medical material specialist_ ____________________________________________________ _
Cardiopulmonary laboratory specialist ________ ---------------------------- _______ _
Aircrew life
support_ _________________________________
-------------------------~~r:ii~f'
lr!f~\~~~~eciafisC
== == == == == == == == == == == == == ==
== == == == == == == == == == == ==
~~~{~H~~:~::~~jtt~:~:t~~~~: ====== == == ==== == ==== ====== ==== == == ==== ==== == == ====
Dental assistant_ ______________________________________________________________ _
4
0
15
22
67
14
0
0
0
231
41
33
0
1977
1
108
768
49
120
3
4
1
6
2
10
6
30
33
32
9
4
47
65
148
10
4
3
139
618
79
42
4
1 The majority of persons processing throu~h the 203X0 field were converted to the 208X0 field in 1976. Hence, when
203X0 and 208X0 are compared, women actually increased from 38 in 1972, to 558 in 1977.
2 The 252Xl field is being phased into the 251X0. Therefore, women actually increased from 176 to 311.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Kingston, the Army reversed its policy
on entrance of women to the Combat Arms Advanced Courses despite
the fact that all those who entered in the 1972-74 period successfully
completed those courses.
Why the reversal~
Was it a factor that Congress was debating the bill allowing the
women to enter the military academies~ Was that a factor~
General KINGSTON. Senator, I can't give you a specific answer to that
question because I was not involved in the policy at that time. But I
think it had to do with the spaces available at the schools and the
fact we were opening up all the other branch schools to women.
We needed them in those areas more than we needed them for
cross-training with the combat arms.
Senator PROXMIRE. It seems to me, I think, a decision certainly in
the wrong direction.
General KINGSTON. It is a decision that is open for review.
Senator PROXMIRE. What happened to the women who completed
those courses 1
General KINGSTON. They were then assigned-one of them, I know,
who went to the Infantry Advanced Course, is now assigned at West
Point as an instructor. I can't tell you about the rest, sir. There were
only a handful, but I will find out and finish it for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Fine.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
Two captains were permitted to attend the Infantry Officer Advanced and
one captain the Field Artillery Officer Advanced course. All graduated in 1973.
Subsequent to graduation, the artillery schooled officer remained at Fort Sill
and served as an instructor in the Target Acquisition Department of the Field
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
45
Artillery School; commanded a WAC battery ; and was assigned as the Army
Emergency Relief Officer before departing for United States Army, Europe and
Seventh Army in November 1976. She is now the commander of the Headquarters
Detachment of the Regional Personnel Center in Frankfurt, West Germany.
Since graduation, one of the infantry schooled officers has performed duties as
a division education officer, S-1 (Personnel Officer) of a divisional Supply and
Transport battalion, Assistant G-1 in a division, and is currently a personnel
staff officer in a support battalion. The other officer has performed as an Adjutant
General Branch Advisor in a Readiness Region headquarters, as an admissions
officer at the United States Military Academy, and is currently scheduled to begin
the Command and General Staff College course at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas in
August 1977.
All three officers are basic branch Adjutant General Corps and their assignments have been generally in consonance with normal career patterns for that
specialty.
ENLISTMENT STANDARDS HIGHER FOR WOMEN
Senator PRoxMIRE. Secretary Nelson, is it correct that women are
required to meet higher enlistment standards than men in the Army,
:and with low quotas they must wait 6 months to a year before going on
:active duty, and as a result many give up in discouragement~
Some jobs are clo£ed to women for long periods because of the quotas,
.and everywhere there are low quotas and very few women are selected?
Mr. NELSON. As to the first part of your question, Senator, it is
true that their standards, if you put it that way, are higher.
As to the other part of the question, I really don't know the answer
to that.
General KINGSTON. Sir, I think what you are referring to is the
•delayed entry program we had and have, because so many want to
,come in, we have had them delayed as long as 8 to 10 months.
"\Ve have tried to reduce that down to a maximum of 6 months
because a lot of things happen to people in terms of their career goals
.and so forth in the interim.
Senator PROXMIRE. What I am saying is this: that the Army does
not have a problem of recruiting personnel. We know that.
At the same time, we are turning away women who want to come
in who are qualified, and who will improve the quality of the Army.
That seems to be true.
General KINGSTON. I would say we are not turning away-Senator PROXMIRE. You got low quotas and where you don't have a
<J.uota, you recruit very :few women.
General KINGSTON. That is true, sir.
Senator PROXMIRE. It seems to argue you are not making the service
in the Army available to women in the way it would seem logical to do.
General KINGSTON. vVell, I think there are very few women in that
-category, sir, £rankly. There are a few, but that is part of our evaluation to see if we cannot open up and take care of more of those women
:and, of course, by virtue of opening up all these nontraditional MOS's,
we can give them options.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me give a specific example: The legal education program that sends officers to law school at Government expense
is an example. It is true that there is a much lower ceiling on ROTC
ficholarships for women than for men. Isn't that true?
Mr. NELSON. I imagine scholarships would reflect at this point the
nnmber we need for combat-trained officers.
General KINGSTON. That is certainly part of it.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
46
Mr. NELSON. I suspect that; I don't know that.
General KINGSTON. We have about 517 with ROTC scholarships
now, sir, and we have about 11,000 women out of our total of 54,000
who are in ROTC.
Senator PROXMIRE. How many women get scholarships per year
compared to men?
General KINGSTON. Of course, we have only had women in ROTC
since 1972. We now have about 517, and they compete and there is
about 100 or 200 per year, I will have to find the exact figure, but they
have to compete for those scholarships.
Senator PROXMIRE. About 100 for women, 470 for men?
General KINGSTON. Yes, sir. It is actually more for women because
we have a total of 517 now. It is about 200 a year getting the scho]arship.
Senator PROXMIRE. Are more men or more women 1
General KINGSTON. More men, of course, are getting scho]arships.
"\V"e have 54,000 in ROTC, of which 11,000 are women. sir. Proportionately they have about what you expect in terms of scholarships
now. I will update that for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you.
[The following information was subsequent]y supplied for the
record:]
Approximately 200 scholarships are awarded to wom€'ll each year. The policy
followed by the Army in awarding ROTC scholarships must best use that tool
to meet the Army's requirements for officers, both men and women. The Army
needs a mix of officers to serve in combat arms, for which men and women serve
according to a prescribed pattern. In this regard, based on our current ability to
attract male and female officers to meet noncombat requirements the available
scholarship for wom€'ll considering their exclusion from the combat arms and
their density in the officer corps, is about right. The women get their fair share
of scholarships based on noncombat arms requirements. Each year 2,200 scholarships are awarded. Of this number approximately 2,000 are awarded to men and
200 to women. During school year 1976-77, 14 percent of the men enrolled in
ROTC were on scholarship compared to 4.4 percent women.
Senator PROXMIRE. Secretary Chayes, the overall percentage of
women, 6.8, is an improvement £rom what it was in the past. We would
all agrp,e it is much too low, and we are hopeful it goes much, much
higher than that.
But when that number of the 5,000 is officers, how many are nurses
and how many are line officers i
Ms. CHAYES. Do vou have that information, General?
General DAVIS. :t'don't have it readily available, but I can provide it
for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank vou.
[The following informat1on was subsequently supp]ied for the
record:]
The following numbers show women line officers. nurses, and other professional
women ( e.g. lawyers, doctors, etc.) in 1972 and 1977 :
1972••• _-- __ -- ______________ -- ___ • __________ -- ____ _
1977--- _-- • _. _•• -- _••••• -- •••••••..••••.•• -- -- •••••
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Line
Nurse
Others
Total
1,213
1,842
3,084
3,371
182
336
5,262
4,766
47
The decrease in women nurses is attributable to two factors. First, as a part
of overall strength reductions, there has been a reduction in the authorizations for nurses. Second, there has been a gradual increase in the number of male
nurses entering the Air Force. As of 30 June 1977, males comprised 17.2 percent of the nurse corps.
Senator PROXMIRE. General, I would also like to know what percentage of the line officers women represent in the Air Force.
General DAVIS. Senator, I will provide that for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you.
[The following informat10n was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
1977
1972
Percent
Number
Percent
1, 213
1.1
105,534 --------------
1, 842
2. 2
Number
Female
__ ----------------------------------------Male
__________________
---------------------------TotaL ______________________________________ _
82,974 --------------------106, 747 -------------84,816 --------------
Senator PROXMIRE. Now, how many of these officers are majors, lieutenant colonels, colonels; what would be the percentage for women
colonels against the percentage of all line colonels~
General DAVIS. Senator, we will provide that for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Fine.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
~=t~~nant coloneL ______________________________________________ _
Colonel _________________________________________________________ -
Female
Total
86
40
4
15,655
10,982
4,534
Percent
0.6
.4
.09
These figures are low due to the small numbers of women competing for promotion to these grades. We must remember that the officers being considered for
these grades entered the Air Force 10---20 years ago and their numbers represent
the policies in existence at that time. For example, 64 women were commissioned
in fiscal year 1957. Additionally, prior to 1968, a legislative ceiling limited total
women line officers to 700. Today the increasing number of women in •the officer
corps are receiving more responsible and demanding jobs. As a matter of fact,
for the last three promotion boards to Captain, women have had promotion
rates equal to or higher than men. The Air Force is confident that this trend
will continue and, as a result, more women will be promoted to the senior grades.
Senator PROXMIRE. General, how many enlisted women are master
sergeants, and senior master sergeants, chief master sergeants, and
what are the percentages for each grade as against the total percentage~
General DAVIS. We will provide that :for the record, Senator.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
1972
E-7 ___________________
E-8_ -- -------------- -E-9 ____ ---------------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1977
Female
Total
Percent
Female
Total
Percent
122
29
10
43,330
11,945
6,054
0.28
.24
.17
87
30
9
33,553
9,496
4,692
0.26
.32
.19
48
Senator PROXMIRE. Since the Air Force implemented its plan to
triple the number of women in 1972, for the record, how do each of
these numbers and percentages compare to 1977 i
General DAVIS. yes, sir; for the record.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
The information provided in response to the previous questions includes
available data for 1972. In 1972, the Air Force had 10,728 enlisted women in
traditional jobs such as administration and medical fields. By June 1977, that
number had increased to 17,809. Additionally, in 1972 there were 904 women
in non-traditional jobs such as aircraft and vehicle maintenance. By June 1977,
that number had increased to 15,344-a nearly 16 fold increase. These increaseR,
by number and skill placement, represent positive movement in opening all
career fields to women. As these women gain experience on the job and time in
service. their promotion opportunities should concurrently increase.
Senator PROXMIRE. Secretary Chayes, is it true that 83,000 jobs
are closed to women because of limited housing facilities overseas?
Ms. CI-IAYES. Well, there are many.
General DAVIS. I believe that number is a little high but we will
have to provide that for the record.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
In the overseas areas, we have 72,200 positions which are not open to women
hecause of limited housing facilities. The locations vary from 18 remote sites
in Alaska and the Pacific where the modification cost to limited dormitory space
is the primary constraint, to overseas bases where bachelor housing policy
in conjunction with facility renovation is the nrimary constraint. We are currently reviewing our housing facilities to see where we can decrease the restrictions and thereby open more overseas assignments to women.
Senator PnoxMmE. Tell us, if you can, how much it would cost to
provide facilities to 11Pcommodate women i
Ms. CnAYES. Sir, I have iust 1u,ked my deputy assist11nt £or installations to tret that information. We do not have t:hat information now.
·we cannot fnrnish that for the record because it requires an installation-bv-installation analysis, and when we have it we will supply it
for you.
NO SURVEYS OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES BY SERVICES UNDERWAY
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me ask one final question and s:tart with the
Army and go ri~ht across.
.
Secretary Nelson, have you done any survevs to try to ascertam
wha,t the attitude of the general public is toward increasing the roJe of
worn en in the military~
If so, what are the results, and what about the surveys of possibility
of women even volunteering for combat and the resultsi
Mr. Nm,RoN. Not to mv knowledge, sir. vVe will check on it.
General KINGSTON. If I could, sir-Senator PROXMIRE. I have Jrreat confidenpp, in my survey but I can
underRtand why it mia:ht be challenged. I thought we were careful
ab011t how we llsked auestions.
1Ve realize if you ask the ouestion a certain way-we were careful
to make the question as objective anrl balanced as p~ible.
As I pointed out, we g-ot overwhelmin~ response in favor of the
women in the milifary having the opportunity in the military and also
being allowed to volunteer for combat.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
49
General KINGSTON. Sir, we are starting a study right now to determine just what is the propensity of women to enlist in the Army and
also if we opened more MOS, particularly in the combat arms for
women.
This is a very easy subject to talk about but I am not sure we would
have a rush to the enlistment booths if we opened it up to combat.
We don't have the men knocking down the doors, either.
Senator PROXMIRE. I am talking about the attitude of the public because this is a democracy and we are governed whether we admit it or
not by public attitude to a very considera:ble mrtent.
I think one of the inhibiting notions is that well, people, don't want
it, they want women in the kifohen. I think that is a vicious attitude
that some have that makes it so hard for us to make progress.
I think maybe ·a survey, if it were objective •and accepted, would be
very helpful.
General KINGSTON. I have done a couple of informal surveys similar
to yours and I found the women say yes, they ought to have the opportunity to go into the combat arms.but for somebody else, not for me.
So, it is very interesting.
Senator PRoxMmE. I can tell you a lot of men feel the same way.
[Laughter.] The way I felt about combat in World War II I didn't
want to go in.
Nobody else I knew wanted to go in. Maybe a few, but it was a rare
guy that wanted to go out and get in combat.
Mr. NELSON. No question about that. w·e have to pay bonuses to get
men in the infantry and so on.
SURYEY
RESEARCH ORIBNTED TOWARD MEN
Admiral WATKINS. All survevs we have deal with persons in the
military. We have not embarked on public surveys. It is my understanding that this will be one of the elements of the Department of
Defense review under the Nunn amendment. We in the services
normally do not embark on surveying people outside the military
family.
However, we do have internal Navy surveys that are valid. We are
people also, and also citizens.
For example 50 percent of our women, on informal surveys we conducted recently, in the Navy, do not desire to serve at sea. This may
be-Senator PRoxMIRE. Do not desire to serve at sea i
Admiral WATKINS. Serve ·at sea, yes.
Similarly, we have found that 30 percent of our married women, the
wives of our career force, are very vocally opposed to women serving
at sea. Furthermore, 11 percent of the wives state that they would not
support their husband's decision to reenlist if women were assigned to
sea duty.
Senator PRoxMIRE. I can understand that, but-Admiral WATKINS. Now, wait a minute. I am trying to say, Senator,
we have internal attitudinal surveys we must consider irrespective of
what the public says. We also have to maintain military effectiveness.
Sen~tor PRoxMIRE. But if you ask the question differently, not
whether they favor permitting women to volunteer to serve at sea,
that's quite different.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
50
Admiral W ATKrns. We have no such survey.
Senator PRoxMIRE. I:f that is wha.t they like, why shouldn't they be
allowed to do it or you might get a difierent response.
Admiral WATKINS. I understand, sir, but our primary responsi:bility
has been to spend our limited survey dollars within the Navy to determine our own attitudinal difficulties in instituting our women in the
N avv programs.
"'Ve have not embarked on any external surveys.
Senator PROXMIRE. All right.
Secretary Chayes.
WOMEN OVERWHELMINGLY DESIRE FLIGHT DUTY
Ms. CHAYES. The only study I am aware of done of Air Force women
officers indicated by a margin of-well, by 73 percent, 12 percent
against, that women should be-Senator PRoxMmE. Sav that again, I missed it.
Ms. CHAYES. All right. A study in 1973 was done by the Air Force
and of the Air Force women 73 percent said yes, women should be
permitted to fly in combat and 12 percent said they disagreed with
the proposition that women should fly in combat.
Senator PROXMIRE. You say 73 percent agreed that they should be
allowed~
Ms. CHA YES. Yes, should be allowed.
Senator PROXMIRE. Should be allowed to fly in combat and 12 percent disagreed?
Ms. CHAYES. Right. That is the indication of the then current attitude of women in the Air Force.
"\Ve have not and should not be doing, I think, public surveys at this
time so long as the restriction is congressionally imposed but I do
think those public surveys are very important and they may, you know,
help clarify the debate which is bound and should take place.
I would like to ask you, sir, to repeat again the questions in your
seurvey on women in combat because it had something about it that
troubled me.
Senator PROXMIRE. All rig-ht. Let's see if I can dig that out.
The first question was: Should all noncombat jobs be available for
women in the military.
Ms. CHAYES. It was the other question that I was concerned about.
Senator PROXMIRE. The second question was: Should women be allowed to volunteer for combat duty.
Ms. CHAYES. That is only part of the kind of question that really
has to be asked, I believe. The question also should be asked not only
can they volunteer but should they be assigned to combat, because it
seems to me that that would be inevitable if the combat restrictions
were removed.
Senator PROXMIRE. I see your point, and it is a very ~od point.
I think you are right. However, I think that it is possible that you
should ask both questions because it is very possible that you might
adopt a policy of saying that if women can volunteer for combat duty,
they should not be restricted from doing it.
I think that might be a logical approach, at least for the transition
period.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
51
Ms. CHAYES. That is right.
Senator PnoxMIRE. Maybe a final approach for that matter.
Ms. CHAYES. As :far as the Air Force is concerned, I think your
question is good because the Air Force personnel do volunteer to be
rated as I understand it.
General DAvis. That is right.
Ms. CHAYES. So, that would be a sufficient question.
For the other services, I am sure it would be a sufficient question
to give you the insight you need.
Senator PROXMIRE. These hearings have been extremely helpful ·and
useful. There is nothing harder in our society than change, particularly to change something as imbedded as you pointed out in civilization as having men do the fighting.
The only example of the contrary I know of is that in the Amazon
the women did the fighting.
This is something encrusted in years of habit not only in our country
but in our civilization, so it is something that is very, very hard to
modify and change on the basis of reason and logic.
I think that while the services could have done better, they can
always do better. To say that the typical person doesn't reach more
than about 10 percent of his potential and very few go more than about
40 or 50 percent, I think you can do a great deal better in the military
than you have done to date.
You have every reason to do it, the Army, particularly, where you
have recruit problems and where women improve the quality of the
service and where women are pounding on the door to get in.
I think it is true across the line.
I think General Eisenhower's notion that not only did we find
women could perform every function in the military as well as men,
but it iiniproved the quality of men, too, and that is something we
shouldn't forget.
We can have a better military force-certainly a better allocation
of our economic resources which 'is the responsibility of this Joint Economic Committee, if we open our minds and try to overcome the
habits and prejudices that unfortunately plague us.
Thank you very much :for testifying.
The official record will remain open temporarily and we will submit
written questions to yon for your response for the record, if you would
be so kind as to respond.
The subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 5 :18 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to
the call of the Chair.]
[The following written questions and answers were subsequently
supplied for the record :]
RESPONSE OF :MAJ. GEN.
J. P. KINGSTON TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS
POSED BY SENATOR PROXMIRE
Question 1. What is the primary role of women in your service? What do you
think their role should be?
Answer. The Army is committed to providing for the full and effective ememployment of women consistent with the Army's primary mission of ground
combat. The over-riding requirement of the Army is to be able to fight and win,
hence, the operational effectiveness and readiness of the Army to execute this
primary misEdon governs its policies for women. The Army's stated position
with the American public and the Congress is that of unequivocally opposing the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
52
use of women in combat as active fighters. The Army believes it is clear that
the original intent of Congress and, by extension, the intent of the American
people was that women perform in noncombatant roles; and recent Congressional commentary also supports this position. Exclusion of women from direct
combat is also prudent and reasonable until more is learned about the physical
limitations of women in comparison to men, and the psychological and sociological impact of women in tactical units. Therefore, the Army believes that
the basic premise upori which its policy concerning women is founded, that is,
exclusion from direct combat roles as active fighters, is a sound one.
For these reason, the primary role of women in the Army is that of a noncombatant and should remain so.
Qitestion 2. 'l'he "Women in the Army Study" refers to "maximum female content." What is this? How is it computed? Does this computation limit the number of women who can serve in the Army? Is there a similar computation for
men in the Army?
Answer. The Army's program that determines the number of women who
may serve in the force has always 1been based on two factors : the primary mission of the Army is combat and the nation does not support using women in
direct combat roles, or as active fighters. Accordingly, a minimum number of
men are required to maintain the Army's combat readiness. Because of the
Army's manpower ceiling, there is a maximum number of women the Army
can absorb and use. "Maximum female content" refers to the maximum number
of enlisted women possible for each skill (MOS) and grade consistent with
total active Army strength authorizations and male combat requirements.
The number is determined using the Army's Woman's Enlisted Expansion
model (WEEM) which involves a data base and a fifteen step process. During
model simulation, each enlisted grade is processed separately by MOS from
the data base until all MOS (skills) are completed. The WEEM compares two
continuing routines on women. The first is the application of maximum female
content in unit percentages to documented interchangeable positions (as identified in unit authorization documents). The second is consideration of promotion equity, rotation base, and career development assignment equity to provide for full professional development. In comparing the two routines, the
model is programmed to select the approach which provides the lesser female
content by grade in order to ensure maximum support of combat positions.
This number is then run through a grade/space ratio (GSR) routine which
ensures that the MOS grade structure for women mirrors the Army-wide
structure for that MOS. Once this is accomplished, the total number of available
po.ciitions for women is configured to ensure that there are sufficient positions
to supuort the upper grade levels (based on the Army's Enlisted Force Management Plan).
The computation Just described does limit the number of women who can
serve in the Army, but for the reasons indicated. No similar computation is
made for the men. however, the female strength acts to constrain the number
of men in an MOS and grade.
Que.~tion 3. Have there been any projections regarding the potential of men
and women for your service? Would a change in the policy regarding women
affect the potential pool?
Answer. Yes, to both questions. The Army Recruiting Command ooriodi<'ally
analyzes the recruiting market to estimate the number of potE"lltially available
qualified men and women. The Army establishes recruitment policies to allow the
enlistment of the most highly qualified available applicants with tl>e highest
probability of completing their enlistment, from that pool. As an example, we currently require women Pnlistees to be high school gr11du11tes who have a signifi<'flntly higher likelihood than non-high school graduate women to comulete their
first enlifitment. If we removed that criterion, a significantly larger number
of women would hP eligible to enlist. However, we cnrrently do not need to
enlist women with hhrh Joss potential. since more HSDG women are annlyinit
for enliRtment than we are able to accept due to the prohibition of assigning
women to coml>"t units.
Q11estion h. Wh11t studies have been done to !!!how the nroy:x>mdty of women
to join the Army? For example, has the Army done any national surveys of bjgh
school girlR • • • similar to the surveys of high school hoys • • • to determine
the potential job pool of women? If so, what were the results?
Answer. There have been two l!!Urveys of the attitudes of women toward
enlisting in the Army. The first was in 1971, the latter in 1974. The earlier
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
53
survey observed that military service did not, at that time, figure prominently
in the minds of young women. Relatively few women had a true knowledge
of or familiarity with what the Army offered, expected, or entailed. The latter
study identified a small but measurable increase in the awareness of, familiarity
with, and considerations of military service; however, it revealed that the Army
could expect to appeal to only a narrow segment of young women.
In order to obtain more current information and account for any changes in
young wimen's perceptions, expectations and interests * * * toward life in
general and the military in particular "' * * the Army is cooperating with the
Navy to develop and conduct a new study for the Department of Defense. In
addition to the areas of interest cited earlier, this survey will investigate the
appeal of non-traditional jobs for women in the military.
Question 5. What effort has been made to recruit qualified men to your service?
Qualified women? What constitutes a qualified man? Qualified woman? What
are the differences in qualifications for men and women, and why do they
exist?
Answer. To recruit qualified men and women for the Army, the Recruiting
Command has a field recruiting force of over 5,000 men and women. The Army
has placed great emphasis on maintaining the assigned strength of the field
recruiter force who must "close the deal" with the potential enlistee. In the
volunteer environment, it is the recruiter who finally sells the Army to every
young person who enlists. Chapter 2, Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army
Enlistment Program) provides the basic qualifications for enlistment in the
Regular Army for men and women. The only difference between male and female
basic enlistment criteria is in the mental category and education level requirements. The rationale for these differences stem from the objective of the Army
recruiting effort to recruit the best qualified volunteers in sufficient numbers
to accomplish the Army mission. To achieve this objective, standards are set
which allow us to choose the best qualified men and women based on how many
we have to select from and how many are required. The standards for women
are higher because there is a larger number of women interested in joining the
Army in proportion to the number of women required. Since fewer women are
required and there is a relatively large pool from which to choose, we are more
selective and set the standards accordingly.
Question 6. Does Army advertising-in posters, TV spots and the like-prominently show women in a variety of duties? Please be specific.
Answer. Yes. Department of the Army guidance for the Army Recruiting
Command regarding female advertisement states that it will display a male,
female, and minority subject mix whenever appropriate. Specifically: Group pictures include women whenever possible. Such advertising reinforces the theme
that people in today's Army are working and serving together toward a common
goal. Women are shown in a wide array of roles. Men and women working together, in different but mutually supporting skills, are depicted. Women are
shown performing duties, not posing for pictures. Advertisements using photographs which blur female soldiers are not used because of the secondary role
connoted. Women are shown in skills which are likely to be available to them
throughout the year. Both field and office environments are used. Female advertisements focus on achieving the career management field content goals. Women
are depicted in leadership roles when appropriate.
Question 7. How do you specifically recruit women? What type of guidance
do you give a woman seeking to join your service regarding the life she might
expect?
Answer. Women are recruited in much the same way as men. No special recruiters, either male or female, are designated to exclusively recruit women.
All applicants are required to read job descriptions of the _skills for which they
enlist. If they or their parents have female-unique questions regarding Army
life, they are able to discuss them with one of the female recruiters or Army
guidance counselors. The Army attempts to depict to all potential enlistees as
accurately as possible the life they might experience during their enlistment.
This follows the answer to the preceding question regarding adverthiement.
Question 8. The. "Women in the Army Study" recommends that all MOS's be
reviewed periodically for possible participation by women and that the reasonR for closing an MOS to women be clearly stated. Has this been done? How
often is the list of MOS's reviewed? In the year and a half since publication
of the. "Women in the Army Study" have more MOS's been opened up to
women?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
54
Answer. The periodic review of MOS's for participation of women recommended in the Army Study (December 1976) is being accomplished. A review
was conducted between March and June 1977 :that validated the list of 29 MOS's
to be closed to women (two of the MOS's previously closed, 12D and 12F, have
been deleted from the Army MOS Inventory). These 29 MOS's are presently
closed to women because they are designed for direct involvement in combat (i.e.,
contributing to the act of inflicting casualties on the enemy) or structured primarily for utilization and assignment in areas where close combat operations
would occur. The Army is currently considering 13 of these MOS's to determine
if they could be opened to women. In addition to the 29 MOS's closed for combat
and combat support purposes, selected MOS may be temporarily closed based on
a quarterly evaluation of rotation equity, equitable career progression and absence of entry level positions. The list of MOS's closed due to the combat exclusion policy are reviewed semi-annually, the next review being scheduled to begin
September 1977.
Question 9. Are women required to meet the same training and performance
requirements as men on the jobs assigned?
Answer. Army training is designed to prepare soldiers with the technical skills
and knowledge necessary to successfully perform in their MOS at increasing
levels of responsibility. Training provided to male and female soldiers for the
same skill (MOS) is identical except where physiological differences dictate
otherwise. The same is true for the training provided to male and female officers. Inasmuch as the training is identical, men and women are expected to
meet the same performance requirements.
Question 10. What are the educational opportunities that the Army provides
for men and women? Are there professional school programs? How many
women and men are selected to attend these? What are the criteria for selection and admittance to these programs? How many ROTC scholarships go to
women-number and percentage?
Answer. Educational opportunities that the Army provides to its soldiers (as
distinguished from skill training) are offered first to meet Army requirements
and next to satisfy personal development aspirations of individual men and
women. The service colleges constitute our most important source of individual
professional military development education for officers. Each year about 1,400
officers are selected to attend the senior service colleges and the Command and
General Staff College. Students are selected by boards of officers based upon
demonstrated performance and potential for advancement. Results of the School
Year 1977-1978 boards reveal that female officers receive an equitable share of
educational opportunity. For the senior service colleges 8 percent (2/25) of
the eligible females were selected compared to 5 percent (284/5,816) of eligible
males. For the Command and Staff College the selection rates were 22 percent
female (13/60) and 14 percent male (l,027/7,381).
In addition to service colleges certain officers are selected each year to receive advanced civil schooling. Each student is educated to meet specific requirements and is used following the schooling in the advanced degree discipline.
Women compete equally with men in this program. Selection is based on aptitude
for advanced education, specialty designation, overall demonstrated potential for
continued military service in more responsible positions, and personal interest.
About 500 officers enter this fully funded program each year. So far in 1977 six
women have entered this program. Additionally about 800 officers and warrant
officers attend full time degree completion programs each year. These students
are selected from applicants in accordance with the criteria above without regard to sex. 10 female students entered degree completion programs this year.
The low number of women in civil schooling programs can be explained in part
by three characteristics of female officers. Until recently all female officers were
required to have undergraduate degrees, and few need undergraduate degree
completion programs. Recently female officers were assigned to branches, as
yet few are branch qualified, and it is inappropriate to send them to civil schooling until they have gained proficiency in their newly assigned branches. Most
Army requirements for advanced civil degrees are in the engineering and science
disciplines, yet few female officers have the undergraduate background to successfully undertake advanced schooling in these areas.
Professional military education for enlisted soldiers consists of the Sergeants
Major Academy, Attendees at the Sergeants Major Academy are selected by a
Department of the Army board based upon the best qualified criterion considering
overall demonstrated performance of duty and potential for further service in
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
55
positions of increased responsibility. The school year 1977-78 Sergeants Major
Academy selection board chose 10 ,percent of eligible female master sergeants
(2/22) while 6 percent of eligible male master sergeants were picked (336/6,000).
'.rhe number of women eligible for the Sergeants Major Academy does not reflect
the percentage of women in the Army largely because of the recent expansion of
the female content of the Army, the increased number of skills for which women
are eligible, and the length of time required to reach the senior grades. The proportion of women will increase as the recent female accessions age.
In addition to these formal education programs there are a variety of volunteer programs available at each installation worldwide providing educational
opportunities equally to men and women who are eligible based upon previous
educational attainments and who are willing to devote the off-duty time to selfimprovement. Participation rates are not maintained by sex. The available programs range from remedial education through degree completion to graduate
academic programs as well as technical, vocational and language courses. Counseling and testing services are also provided.
Each year about 200 ROTC scholarships are awarded to women. This is
approximately 10 percent of the total number of scholarships awarded each year.
The policy followed by the Army in awarding ROTC scholarships is that this tool
must be used to meet the Army's requirements for officer accessions, both men
and women. A significant fraction of our officer requirements is for officers to
serve in the combat arms, for which only men are eligible. Scholarship must be
allocated to support both the combat arms and noncombat arms requirements.
Thus, based on our current ability to attract male and female officers to meet
noncombat requirements the available scholarships for women, considering their
exclusion from the combat arms and their density in the Officer Corps, is about
right.
Question 11. While the Army has increased the number of enlisted women,
has the number of female line officers increased proportionately? Does this, or
does this not, include Army nurses?
Answer. Since 1972 (when the Army revised and expanded its objectives for
Women in the Army), the increase in female line officer strength has not been
proportionately as large as the increase in enlisted women, as shown below.
Fiscal year-
Enlisted women. _____________________
Female line officers ___________________
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
TQ
Percent
change
12, ~~:
16,457
1,066
26,328
1,229
37,703
1,428
43,806
1,726
44,461
1,873
+260
+no
These numbers do not include Army nurses, nor do they include female officers
of the other special branches ( Chaplains, Judge Advocate General's Corps, Medical Corps, Dental Corps, Medical Service Corps, and Army Medical Specialist
Corps).
Question 12. In regard to the turnover rate in the Army, how many men fail
to reenlist? How many women? Have you looked at the reasons why men leave
the service as opposed to women?
Answer. Through June 1977, there were 44,492 first term males and 4,792 first
term females, who were eligible to reenlist in fiscal year 1977. From these eligibles
14,859 males (33.4 percent) and 2,171 females (45.3 percent) reenlisted. The
female reenlistments were primarily in the traditional skills; we wil-1 not have
any significant data of female reenlistments rates in non-traditional skills until
1979. We have looked separately at the reasons why men and why women do
not reenlist. The most recent Army-wide survey administered in February 1977
to first termers leaving the service suggests that a higher percentage of women
than men in this group intended only to serve one term, and that more husbands
wanted their wives to get out than vice versa. The same survey also suggests
that among those leaving the service a higher percentage of males than females
considered, primary among other factors, that their pay and allowances were
too low.
Question 13. What studies have been done, or are now underway that look at
the overall performance of men and women in your service? What were the
results of these studies?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
56
Answer. In its planning for the entrance of women cadets, West Point initiated
Project 60 in 1975 to determine what minimal adjustments were necessary to
existing standards because of physiological differences between males and females. Fifty-eight volunteer women students, 16---18 years of age, participated in
seven weeks of experimental training. Additionally, an extensive review of
literature relating to the physiological differences between men and women was
considered. A substantial amount of information relating the physical capabilities and limitations of young women was provided by this project. The results
revealed that the women involved were, in many instances, far more physically
proficient than a review of the literature on the physical abilities of women
would have led West Point personnel to believe; and on a number of tasks, even
above average women physical performers performed at a level below that
achieved by the average male cadet. This led to modifications of the Cadet Basic
Training (CBT) program. Women were equipped with the lighter M16 rifle for
physical training, rifle exercises and bayonet training whereas the men used
the larger M14 rifle. The operating rod spring and hammer spring of the M14
rifles were modified for women in an attempt to equalize the difficulty men and
women experience in performing inspection arms. ·women opposed women in
pugil training. Although women still had to work harder to accomplish the
physical aspects of CBT, the minor modifications made appears to be sufficient.
A survey of major Army commanders in 1975 indicated general satisfaction
with the performance of women, but identified a need to set minimum physical
standards for all personnel in each MOS. Two studies are underway that address
the physical performance capabilties of men and women. The first was undertaken in 1976 to examine the requirement for physical training in the Army in
order to design a more satisfactory program. This study separates physical
fitness and training into a Baseline Program to maintain a minimum level of
fitness; an MOS Program to meet the physical training requirements of common MOS related job tasks; and a Collective Program related to MOS task
performance in a battlefield environment. Models for the MOS and collective
programs are being field tested during the period June 1977 to March 1978. The
other study also began in 1976 and is designed to establish the physical fitness
standards for each skill (MOS). Implementation of a six months pilot physical
screening program in selected Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Stations
(AFEES) is scheduled for 1 October 1977. The results of these studies are
expected in late 1978 and should lead to improved physical entry standards for
skills and physical readiness training within the Army as a whole.
A field test of a Basic Initial Entry Training Program (BIET) was conducted
at Fork Jackson, S.C., during the period September-December 1976. Its objective was to measure and compare the performance of male and female non-prior
service (NPS) accessions against standards of a common course of instruction
and identify needed changes in female basic training. Identical training and
preparation will enable both men and women to participate equally in follow-on
and unit training and unit defense should this be necessary. Results of the test
revealed that women perform comparably with men on basic critical tasks,
except for physical readiness training (PRT). PRT events can be modified for
women, however, without changing the content of the training, reducing the
value of the training received or lowering the male standard. As a result of this
test a decision was made to design a common basic training program for men
and women modified only to accommodate physiological differences. This common-core entry level training is planned to begin in September at Fort McClellan
and October at Fort Jackson.
A force development test and evaluation (MAX WAC) was conducted during
the period October 1976 through June 1977 to determine what effect varying
the enlisted female strength of a company level unit will have on unit performance. The purpose of the test was to assess the effects that varying the
percentage of female soldiers (0-35 percent) assigned to representative types
of combat support and service support units will have on the capability of these
units to perform their mission under field conditions during a 72 hour period.
'l'he last of fifty-five planned company-size tests was completed 1 July 1977. Data
are currently undergoing statistical analysis with a final report scheduled for
late 1977.
Another comparison of the performance of men and women will be undertaken
during Reforger 77 to assess the effect of overseas deployment and extended
field conditions on the stamina of female soldiers assigned to combat support
and combat service support units. The exercise will be completed in October 1977
with a final report expected in July 1978.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
57
RESPONSE OF VICE .ADM. JAMES D. WATKINS TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS
POSED BY SENATOR PROXMffiE
Question 1. What is the primary role of women in your service? What do
you think their role should be?
Answer. The primary role of women is basically to serve on an equal basis
with men, to the extent they are qualified and permitted by law, in meeting the
total manpower requirements of the Navy. As indicated by Mr. Hidalgo in his
statement, the utilization of women has been increasing since the early 1970's
with a 63 percent increase planned through fiscal year 1988.
I think the Navy should continue plans to expand in an evolutionary manner
the integration of women into the total force. In this regard, Congressional
approval of the Navy proposal to amend Title JO, U.S. Code, Section 6015, would
facilitate such expansion by permitting the temporary assignment of women to
all Navy ships and permanent assignment to auxiliary and service craft.
Quest-ion 2. Have there been any projections regarding the potential of men
and women for your Service? Would a change in policy regarding women affect
the potential pool?
Answer. Senator, I assume the first part of your question pertains to projections for increasing the utilization of women in the Navy, thus maximizing one
valuable manpower asset in view of the dwindling supply of qualified males
generally projected to occur during the 1980's.
The Navy has participated in numerous, wide ranging seminars and studies
on women and is in basic agreement with the Brookings Institute Research
Study. The Navy is planning a 63 percent increase in women by fiscal year 1988.
This objective is in close agreement with Brookings estimates of the potential
utilization of women in the Navy, under both current statutory restrictions
as well as in recognition of the necessity for providing shore billets for males
rotating from sea duty.
With respect to policy changes and the utilization of women, we have learned
that it is necessary to move in an evolutionary manner in order to successfully
integrate women into the total force. Women strength increases planned through
fiscal year 1983 represent the maximum we can manage under current legal
restrictions. However, Congressional approval of the Navy proposal to amend
Title 10, United States Code, Section 6015, permitting the permanent assignment
of women to auxiliary and service craft and temporary assignment of women
to all Navy ships, would allow the Navy to more properly utilize the women
planned through fiscal year 1983 and to permit an additional increase of 6K
women while reducing the demand for male personnel.
Question 3. What effort has been made to recruit qualified men to your service?
Qualified women? What constitutes a qualified man? Qualified woman? What are
the differences in qualifications for men and women, and why do they exist?
Answer. Navy recruiting efforts for qualified men and women do not differ except in intensity. The major thrust of our recruiting effort is directed toward
procuring required numbers of qualified young males. The female recruiting
effort is essentially a process of screening and and selecting the best qualified
among the applicants which currents exceed female, recruiting requirements.
Qualified men and women must satisfy minimum age, mental, physical and
background criteria, the details of which are readily available, if desired. Because supply exceeds demand, the Navy requires that all female recruits must
be high school diploma graduates and quality eor school training. On the other
hand, because 100 percent male high school graduates and school eligibles cannot
be recruited, the Navy must accept a minimum number of males who do not
meet these criteria, sufficient to attain recruiting goals. For example, in fiscal
year 1976, 76.5 percent of all non-prior service males were high school graduates
and 88 percent were school eligibles. With respect to physical qualifications, prescribed height and weight standards recognize physiological differences between
males and females. Otherwise, there are no differences in required qualifications
for males and females in the Navy.
Question 4. How do you specifically recruit women? What type of guidance
do you give a woman seeking to join your service regarding the life she might
expect?
Answer. Women and men are recruited through the same procedures. These
procedures described herein are tailored to the female candidate. Women are
made aware of Navy opportunities through direct recruiter contact, national
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
58
advertising, literature available at the recruiting stations, high school career
days, college campus visits, and other women already in the Navy home on leave
and as a part of the Hometown Recruiter Assistance Program.
For female enlisted applicants, all recruiting stations show a film depicting
the life of a woman recruit at Recruit Training Center, Orlando, Florida. All
women applicants are required to view this film, They are also briefed by recruiting personnel about the conditions of Navy life and possible duty assignments
for women in general. Prior to enlistment, all women must be interviewed by a
specially trained Navy job classifier. Each applicant is counseled regarding Navy
training available depending on aptitude test scores, physical qualifications, the
applicant's desires, and other factors such ,as security clearance requirements.
Based on the results of this job classification interview, each applicant qualified
for enlistment is enlisted with either a written guarantee for specific training
or for general duty assignment leading to on-the-job training.
For officer applicants, we inform the young woman that she will not serve
aboard a ship or in a combat designated aircraft squadron, but she will be
e~pected to contribute to the team effort in support of the operating forces. The
woman candidate is also briefed on the rigors of officer candidate school and
the fact that the co-educational academic and physical requirements are equally
applicable to both men and women. The women are apprised of the career fields
available to women and sub-specialties which they might attain in the future.
Question 5. What percentage of the Naval force is now women? If 10 U.S.O.
6015 were modified, would it enable the Navy to recruit a larger number of
women?
Answer. Currently, 4.3 percent of the total Navy strength are women. Without
a modification to 10 U.S.C. 6015, it is planned that Navy women will increase
63 percent and constitute over 6 percent of the total force by fiscal year 1983,
with a required annual accession of 6,600 female recruits. If that statute is revised as proposed by Navy, approximately 6,000 additional women could be
utilized, thus necessitating additional female recruits.
Que11tion 6. What is the greatest number of women that could serve in the Navy
without changing current laws? With a change in law?
Answer. Without changing current laws, the Navy can utilize 30,651 enlisted
women and 5,088 women officers for a total of 35,739 women by fiscal year 1983
(currently, the Navy has 19,342 enlisted women and 3,713 women officers). If
10 U.S.O. 6015 is amended as Navy has proposed, an additional 6,000 enlisted
women and 122 women officers could 1be utilized to fill billets at sea and ashore.
Qitestion 7. Are women required to meet the same training and performance
require~ents as men on the jobs assigned?
Answer. Yes, sir.
Question 8. What are the educational opportunities that the Navy provides
for men and women? Are there professional school programs? How many women
and men are selected to attend these? What are the criteria for selection and
admittance to these programs? How many ROTC scholarships go to womennumber and percentage?
Answer. The Navy has ,a number of voluntary programs which provide educational opportunities to navel personnel. Full-time Navy funded duty under instructiQn includes the programs listed at Table A with statistics for 1976.
Medi~l education programs also exist for professional development of naval
personnel in tJhe healing arts. (Statistics for male/female participation in these
progra_ms are not available). Off duty programs include the Navy Campus for
Achievement and Tuition Aid Program, both of which provide opportunities for
naval personnel to attend college courses in their free time. Educational opportunities are available to all naval personnel, regardless of sex.
General criteria for selection/admittance are based on academic qualification
for the specific program concerned, professional qualification including performance record and future promotion potential, appropriate grade of rank eligibility,
willingness to accept a service obligation, and the status of Navy specialist
perso@el inventory vs specialist requirements. As formal screening procedures
are not conducted for these programs, male/female statistics are not available.
A maximum of 264 women may hold NROTC scholarships of the total 6,000
author_ized. This represents 4.4 percent of the total. (:At the present time, women
officers comprise 5.8 percent of the total officer corps). As of 30 June 1977, following graduation of the Class of 1977, women held 106 Navy/Marine Corps
Scholarships of a total 4,262 (2.5 percent).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
59
TABLE A
Calendar year 1976
Educational/
professional
program
Female
Male
Considered
Service college (professional
military education).
Postgraduate schooi_ _______ _
3,118
Selected
872
Considered
26
Selected Remarks
15
The smaller percentage of women
selected as compared to men generally
reflects a lack of math/science undergraduate courses completed by
women. Current recruiting goals for
all potential naval officers emphasize
the desirability of technical undergraduate curriculums and/or courses.
Scholarship ________________ _
22
8 ---------------------- No women applied for any scholarship
programs in 1976.
College degree program _____ _
107
64 ---------------------- The college degree program leads to a
baccalaureate-level degree for officers
who have entered the service with
less than an undergraduate degree.
Women officer applicants are required
to possess this level of education
prior to commissioning,
Law education program _____ _
In addition to general criteria, appli89
15
3
cants must possess appropriate
potential for designation as a member
of the Judge Advocate General Corps.
Advanced education program _____________________________________________ The advanced education program will
conduct its 1st selections in September 1977. Men and women are
eligible to apply,
7,014
2,134
318
60
Question, 9. While the Navy has increased the number of enlisted women, has
the number of female line officers increased proportionately? Does this, or does
this not, include nurses?
Answer. No, sir; there has not been a proPortionate increase in female line
officers compared to the growth of enlisted Navy women. Nurses are not included
in this comparison.
The growth in women officers has been slower than enlisted women since many
officer billets ashore require warfare specialties which women are restricted from
obtaining by 10 U.S.C. 6015. The enlisted billets are not so constrained and, accordingly, proPortionately larger num-bers of enlisted women may be utilized.
Question 10. How many women are in the Navy, aviation program? What has
been their record? Are there any limitations imposed on these women, and, if so,
what are they? If 10 U.S.C. 6015 were repealed or modified, would it affect the
roles the women aviators have?
Answer. There are currently 21 women officers in Naval Aviation. With respect
to their record, thirteen women officers have completed flight training, ten in the
prop pipeline and three in helicopters. Eight women officers are currently undergoing flight training. Of the 23 women officers who have entered flight training,
there have been only two attrites, a rate of 8.69 percent. This compares most
favorably with the 27.5 percent overall attrition rate experienced in the flight
programs. All women who have completed the training have successfully served
in jobs with duties involving flying.
Limitations on the utilization of women in the aviation program stem from
the "Combat" provisions of 10 U. S.C. 6015. Women may not be assigned to shipboard duty, including squadrons that land on ships, other than transports and
hospital ships.
If Title 10 U.S.C. 6015 were repealed, there would be no restrictions on the ·assignments of women ·aviators. If Title 10 U.S.C. 6015 were modified to remove the
shipboard duty restriction but not the combat restriction, women aviators could
be assigned to squadrons in support of Fleet Operations and could land on
carriers.
Questioo 11. Describe the potential difficulties and problems that might arise
if women were •assigned to ships. What reasons do you have for making these
assumptions?
Answer. The assignment of women to auxiliary ships and service craft, as well
as combat vessels, could present many and varied command problems resulting
from reactions of men and women serving long periods at sea in confined spaces
1
23-366-78-li
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
60
under arduous conditions. In the absence of experience of any duration, the
identification of difficulties and problems which might arise would largely be
pure speculation.
We do have the limited e:x;perience with women at sea which was undertaken
on a hospital ship, the U.,s.:s. Sanctuary, during the 1972-1975 period. A small
cadre of about 60 women over and ,above the women normally assigned to the
hospital department were involved. We found no significant problems which
couldn't be overcome. The Commanding Officer felt morale was high. The interchange between male and female seaman was was excellent and on a high level.
Minor problems of a hand•holding nature were handled satisfactorily through
regulation. However, no finite conclusions from the Sanctuary experience as to
what might develop from assigning women to sea duty should be made in view
of the fact that of the 400 days women were ,assigned, only 42 days were spent
underway. Even so, ,I see no reason for not proceeding in a calculated and evolutionary manner to assign women to auxiliary and service craft, with the possible subsequent inclusion of combat vessels a matter for determination by the
Congress and the American people.
Question 1!. Do women in the Marine Corps have special problems and restrictions? If so, please identify them and tell us what the Navy is doing to deal with
them.
Answer. I am advised by General Schulze, Director Manpower Plans ·and Policy
Division, Headquarters :Marine Corps, that the Marine Corps is experiencing no
major problems with respect to utilization of women. In fact, the present plan
calls for more than a 100 percent increase in ,the woman Marine population by
1988. There are combat restrictions that prevent women from being training in
infantry, artillery, tanks and amphibian tractors and as pilots ,and naval :flight
officers. In addition to these specific skill restrictions, women cannot be routinely
assigned to combat units since such as assignment would place them in a potentially combatant role. The Marine Corps does not have a blanket combat unit
restriction, however, and has identified approximately 3 percent of the manpower
spaces in the Fleet Marine Force as 'suitable for assignment of women l\farlnes.
The combat restriction is the overriding constraint on the employment and utilization of women and the legal limitation of 6015 does not have a major impact on
the Marine Corps. Combat action ashore is the key issue. Amendment of 6015 to
provide for temporary additional duty aboard certain ships would be of some
benefit to the Marine Oorps by permitting amphibious movement of women :Marine
personnel to the objective area. This does not contemplate the participation of
women in amphibious assault operations. While women will be assigned to combat
support and combat service support units, the Marine 0orPS steadfastly maintains
that women will neither ,be employed nor tl"ained ·as combatants.
Question 13. At this point, it does not look like DOPMA. will pass this Congress.
What alternative plans has the Navy made to equalize promotion opportunities in
the event that DOPMA does not pass?
Answer. In the event D0PMA does not pass, the Navy has taken steps within
the limitations of current promotion laws to provide for the continued growth of
the women officer communities through increased promotion opportunity.
Women officers are appointed to the Medical, ·Dental, Nurse, Medical Service
and Judge Advocate General Corps and compete with their male counterparts in
these competitive categories. By law, women officers ,are appointed to and compete only among themselves within the categories of the line, Supply Corps,
Chaplain Corps and Civil Engineer CorPS,
The Secretary of the Navy designates the number of officers that the selection
boards may recommend for promotion to each grade in each competitive category
through establishment of promotion opportunity. The following promotion opportunities were apprved for fiscal year 1978 selections for women officers of the line,
Supply Oorps, Chaplain Corps and Civil Engineer CorPB as contrasted with promotion opportunities for most other communities:
(In percent)
ToCaptain _______________________________________________________________________ _
Commander ___ •• ____ •••••••••••••••••••••••• ____ •• ··-····-··· •••••••••.••• ____ •
Lieutenant commander ••• __ ----·-·· •••••• ______ •• ________ ••••••••••••••.••••••••
Lieutenant_ __ ••••• __ ._ •••• __ •• __ •• _•• _••••••• _____ ._ •••• __ ._ ••••••••••••••• _._.
Lieutenant (junior grade) •• ___ ••••••••••••• _________________________ ···--··· •• __ _
l
All qualified.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Women
Most other
communities
100
80
90
100
60
70
85
95
(')
(1)
61
The increased promotion opportunities for women were authorized by
SECNAV in recognition that the women officer communities are sman, but growing, with few officers iin senior grades. For the next few years the small numbers
coming into the promotion zones will be insufficient to permit growth in the
senior grades. Increased promotion opportunity to the three senior grades will
provide the ciapability for some measure of growth. The promotion opportunity
to lieutenant for women officers is specified in law.
Question 14. What has been the performance of the female Midshipmen at
AnIWJpolis? What do you envisage as the future role of these women in the
Navy? If 10 U.S.C. 6015 were repealed/modified, how long would it take before
the women would take their place on shipboard?
Answer. The programs at Annapolis for both men and women are "s,ingle
track" except where plhysiological differences occur. The same standards for
men and women are maintained for training, graduation and commissioning.
The performance of the female Midshipmen at Annapolis during the academic
year 1976-77 was on a par with that of the men. The attrition rate for women
was slightly higher than the men but the reasons for attriting were similar to
the male Midshipmen. The women have performed well academically, professionally and athletically. Their summer training is currently being performed
aboard yard patrol craft.
The future role of these women, assuming 10 U.S.C. 6015 is not modified, would
include assignment to unrestricted line non-combat billets ashore depending on
their educational backgrounds, desires, and types of first tour billets which
are available 'at time of graduation. Flight :training will also be available.
Progressive assignments during their careers will include division officer, department heads, executive officer and commanding officer billets ashore. On the
other hand, if the U.S.C. 6015 were modified as recommended by the Navy, assignment would also include certain shipboard duty. If 10 U.S.C. 6015 were
repealed, through tlle evolutionary process involving training and qualification
programs, men and women would be assigned 'all jobs in accordance with their
qualliication.
If 10 U.S.C. were repealed/modified, the length of time before women would
take their place aboard ship would depend on several factors. For example,
training, to compensate for the lack of experience and training not needed for
shore duty assignments, required for shipboard duties would have to be provided. This would be in addition to training required for the billet regardless
of whether it was :ll.Ued by a male or female. Therefore, the specific length of
time could vary from immediately after 10 U.S.C. 6015 is modified to several
years depending on past exiperience and training of the females concerned.
Q,uestion 15. What studies have been done, or are now underway, that look at
the overall performance of men and women in your Service? What were the
results of these studies?
Answer. The Navy has never conducted a study evaluating overall performance of men and women and no overall study is currently in progress. The Navy
is conducting the following research on Sipecific areas of the performance of men
and women : Reasons for separating during :first enlistment; loss of productive
time comparison with males; physical requirements of Navy jobs.
The Navy has completed some research on loss of productive time comparisons
between men and women which showed women had less t~me loss than men when
pregnancy and other factors such as unauthorized absence, accidents, alcoholism,
etc. were included. However, this survey compared men at sea and ashore with
women ashore, so the comparison is not completely valid. Current researc'h
is directed toward the development of a more accurate evaluation of lost time.
Question 16. What is 10 U.S.C. 5767? Does this affect women in the Navy and
marines? If so, how?
Answer. This statute permits the Secretary of the Navy to designate a woman
to hold a position as a rear admiral or brigadier general if:
(1) There is a position of sufficient importance and responsibility to require
an incumbent in the grade of rear admiral or brigadier general and
(2) There is a woman officer of the Navy or the Marine Corps who is best
qualified to perform the duties of the position. With the exception of women in
the Medical Corps and Dental Corps of the Navy, women are excluded from the
normal selection and promotion process to flag grade by law.
There are two women rear admirals presently on active duty, one in the line and
one in the Nurse Corps, who were appointed under this authority. There are
presently no female Marine Corps generals.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
62
RESPONSE OF HON. ANTONIA HANDLER CHAYES TO ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUESTIONS
POSED BY SENATOR PROXMIRE
Question 1. What is the primary role of women in your service? What do you
think their role should be?
Answer. The primary role of women in the Air Force is no different from the
primary role of men in the Air Force. That role is to provide a trained and motivated personnel resource to accompMsh the Air Force mission. There is a legal constraint on the extent of the role of women in the Air Force. Section 8549 of Title
10, U.S. Code, specifies that women may not be assigned to duty in aircraft engaged in combat missions. Air Force policy further sttates that women may not be
assigned to duty where there is a high risk of capture or injury due to hostile fire.
DOD has initiated a study requested by Congress of the proper definition of
"combat." The results of that study should clarify the extent of utilization of
women within the present statutory restrictions, therefore Congress will be in a
better position to address the actual combat restrictions.
Question 2. What major changes in policy have occurred since 1970 regarding
any modifications in Air Force policy regarding women?
Answer. The following major changes have occurred:
1970-Women Air Force members adopting or acquiring minor children could
remain on ·active duty unless they requested discharge.
1971-Pregnant Air Force women could request waiver to mandatory separation to stay on active duty.
1972-Plan to triple the number of women and expand their utilization was
approved.
1974---Public Law 93-920 established uniform enlistment standards for men
and women.
1975--Pregnant Air Force women could remain on active duty unless they requested voluntary separation.
1975--Public Law 94-106, Title VIII, Sec. 803, provided that women were
eligible for appointment and admission to service academdes.
[1975-Test program to train women pilots and navigators for non-combat aircraft was approved.
197~Test of 100 enlisted women to be trained as security force specialists was
approved.
Question 3. Have there been any projections regarding the potential of men
and women for your service? Would a change in the policy regarding women affect
the potential pool?
Answer. The Air Force has been committed to expanding the use of women and
therefore expanding the size of the total availaible pool. A change which would
allow commissioned women to participate in combat missions in all types of aircraft would open 18,000 rated officer positions to women. While the size of the
potential pool would be increased by opening these rated positions, we cannot accurately predict the propensity of women to volunteer for such positions nor the
Vlill of the American people as expressed through Congress to support the use of
women in a combat profession.
A change in law involving women in combat would have little impact on the
number of enlisted women that could be used since all except seven Air Force enlisted specialties are open to women. There are, however, factors which indicate
the capability to expand the potential pool significantly may be limited. The combination of vocational aptitude test score results, labor force entry, and propensity
to enter the military are all considerations when the ·actual size of a qualified and
available female resource pool is examined. The Air Force has large requirements for personnel in scientific/technical fields, areas for which women currently
demonstrate significantly lower aptitudes than men. For example, in recent Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) results only 4 percent of females
qualified in the electronics area, yet 25.5 percent of all Air Force enlisted skill requirements are in this area. Latest available Department of Labor figures for
high school graduates (age 2~24) show 64 percent of women enter the labor force
compared to 94 percent of the men. Finally, ASVAB data reflects 3.4 percent of female high school juniors and seniors in'dicate future military plans versus 8.2
percent of males.
Question 4. What effort has been made to recruit qualified men to your service? Qualified women? What constitutes a qualified man? Qualified woman?
What are the differences in qualifications for men and women, and why do they
exist?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63
Answer. Air Force Recruiting Service directs the efforts of its recruiters to
select, from civilian sources, sufficient numbers of men and women who meet
the required mental, moral and physical standards in order to meet programmed
Air }j'orce objectives for nonprior service, prior service, Officer Training School,
and nurse, medical, dental, veterinary, and biomedical science corps. Air Force
recruiters also provide qualified referrals to the Reserve Forces for enlistment.
Additional efforts to attract men and women include recruiting advertising,
assistance from active and retired Air Force members in stimulating support
and applicant referral, and the development of enlistment incentives.
In order to qualify for enlistment in the Air Force, men and women must
achieve a General Score of 45 and a Composite Score of 170 on the portions of the
Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) used by the Air Force.
Further, men and women must achieve a score of 21 to 99 on the Armed Forces
Qualification Test if they are high school graduates or state certified GED. Nonhigh school graduates must achieve a score or 65 to 99 on the same test. :\1en and
women must be between the ages of 17 and 28 with parental consent required for
those under 18. Only American citizens, citizens of American possessions/territories and registered aliens may be enlisted in the Air Force. In all cases,
enlistees must be of good moral character while meeting the medical fitness
standards as identified by the Air Force Surgeon General.
The only differences in required qualifications for men and women are physical.
Although the minimum and maximum height requirements are the same for
men and women, the maximum weight by health and age differ due to the difference in male/female anatomical structure. Other biological differences between
men and women dictate dissimilar physical examinations.
Question 5. How do you specifically recruit women? What type of guidance do
you give a women seeking to join your service regarding the life style she might
expect?
Answer. Women are actively recruited from civilian sources in the same
manner as men. Our recruiting objectives are based on skill requirements needed
to support the Air Force manpower structures. Each field recruiting unit is then
given specific monthly objectives for men and women. Men are recruited into
all available skills; women are recruited into all available skills except those
prohibited by law or policy.
Women (and men) are provided information concerning the Air Force through
advertising media, films and personal interviews. The purpose of tl1is information
is to depict the Air Force life style to include pay, promotion, career and educational opportunities in a factual "tell-it-like-it-is" manner. Additional emphasis
is given to explaining to women those opportunities in "non°traditional" fields
which are available to them.
Q·uestion 6. What is your position on the issue of keeping legislative statute
versus vesting policy decisions in the Secretary of the Air Force on the use of
women? Do you feel that this should be out of the hands of the service secretaries
and vested in the Secretary of Defense ·1
Answer. The Air Force has not requested a change to Section 8549, Title 10,
U.S. Code. If Congress concludes that legislative restrictions are no longer
appropriate, Congre,~,s should eliminate or amend the statute. The Air Force
envisions no policy difference between SecAF and SecDef.
Question "I. The Army and Navy have a number of studies aYailable on the
use of women in a number of of non-traditional areas. What studies have the Air
Force done that deal specifically with the role of women in the Air Force? What
are the conclusions of these studies?
Answer. The Air Force has made periodic assessements of the role of women in
the Air Force. The findings from these reviews have been to use developing plans
for progressively increasing the participation of women in the Air Force.
Significant assessments occurred in 1965, 1967, 1972, 1974 and 1975. The extensive study concluded in 1975 resulted in a quantitative methodolog-y for establishing accession objectives for women. This methodology specifically considers
the resource pool, labor market entry and propensity to enter military service.
It also considers the limits resulting from combat and facility restrictions. There
is an inherent adaptability in this methodology. An annual review ie scheduled to
update the factors in the methodoolgy as well as incorporate any new ones. As a
result, any changes in societal trends or Air Force policies can be on better utilization of women as a personnel resource, increases in the total numbers of women
recruited, opening of more job specialties to women, and conversion of housing
from male to female dormitories to house more women at more locations. The
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
64
total number of Air Force women on active duty has increased every year since
1965 (from 8,841 on 30 June 1965 to 39,650 on 30 June 1977).
The Air Force position has been to continue to strive toward balancing costeffecti veness, equal opportunity, and military preparedness while responding to
the will of the American people as expressed through the Congress.
Question 8. Are women required to meet the same training and performance
requirements as men on the job assigned?
Answer. Yes. Each person who enters the Air Foce is assigned an Air Force
specialty. Prerequisite qualifications for entry into a specialty and the duties
and responsibilities to be performed are contained in Air l!'orce Regulation
(AFR) 39-1 ( Enlisted Personnel) and Al!'R-36-1 ( Officer Personnel) . There is no
differentiation in the entry requirements or tasks to be performed based on sex.
Question 9. What are the educational opportunities that the Air Force provides
for men and women? Are there professional school programs'/ How many women
and men are selected to attend these? What are the criteria for selection and
admittance to these programs? How many HOTC scholarships go to womennumber and percentage?
Answer. The Air Force provides an extensive network of voluntary and primarily off-duty educational opportunities for men and women through the Air
Force Education Services Program. These range from high school completion and
basic skill development (i.e., reading skills), through certificate, associate, baccalaurE-ate and graduate programs. Many of these programs are conducted on
Air Force installations, by civilian schools, world v1.ide. 'l'he Air Force encourages
the educational growth of its people by providing 75 percent tuition assistance for
voluntary off-duty study. Those eligible may choose to use in-service Veterans
Administration educational benefits. The Air Force also provdes for its men and
women to engage in full-time study in a variety of degree and non-degree programs to meet our education requirements. These programs are primarily in the
professional (medical, legal, etc.) and scientific and techncal management areas.
The Airmen Education and Commisi,;ioning Program provides for highly qualified
enlisted personnel to attend college full-time to obtain technical degrees needed
by the Air Force followd by commissioning through Officer Training School. Additionally, the Community College of the Air Force enables our enlisted personnel
to integrate teclmieal training and voluntary off-duty civilian college education
into programs that lead to Associate in Applied Science Degrees related to their
Air Force specialties.
Professional military school programs for officers are provided at ithree levels.
'l'he basic level is represented by the Squadron Officer School for which officers
with over 2 and under 8 years of commissioned service are eligible to attend.
Selection for each of four offerings annually are made by major commands on a
best qualified basis. During academic year 1976-77, 2,522 men and 104 women
attended the school.
The intC'rmediate level of professional military education is presented by the
service and joint command and staff college. USAF officers primarily attend the
Air Command and Staff College at Maxwell AFB, Alabama. Eligibility begins at
selection for promotion to the grade of major ( 0--4) and terminates at 15 years
comr:1issioned service. Selection for school attendance is on a best qualified basis
from among those officers promoted to major. During academic year 1977-78,
620 male and 4 female USAl!' line officers will attend the various intermediate
colleges. The 4 selected to attend represents 4.6 percent of the 86 line female
majors on board as of 30 June 1977, while the 620 males represents 4 percent of
the line male majors.
Senior level officer professional military education is provided by the National
Defense University and the ·war Colleges operated by each military department.
Eligibility begins at selection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel
(0-5) and terminates at 21 years of commissioned service. Selection to attend is
on a best qualified basis from among promotees to lieutenant colonel and early
promotees to colonel (0-6) who were not previously nominated to attend.
During academic year 1977-78, 326 male and 3 female USAF line officers will
attend the senior service colleges. The 3 selected to attend represent 6.8 percent
of the line 0-5 and 0-6 females on board as of 30 July 1977, while ,the 326 line
male officers represent 2.2 percent of the line males in these grades.
In addition, through correspondence courses and seminar programs at base
level, all officers have the opportunity to complete initial, intermediate, and
senior service schools. Those who successfully complete these courses receive
a diploma from the appropriate PME school.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
65
Non-commissioned officer (NCO) professional military education is a fully
integrat!!(l :five phase program designed to prepare NCOs for positions of responsibility by broadening their leadenihip and management skills and by expanding
their perspectives of the military profesison. Phase I consists of an 18 hour
NCO Orientation Course conducted at base level. It is required for all E-4/Senior
airmel). prior to appointment to NCO status and approximately 48,000 attend
yearly. Phase II consists of a 52 hour USAF Supervisor's Course at base level
and if is required for all NCOs upon :first reenlistment. Approximately 21,000
attend annually. Phase III is the 8-week Command NCO Leadership School.
Eligibility includes all E-4/Sergeant and E-5's on second or subsequent enlistments. During :fl.seal year 1976, 12,115 males and 594 females attended the
schools. fhase IV consists of the 5-week Command NCO Academies. Eligibility
includes all E-6 and E-7 and selectees. During :fiscal year 1976, 5,700 males
and 68 females attended tJhe Command Academies. The :final course is 9 weeks
and E-8 and selectees and E-9's are eligible to attend. Selections are made by
major commands selection boards on a best qualified basis. During :fiscal year
1976, 1,202 males and 8 females ·attended the Senior NCO Academy. Selection
opportunity for females for the NOO professional military education programs
is comparable to or exceeds that of males.
Women compete on an equal footing for ROTC scholarships in :fields for
which they are eligible. They are not currently eligible to compete for scholarships in the pilot, navigator, or missile categories. These categories account for
2,124 scholarships. For academic year 1976-77, the majority of the remaining
2,287 scholarships were in the scienti:fl.c/technical fields-fields with low female
representation. Women held 848 (15.8 percent) of the 2,287 scholarships.
Que{ltion 10. While the Air Force has increased the number of enlisted women,
has the number of female line officers increased proportionately? Does this, or
does tbis not, include nurses?
Answer. The number of female line officers, excluding nurses, has increased
approximately 52 percent from fiscal year 1972 to end June 1977, compared
to an increase of about 198 percent in the number of enlisted women. Many
factors have influenced the lower proportional gain in the line officer force. Most
important is the fact that roughly half of the line officers are pilots, navigators
and missile launch officers, :fields not currently open to women. However, line
women accessions have steadily increased since 1978. The increases occurred
despite sharp rreductions in officer strengths and accession levels. Since line
accession requirements are driven by specific skill requirements, we had to use
male resources where the resource of qualified women is limited-specifically
in the engineering skills. Additionally, in :fiscal year 1976, a prioritization of
skills needed at a low procurement level resulted in heavily decreased procurement objectives in management areas-where the bulk of the qualified female
resource exists. In terms of increased rrepresentation, 1,842 line women officers
were serving in June 1977 versus 1,218 in June 1972. The category of line officers
does not include individuals serving in legal ,chaplain or health related professions. Total women officer representation was 5,262 in June 1977 versus 4,766
in June 1972.
Quest-ion 11. How are women promoted in the Air Force? Are the promotion
!Joards for women different than promotion boards for men? Are men and women
promoted by the same criteria?
Answer. All officers eligible for promotion to a given grade (men and women)
are considered at the same time by the same board without distinction. Air Force
officers are assigned to one of nine promotion categories, within which they
compete equally : Line of the Air Force, Medical Corps, Dental Corps, Nurse
Corps, Biomedical Science Corps, Medical Service Corps, Veterinary Corps,
Chaplain Corps, and Staff Judge Advocates. Although the needs of the Air Force
determine the specific quota for each promotion category, men and women are
considered under the same criteria. The "whole person concept" is used to assesR
each officer's potential to effectively serve in the next higher grade. This includes
a subjective evaluation of his or her record of performance, professional and
academic education, breadth of experience, job responsibility, professional competence, combat/achievements, and leadership ability. If selected, all officers are
promoted sequentially based solely on seniority as vacancies occur.
Air Force enlisted women are promoted under the same criteria as men. All
(male or female) must be eligible and recommended by their immediate commanders. Following information relates to promotion to specific enlisted pay
grades:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
66
To E-2 and E-3: Based on individual attainment of minimum six-month timein-grade and immediate commander's recommendation.
'.ro E-4 (Below-the-Zone): Unit commanders may nominate up to 10 percent
of those airmen who meet rthe criteria and who are within six months of the dateof-rank cut-off as announced by the Air Force Military Personnel Centers
(AFMPC). The Central Base Selection Boards are held quarterly and they select
10 percent of the total nominated for Below-the-Zone promotion to E-4.
To E-5 through E-7: All airmen compete under the weighted airman's promotion system. Individuals are aligned in merit listings based upon total scores
and quota supplied. Those above the quota cut-off line are the selectees.
To E-8 and E-9: Promoted by a combination of board evaluation and weighted
factor scores. The Board scores and weighted scores are combined to establish
an order merit listing and the persons above the quota line are selected. Men
and women are promoted by the same criteria with no distinction in regard to
sex.
Question 12. A recent article stated that the Air Force has selected the people
who will be included in the space shuttle program. Who has been nominated? How
many of these are women? What were the criteria used in making the selections?
Who chose rthe persons involved?
Answer. 133 Air Force officers were chosen for nomination to the space
shuttle program. 68 out of 348 applicants were chosen in the pilot category. 65 out
of 578 applicants were chosen in the mission specialist category. One woman mission specialist applicant was chosen for nomination out of 15 female pilot and
mission specialist applicants.
a'o identify officers who would be nominated to the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA), board members selected applicants on a best
qualified basis. Application criteria are shown below:
Piwts
U.S. Citizen.
5--13 years' service.
NASA Class I Physical
Bachelor's Degree in Engineering, Math, or Physical Sciences.
1,000 Hours First Pilot in Jet (Note 1) Fighter Type Aircraft.
2,000 First Pilot Hours '(desired).
Test Pilot Experience (desired).
Combat Experience (desired).
Mission Specia'U8ta
U.S. Citizen.
5--13 years' service (Note 2).
NASA Class II Physical.
Master's Degree in Engineering, Math, or Biological or Physical Sciences
(Note 3).
Notes:
1. Waiver for Extensive Multi-Engine Time.
2. Waiver for Exceptional Candidates.
3. Masters Can be Waived for Extensive Experience.
a'he A.ir Force Astronaut Nomination Board convened on 16--20 May 1977 at
the Air Force Military Personnel Center at Randolph AFB, Texas. Former
Astronaut Major General Thomas P. Stafford presided over this board of 2
Brigadier Generals and 9 Colonels.
Question 13. Are women at the Air Force Academy trained precisely the same as
men? If there is any difference, what is it? Why? If 10 U.S.C. 8549 were repealed
modified, would this difference still exist?
Answer. The academic and military training programs at the Air Force
Academy were unchanged by the entry of women. Accordingly, the training received by the women in these areas is identical to that received by men. Minor
changes were required in the physical training program to accommodate for physiological differences as authorized by Public Law 94-106. Specific changes include rthe substitution of fencing and body building for women in lieu of boxing
and wrestling. In addition, flexed arm hangs have replaced pullups. One objective of the physical training program has been to insure an equal amount of
physical effort is required by both the men and women rather than equal performance. The Air Force believes this objective has l1een met.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
67
A repeal of 10 U.S.C. 8549 would have no impact on the academic, military, or
physical training programs currently in effect at the Air Force Academy.
Que&tion 14. What studies have been done, or are now underway, that look at
the overall performance of men and women in your service? What were the
results of these studies?
Answer. There are no specific studies, which have been done or that are now
underway that look at the overall performance of men and women in the Air
Force. Performance expectations and measurements are identical without regard
to sex.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
THE ROLE OF WOMEN IN THE MILITARY
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1977
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
SuncoM:t\HTTEE ON ProoruTIEs AND
ECONOMY IN GOVERNMENT OF THE
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE,
.
Washvngton, D.O.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 :03 a.m., in room
5302, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. William Proxmire ( chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present : Senator Proxmire.
Also present: Richard F. Kaufman, general counsel; G. Thomas
Cator, William Chastka, Deborah Norelli, Ron Tammen, and Annie
Lesher, professional staff members; and M. Catherine Miller and
Mark R. Policinski, minority professional staff members.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PROXMIRE, CHAIRMAN
Senator PROXMIRE. The subcommittee will come to order.
The Subcommittee on Priorities and Economy in Government of
the Joint Economic Committee meets today for a second hearing dealing with the issue of women in the Armed Forces.
It is the responsibility of the Joint Economic Committee to investigate instances of economic discrimination in various sectors of the
labor force. The military is this country's largest employer, with over
2 million personnel. Of this total only about 6 percent are women.
Now, the Congress of the United States has made it clear that we are
opposed to discrimination on the basis of sex as well as on the basis of
race, and this has been a long, hard fight in the private sector. It would
seem very clear that, if the Federal Government means what it says, it
should have the largest employer that it has, to wit the military, follow that practice of no discrimination.
It's obvious that the military has not been able to achieve that as
yet, although some people have made commendable efforts, and I
think we have made some progress. But we want to see that that
progress continues.
During the first hearing on the role of women in the military on
July 22 the assistant secretary for manpower of the three services,
accompanied by deputy chiefs for personnel, presented testimony
which in some cases called into question the commitment of the Defense Department in moving toward equity for women in the miiltary.
For example, Air Force testimony indicated that there was considerable question as to whether or not a woman should be allowed to
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
( 69)
70
fire a nuclear missile i£ so ordered by the President. One Air Force
general suggested that there were undefined "flight control pressures"
whioh might disqualify a woman from being a pilot.
The Army confirmed that, although £aced with a serious potential
shortfall in recruiting, the number 0£ women projected £or Army
service will remain constant at about 50,000 through 1982.
The Navy took the most ag~ressive and corrective stance 0£ the
three services. By seeking legislation to allow placing women on
board ships and as pilots, the Navy has attempted to open up new
job classifications for women and overcome some 0£ the inequities
that result from uneq_ual promotion policies. But the Navy still has
not resolved the question 0£ how many women to place on temporary
duty on combatant ships or what kind 0£ ships would be used £or
this purpose.
The issue 0£ women in the military is a critical ingredient in our
£uture decisions on the All-Volunteer Army. The July hearing confirmed that women recruits surpassed male recruits in terms 0£ education and scores on standardized tests. Women have a higher retention
rate than males. And women lose about 50 percent less time than men
while on the job-including the pregnancy £actor. The facts are that
women lose 0.63 percent 0£ days available for service, mainly due
to pregnancy, while men lose 1.10 percent 0£ days available £or service, mainly due to desertion, alcoholism, and drug abuse.
180 that would indicate that the more women we recruit, the higher
the quality 0£ the military, and in very important terms 0£ intelligence, education, and retention.
To show the absurdity 0£ the current situation, just imagine a university which allowed women to hold a variety 0£ jobs but explicitly
excluded them from teaching, the primary role of the university,
just as fighting is the primary role of the military. Or, to carry the
analogy a step further, imagine a trained surgeon being barred from
the operating room simply because she is a woman.
It has been asserted that most people argue there is a strong public
distaste for women in combat. Well, I question the people, as many
people as I can in Wisconsin every 6 months, and in my last questionnaire I got a response from over 10,000 people. One 0£ the questions
was should women be allowed to volunteer £or combat. The answer
to that was more than 2-to-1 yes. It's overwhelmingly in favor. There
certainly isn't any indication 0£ public opposition and to the extent
we could determine this, there was no difference in the attitude between men and women.
Before I introduce the panel this morning, I would like to make
one other point.
The case, I think, for better opportunities for women in the military is overwhelming, but the road is far longer, the climb is much
steeper than we might expect.
Women have had the door to advancement slammed in their faces
not only in the military, but in every position 0£ power and influence,
not only in this country, but in most countries and virtually throughout almost all 0£ human history. We are trying to overcome a deeply
ingrained process where, through decisions made in our country and
other countries, women are left out.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
71
Consider this body in which I serve, the U.S. Senate. There are
100 members. And how many women¥ None. How many of our 38
Presidents of the United States have been women¥ None. How many
Vice Presidents have been women¥ Not one.
How many have been seriously considered i None. How many
Supreme Court Justices have been women¥ None. Of the 50 Governors, only 2 are women. Of our 435 Representatives, only about
3 percent are women.
Of the top 6,000 people in American big business, Fortune magazine found only 11 women and 10 of those 11 were in positions of
authority because they were the daughters or wives of the owners
of the corporation; and only 1 had been promoted to her position
of authority on her merits; all of which seems to me a terrible indictment of the prejudice and ~eat economic loss that we suffer in this
country by not recognizing literally half of our talent.
So, ID all fairness, the military is not alone in excluding women
from positions of authority. And because of the propensity to violence and :physical strength tha.t war historically demanded, because
those qualities have been deemed to be masculine characteristics-and in my view thef are emphatically not in any relevant sense-this
prospective discrimmation against women in all countries and every
phase of public and private life must be faced if we are to realize
the long, long way we have to go and the mountain we have to climb
!O giye women something like equal opportunity in the U.S. military
ID this century.
Let me just say in conclusion the subcommittee indicated during
its first day of hearings, such provocative testimony from the Defense
Department requires equal time from public witnesses. Therefore, we
have with us today representatives from several national women's
organizations and women who have held high rank in the Armed
Forces.
The subcommittee looks forward to hearing their testimony so that
their ideas might be incorporated in any legislation to be presented
to Congress. By law, the Secretary of Defense is required to present
the Congress with a report by November on the status of women in
the military with recommendations for increasing job opportunities,
eliminating discrimination, and redefining the term "combat."
We have with us today Jill Laurie Goodman of the American Civil
Liberties Union Women's Rights Project; Carol C. Parr, president
of the Women's Equity Action League and National Coalition £or
Women in Defense; Maj. Gen. Jeanne M. Holm, U.S. Air Force,
retired, former "Women In The Air Force," Director and Special
Assistant £or Women to President Ford; Col. Mary A. Hallaren, U.S.
Army, retired, former Women's Army Corps director; and Pat
Leeper of the National Organization for Women.
I will ask that all witnesses first present their oral statements in
sequence, limiting that testimony to 10 minutes each, and then we
will move to the question-and-answer period. The prepared statements will be printed in the hearing record.
We don't want to make you nervous but, so that you have a notion
of how your time is running, we will start the clock when you begin.
The green light will go for 9 minutes, the yellow light for 1 minute,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
72
and then the red light will go on; and, since men usually overrun the
time, feel free to do the same. [Laughter.]
Our first witness is Jill Laurie Goodman of the American Civil
Liberties Union.
STATEMENT OF J'ILL LAURIE GOODMAN, STAFF COUNSEL, WOMEN'S
RIGHTS PROJECT, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
Ms. GooDM:AN. I am Jill Laurie Goodman, staff counsel to the Women's Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.
·
The American Civil Liberties Union is a nationwide, nonpartisan
organization of over 250,000 members dedicated to the protection of
individual rights and freedoms. Recognizing that restrictions on the
opportunities available to women ·are a pervasive problem, the American Civil Liberties Union established the Women's Rights Project
to work toward elimination of gender-based discrimination.
In furtherance of the goal of full equality· for women in the military, the Women's Rights Project has filed suit on behalf of a group
of Navy enlisted women and officers challenging a statute, 10 U.S.C.
6015, which bars Navy women from service aboard Navy ships. This
suit, Owens versus Brown, CA 76-2086, D.D.C., now before Federal
District Court Judge John Sirica, requests a judgment declaring the
statute unconstitutional on the grounds that it denies Navy women the
equal protection of law.
As staff counsel for the Women's Rights Proj~t, I have seen the
difficulties faced by military women whose careers a,re hindered by
legal restrictions imposed solely because of sex. My remarks today
will draw heavily on that experience and knowledge.
The basic lesson to ibe ,learned from the experiences of Navy women
are important in considering the overall role of women in the military.
While women in the Navy may not serve on ships because of statutory
restrictions, women in the Army are barred from combat, and Air
Force women may not fly planes. Thus women in other services find
they, too, are welcomed into the Armed Forces and then told they may
not participate in the essential missions of the services that recruited
them.
The experiences of Navy women show that equality of opportunity
is impossible so long as a restriction as fundamental as that barring
women from ships remains. Such restrictions necessarily generate
further restrictions and quotas which drastically limit opportunities
for training, education, assignments, and promotions. These difficulties are described in detail in appendixes A and B of my prepared
statement, which I have submitted to this subcommittee.
In the Navy, we find that over half of the total billets-job assignments-are found aboard ships. Thus, women find the total number
of jobs, as well as the kind of jobs, for which they may compete,
greatly restricted. Often the precise kind of training or the particular
billet they need to develop skills to further their careers is outside
their reach no matter how skilled or promising they may be.
Promotion becomes more difficult in both overt and subtle ways. For
example, enlisted women in the Navy advance in part through a series
of examinations which test practical knowledge about shipboard equipment which men-but not women-see as a matter of course in their
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
73
everyday life. A Navy woman, who has been permitted to board a ship
only as a guest, faces a severe disadvantage when she sits for that
examination.
Occasionally, the ordinary requirements for advancement are simply
waived. For example, early in their careers Navy pilots must qualify
as aircraft commanders, which requires a tour of sea duty. A few
women have been permitted to train as pilots and have been allowed
to qualify as aircraft commanders without meeting that requirement.
Nevertheless, women who must depend for advancement upon the
waiver of ordinary requirements find themselves in an awkward position. Because they achieved their positions through special rules, the
suspicion remains that they could not otherwise compete equally with
their male counterparts.
The problems that have attended attempts on the part of the services to offer equal opportunities while basic and pervasive restrictions
on the service of women remain may be the reason for the retreat from
earlier initiatives. The Navy, for example, opened all ratings-enlisted
occupations-to women in 1972, but as women found themselves with
shipboard skills they could not develop or use and the Navy found
itself with skilled craftswomen it had trained but could not employ,
entry into ratings was again limited.
Despite the obvious and difficult problems created by partial integration, the armed sevices are reluctant to accept women as full partners in the military. The current approach seems to be to leave open
the pos.sibility for full integration while experiments are designed,
studies made, and reports supplied.
Two objections must be raised to this approach, which says that all
possibilities must be studied in abundant detail before changes can
be made. First, the approach begins with an incorrect assumption.
The assumption underlying the call for more studies is that women
must prove themselves in each separate job, task, and as.signment before the armed services can be expected to change.
Second, this approach demands a degree of certitude impossible
to satisfy. The performance of women has been studied repeatedly and
the anticipated problems never proved insurmountwble.
Underlying the call for more studies is resistance to the idea of
women in combat. This resistance reflects three separate concerns.
First, are women sufficiently fit in terms of strength and other physical
<'haracteristics to serve effectively i Second, will problems develop if
both sexes work side-by-side in the military, no matter how fit women
nre for military service i And third, is it moral for women to be in
combat, no matter how effectively they would serve i
Turning first to the question of physical strength, we find, as Senator
Proxmire pointed out, in a modern armed services, which depends on
sonhisticated technology, the concern that women may not be strong
enough should not carry the weig-ht it might have in the days when
wars were primarily hand-to-hand combat.
For the few occupational specialties that do require substantial physical strength. women should be judged on the basis of individual abilities rather than class characteristics. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
requires civilian employers to do this. "\Ve should expect 1as much
from the military.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
74
Turning next to the concern about men and women working sideby-side, we find evidence from experiments with integrated units that
integration does work. The Commander-in-Chief of t.ihe United States
Atlantic Fleet, for example, concluded his report on the U.S.S.
S(lfMtuary experiment with women aboard ships with the statement
that: "In summary, given the SanctUJary's conclusion that both men
and women have merged into members of a common disciplined crew,
the pilot program has clearly been a success."
But, even if difficulties do develop in integrated units, women alone
should not be blamed for creating those difficulties, nor should they
alone bear the consequences. Solving those difficulties, which may well
be the result of inexperience with mtegmtion rather than with integration itself, is the responsibiliity of a.ll personnel, particularly officers who are trained to handle personal and managerial problems.
Faced with the question of racial integration, the armed services
mwe a commitment to racial integration based not on military necessity, but on the principle of equality. The potential for serious difficulties was tremendous. Relations between races in this country ihave always held a high potential for violence. The confined atmosplhere of a
ship or the strained ;eressure of combalt increases this potential. But
the armed services did nort suggest that the answer WiaS t.o restrict
opportuniities for blacks. Rather, commitments of time and money were
made to make racial integraltion work. The Navy, for example, developed a sophisticated training progmm in race relations including
classroom, seminars, and workshops for all personnel. The program,
prompted in part by shipboard disturbances, has an annual price
tag of $850,000 in direct costs. If it should prove necessary, the same
kind of commitment could be made to insure the success of sexual
integration.
Sexually integrated combat units also raise the specter of a changed
image of the U.S. military. There is no simple answer to the question
of how friend or foe abroad will perceive the use of women m combat; no one knows for sure what would happen. A recent article by
George Quester suggests the impact might well be favorable; Mr.
Quester says:
"* * * an all-male military force smacks of an imperialist army,
while femaie participation in combat signals a defense of what is one's
own-a signal we wish to send." Furthermore, according to Quester,
"other nations may wel~ perceive the increased use of women as proof
that the United States 1s at the forefront of social progress."
Turning last to the question of the morality of having women in
combat, we find this concern is the hardest to answer. It springs from
deeply felt and strongly held convictions about the nature of men and
women.
The question of the ri2"htness of women in combat, apart from the
feasibility, is based on two concerns. First, should women be 'the ones
to be killed in battle i And, second, should women be the ones to do
the killing i
I suggest that concern for exposing women to the dangers of war is
misplaced. It is based on the untenable proposition that the lives of
women are more valuable than the lives of men. But I find it doubtful
that mothers or fathers weep more for their daughters than for their
sons.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
75
The question of whether women should be permitted to kill is more
difficult to answer. The only response I suggest is to return to simple
and basic principles. Characteristics of bravery, strength, intelligence,
and aggression are not assigned at birth according to a scheme based
on sex any more than they are assigned according to race. By the same
token, a democratic society colilIIlltted to the principle of equal protection under law has no justification for allocating obligations, responsibilities, or privileges according to sex.
Congress need not at this time determine the difficult question of
whether women should be required-as opposed to permitted-to go
into combat. Neither men nor women are currently required to serve
in the Armed Forces. Congress should, however, permit women to volunteer for service on the same basis as men, and, once in the service,
women, like men, must then accept the assignments given them.
In short, women are entitled to assume a role of full and equal partnership with men in the Armed Forces of this country:. Congress and
the executive branch should move toward that goal with all the speed
which is deliberate and due.
SENATOR PROXMIRE QUESTIONS PHYSICAL PERCEPTIONS OF WOMEN
Senator PROXMIRE. I want to commend you, Ms. Goodman, on a
fine oral statement; but you skipped over one part of your prepared
statement that I think deserves to be underlined and emphasized.
Let me just quote from your prepared statement where you say:
Even if the average woman recruit is "smaller, weighs less, and is physically
weaker than the vast majority of. male recruits." it does not follow that the
woman who is big, heavy and strong should be restricted in her opportunities.
The average woman recruit is also "much brighter, better educated-a high
school graduate--scores much higher on aptitude tests and is much less likely
to become a disciplinary problem." But no one has suggested the armed services
should restrict opportunities for men in the military because most women are
smarter.
I think it is a point that we should not miss.
Ms. GooDMAN. Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement, with appendixes A and B, of Ms. Goodman follows :]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JILL LAURIE GOODMAN
I. INTRODUCTION
I am Jill Laurie Goodman, staff' counsel to the Women's Rights Project of
the American Civil Liberties Union. I welcome the opportunity to address you
on the issue of women in the military.
The American Civil Liberties Union is n nation-wide, non-partisan organization of over 250,000 members dedicated to the protection of individual rights and
freedoms. Recognizing that restrictions on the opportunities available to women
is a pervasive problem, the American Civil Liberties Union established the
Women's Rights Project to work towards elimination of gender-based
discrimination.
During the past decade, lawyers associated with the ACLU have participated in many of the landmark constitutional cases challenging sex-based
discrimination on equal protection grounds, including Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71
(1971), Frontiero v. Richa,rdson, 411 U.S. 677 (1973), Kahn v. Shevin, 416 U.S.
351, Weinberger v. Wiesenfeld, 420 U.S. 636, and OaZifano v. Goldfarb, - - U.S.
- - , 97 Sup.Ct.1021 (1977).
In furtherance of the goal of full equality for women in the military, the
Women's Rights Project has filed suit on behalf of a group of Navy enlisted
23-366-78-6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
76
women and officers challenging a statute (10 U.S.C. 6015) which bars Navy
women from service aboard Navy ships. This suit, Owens v. Brown, 1 now before
federal district court Judge John Sirica, requests a judgment declaring the
statute unconstitutional on the grounds that it denies Navy women the equal
;protection of law. According to well established constitutional principles "classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and must be
substantially related to achievement of those objectives." Craig v. Boren, - - U.S.
- - , 50 L.Ed. 2d 397 (1976). From the information gathered to date in the
course of litigation it appears that no governmental objective is served by the
restriction. Instead, it serves only to make full equality for Navy women
impossible.
As staff counsel for the Women's Rights Project I have seen the difficulties
faced by military women whose careers are hindered by legal restrictions imposed solely because of sex. My remarks today will draw heavily on that experience and knowledge.
n.
m::P.tll&llllNuES OF NAVY WOMEN
The lessons learned from the experiences of Navy women are important in
considering the overall role of women in the military. While women in the
Navy may not serve on ships because of statutory restrictions, women in the
Army are barred from combat and Air Force women may not :fly planes because
of a combination of statutes, regulations, and policy.• Thus, women in other
services, find they, too, are welcomed into the armed forces and then told they
may not participate in the essential missions of the services that recruited
them.
These· 1essons take on particular significance now when proposals are being
made to increase the number of women in the military without changing the
restrictions that preclude women from the essential work of the military. The
recently published Brookings Institute report, for example, advocates expanding the number of women in the military until women make up 22 percent of the
armed services. This can be accomplished, the report suggests, without lifting
the most basic and crippling restriction which haunts women in the militarythe combat restriction.•
The experiences of Navy women show that equality of opportunity is impossible so long as a restriction as fundamental as that barring women from ships
remains. Such restrictions necessarily generate further restrictions and quotas
which drastically limit opportunities for training, education, assignments and
promotions.•
Over half of the total billets in job assignments in the Navy are found on
!'hips.• Thus, women find the total number of jobs, as well as the other kinds of
jobs, for which they may compete greatly restricted. Often the precise kind of
training or the particular billet they need to develop skills to further their
careers ls outside their reach no matter how skilled or promising they may be.
Promotion becomes more difficult in both overt and subtle ways. For example,
enlisted women in the Navy advance in part through a series of examinations
which test practical knowledge about shipboard equipment which men-but not
women-see as a matter of course in their everyday life in the Navy. A Navy
woman, who has been permitted to board a ship only as a guest, faces a severe
disadvantage when she sits for that examination.
Occasionally, the ordinary requirements :fior advancement are simply waived.
For example, early in their careers Navy pilots must qualify as aircraft commanders, which requires a tour of duty at sea. A few women have been permiitted to train as pilots and have been allowed to qualify as aircraft command1 CA 76-2086 (D.D.C. l
• Some of these barriers are beginning to fall. The Army now trains women to throw
hand grenades (see testimony In the first phase of these hearings). The Navy has requested changes in legislation which would permit women to serve in some instances on
non-combat shi-ps (see New York Times, March 3, 1977). And the Air Force has begun
a small, experimental program to train women as pilots and navigators In support aircraft
(see testimony in the first phase of these hearings). But the numbers of women in these
programs and the situations In which they are permitted to use their skills are painfully
limited and too insubstantial to have any impact on the services or the women In them.
• Binkln and Bach, Women in the Military, 1977 (hereafter, Blnkln and Bach). p. 109.
• The kind of dlfficult,E's Navy women confront Is described In detail in the Complaint,
,ip. 4-12, and In the Memorandum In Support of Motion for Class Certification, pp. 3-6,
Owens v. Brown, 8Upra, appended to this testimony.
5 The Navy has 272.71l'i sea billets and 238,943 shore billets, Discovery obtained by the
pla!nt!Jrs in Owens v. Brown, supra.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
77
ers without meeting that requirement. Nevertheless, women who must depend
for advancement upon waiver of ordinary requirements find themselves in an
awkward position. Because they achieved their positions through special rules,
the suspicion remains that they could not otherwise compete equally with their
male counterparts. Dispelling that suspicion is virtually impossible no matter
how competent, intelligent and professional an individual woman may be.
These limited opportunities resulting in the partial integration of women in
the military, have recently been described by a Naval officer in the Judge Advocate General Oorps as causing "disharmony, hostility, disenchantment, and
disillusionment among both senior and junior, male and female, officer and enlisted personnel." •
The problems that have attended attempts on the part of the services to offer
equal opportunities, while basic and pervasive restrictions on the service of
women remain, may •be the reason for a retreat from earlier initiatives. The Navy,
for example, opened all ratings (enlisted occupations) to women in 1972,7 but
as women found themselves with shipiboard skills they could not develop or use
and the Navy found itself with skilled craftswomen it had trained but could
not employ, entry into ratings was again limited. Now 24 out of 102 ratings are
entirely closed to women, and even in the ratings technically open to women,
the quotas for women are often small.
Thus the problems encountered by Navy women show that partial integration
which permits women to serve but precludes them from the essential missions
of the armed services does not work. Equal opportunity is impossible when
women are subjected to special rules, exceptions and restrictions.
III. FULL INTEGRATION
Despite the obvious and difficult problems created by partial integration, the
armed services are reluctant to accept women as full partners in the military.
The current approach seems to be to leave open the possibility for full integration while experiments are designed, studies made, and reports filed. This, for
example, is the approach recommended in the Brookings Institute report.•
Two objections must ·be raised to this approach, which says that all possibilities
must be studied in abundant detail before changes can be made. First, the approach begins with an incorrect assumption. The assumption underlying the
call for more reports is that women must prove themselves in each separate job,
task and assignment before the armed services can be expected to make changes.
As far as the Air Force is concerned, it is not sufficient that women flew virtually
every kind of military airplane, including combat aircraft, in World War n.•
Nor is it sufficient that the Navy has successfully trained women pilots. This committee was told that the Air Force needs more studies because no "definitive
studies" have been done "in the commercial world of flying multiengine aircraft by women." 10
Second, this approach demands a degree of certitude impossible to satisfy.
The performance of women has been studied repeatedly and the anticipated
problems never proved insurmountable. The Navy experimented with women
aboard ships and concluded that "women can perform every shipboard function
with equal ease, expertise, and dedication as we do." u Under new legislation
and in the glare of great publicity, women entered the military academies last
year. They performed with distinction, and the academies weathered the storm
of change without undue hardship." This subcommittee heard testimony about
an Army comparing the performance of women and men in basic traiuing which
concluded that women had no particular problems, "even including throwing the
hand grenade." 18 During World War II the Army compared women and men
operating just behind the front lines and concluded that women presented fewer
• Hoover, The Disadvantaged Navy Woman, U.S. Navy Proceedings, July 1977, p. 120.
• Test!Jmony of Robert L. Nelson, Joint Economic Committee, Subcommittee on Priorities
nnd Economy In Government, July 22, 1977 (hereafter Testimony on Women in the
Military).
• Binkin and Bach, pp. 109-112.
9 Ibid., p. 7.
10 Testimony of Lt. General B. L. Davis, Testimony on Women in the Military.
11 Third Endorsement on CO, USS Sanctuary (AH 17) Ltr ser 351 of 19 Nov. 1973, from
Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, to Chief of Naval Personnel, Documents provided by defendant In OwrnB v. Brown.
12 " 'So Far, So Good,' A Report on Coed Military Academies," U.S. News & World Report,
Jul:v 11, 1977, np. 26-31.
"'Testimony of General J. P. Kingston, Testimony on Women in the M1lttary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
78
problems for the Army than did men.14 The military's response to those studies
is to order more.
·
Underlying this call for more studies is a resistance to the idea of women in
combat. This resistance reflects three concerns. First, are women sufficiently fit
in terms of strength and other physical characteristics to serve effectively? Second, will problems develop if both sexes work side by side in the military, no
matter how fit women are for military service? And third, is it moral for women
to be in combat, no matter how effectively they would serve?
A. Physical strenuth
In a modern armed services, which depends on sophisticated technology, the
concern that women may not be strong enough should not carry the weight it
might have in the days when wars were fought primarily by hand-to-hand combat. Nor should that concern be used to restrict opportunities for officers who,
presumably, are called on for their technical, intellectual and leadership skills
rather than for their physical strength.
For the few occupational specialties that do require substantial physical
strength women should be judged on the basis of individual abilities rather than
class characteristics. Civilian employers are required, by the Civil Rights Act of
1964, to do precisely that. The Air Force, is currently developing methods for
testing individual physical abilities.18 The other services can surely follow its lead.
Even if the average woman recruit is "smaller, weighs less, and is physically
weaker than the vast majority of male recruits." ,. it does not follow that the
woman who is big, heavy and strong should be restricted in her opportunities.
The average woman recruit is also "much brighter, better educated (a high school
graduate), scores muich higher on aptitude tests and is much less likely to become
a disciplinary problem." 11 But no one has suggested the armed services should
restrict opportunities for men in the military because most women are smarter.
The possibility that women may bear children also calls into question their
fitness for certain kinds of service. Again, each woman ought to be judged on the
basis of individual, rather than class characteristics. Some women may choose
not to bear ichildren ; others may be unable to. Even if class characteristics are
taken into account, the capacity for childbearing does not justify denying women
equal opportunity. In fact, women lose fewer days from military jobs than men,
even when time lost because of pregnancy is included.18
B. Workinu side b1} Bide
The armed services anticipate problems from sexually integrated units such
as the resentment of service wives and the chance for mischief caused by increased sexual relations. The experiences with integrated units like the USS
Sanctuary should lay these fears to rest. The Commander-in-Chief of the United
States Fleet, for example, concluded his report on the Atlantic Sanctuary experiment with the statement that: "In summary, given the Sanctuary's conclusion
that both men and women have merged into members of a common disciplined
crew, the pilot program has clearly been a success." 19 The integration of the
military academies is another example of the ease with which women can take
their place beside men.
But even if difficulties develop, women alone should not be blamed for creating
those difficulties, nor should they alone bear the consequences. Solving those
difficulties, which may well be the result of inexperience with integration rather
than with integration itself, is the responsibility of all personnel, particularly
officers who are trained to handle personal and managerial problems. Again, the
USS Sanctuary experiment is instructive : "While numerous difficulties developed,
all are capable of solution or tolerable* * *"""
Faced with the question of racial integration, the armed services made a commitment to racial integration based not on military necessity, but on the principle
of equality. The potential for serious difficulties was tremendous. Relations between races in this country have always had a high potential for violence. The
"Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Manpower, Reserve Alfairs and Logistics),
Use of Women in the Military, May 1977 (hereafter, Use of Women in the Military), p. 6.
See Binkin and Bach, pp. 81-82.
Use of Women in the Mllitary, p. 2.
Ibid.
1• Binkin and Bach, J>, 63.
10 Third Endorsement on CO, USS Sanctuary (AH 17) ltr ser 351 of 19 Nov. 1973, from
Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet, to Chief of Naval Personnel, Documents provided
by defendant in Owens v. Brown.
IOJbid.
18
10
11
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
79
confined atmosphere of a ship or the strained pressure ot combat increases this
potential. But the armed services did not suggest that the aruiwer was to restrict
opportunities for blacks. Rather, commitments of time and money were made to
make racial integration work. The Navy, for example, developed a sophisticated
training program in Tace relations including classroom, seminars and workshops
for all personnel. The program, prompted in part by shipboard disturbances, has
an annual price tag of $850,000 in direct costs."- If it should prove necessary, the
same kind of commitment could be made to insure the success of sexual integration.
Sexually integrated combat units also raise the specter of a changed image of
the United States military. There is no simple answer to the question of how
friend or foe aboard will perceive the use of women in combat; no one knows for
sure what would happen. A recent article by Professor George Quester suggests
the impact might well be favorable: "* * * an all-male military force smacks of
an imperialist army, while female participation in combat signals a defense of
what is one's own-a signal we wish to send." .. Furthermore, according to
Quester, other nations may well perceive the increased use of women as proof
that the United States is "at the forefront of social progress." 23 Certainly, the
attitude of the armed services would influence whether the full participation of
women in the armed forces is seen as a symbol of strength or weakness.
O. Morality
This concern is the hardest to answer because it springs from deeply felt and
strongly held convictions about the nature of men and women. General Kingston
in his testimony before this committee voiced these concerns when he said: "But
the question, I think is whether we really want to do that as a society and what
is the impact on the men as well as the women?"
The question of the rightness of women in combat, apart from the feasibility,
is based on two concerns. First, should women be the ones to be killed in battle?
And second, should women be the ones to do the killing?
Both the Army and the Air Force, in testimony before this subcommittee,
expressed concern for exposing women to the dangers of war. According to Assistant Secretary Antonia Handler Chayes, Air Force regulations were written "to exclude women from positions where there is the high risk of capture
or injury because of hostile fire." Assistant Secretary Robert Nelson testified
that women are "excluded from those areas and restricted from those positions
where the probability of becoming a combat casualty is the greatest." The Army's
position is translated into complex formulae which permit an increasing percentage of women as the distance from the battlefront increases.
That concern for the safety of women is misplaced. It is based on the untenable
proposition that the lives of women are more valuable than the lives of men.
But it is doubtful that mothers-or fathers-weep more for their daughters than
their sons.
The question whether women should kill which Assistant Secretary Chayes expressed when she asked: "Are we ready to require women to turn the keys to
launch nuclear missiles?", is more difficult to answer.
The answer is to return to simple and basic principles. Characteristics of
bravery, strength, intelligence and aggression are not assigned at birth according to a scheme based on sex any more than they are assigned according to
race. By the same token, a democratic society committed to the principle of
equal protection under law has no justification for allocating obligations, responsibilities, or privileges according to sex.
Congress need not at this time determine the difficult question of whether
women should be required to go into combat."' Neither men nor women are
currently required to serve in the armed forces. Congress should, however, permit women to volunteer for service on the same basis as men, and, once in the
service, women, like men, must then accept the assignments given them.
Our recommendations, then, are these: statutes, rules, regulations and policies
that restrict the service of women should be abolished. Title X of the United
21 Defendant's Answer to Plaintlfr's Second Interrogatories, Owens v. Brown, C.A. 762086 (D.D.C.).
: fbtd~ter, Women In Combat, International Security, Vol. 1 (Spring 1977), p. 91.
.. The policy of the American Civil Liberties Union on conscription states: "Military
conscr!,ption is a severe Infringement of individual liberties. at best tne resort of a nation
facing an imminent threat. It must rest upon the interests of national security, what James
Madison called "the impulse of self-preservation." ACLU believes that government has the
duty to prove to the public that so drastic a step as conscription is required today."
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
80
States Code should be revised to give the Navy authority to assign women to
ships, including combat ships, and the Air Force authority to assign women to
aircraft engaged in combat missions. The experiences of women in the military
in World War II, in other countries, and currently in the United States armed
services should be studied in order to understand how to make full integration
of the services work, not to question whether there should be full integration.
In short, women are entitled to assume a role of full and equal partnership
with men in the armed forces, and Congress and the Executive branch should
move towards that goal with all the speed which is deliberate and due.
APPENDIX A
United States District Court, District of Columbia
YONA OWENS, NATOKA PEDEN, SUZANNE HOLTMAN, KATHLEEN BYERLY, SUZANNE
RHIDDLEHOOVER, and JOELLEN DRAG, individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, PLAINTIFFS.
v.
HAROLD BROWN, indi.idually and in his capacity as Secretary of Defense, and
G. WILLIAM CLAYTOR, individually and in his capacity as Secretary of the
Navy, DEFENDANTS.
Civil Action No. 76-2086
AMENDED COMPLAINT
I. NATURE OF ACTION
1. This class action challenges the constitutionality of 10 U.S.C. § 6015, which
forbids Navy women from serving aboard United States Navy vessels. The
statute deprives plaintiffs and the members of their class of their right to the
equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the due process clause of the fifth
amendment to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring the statute unconstitutional, an injunction forbidding the defendants
from enforcing the statute, and damages to compensate them for the denial
of their constitutional rights.
II. JURISDICTION
2. This action arises under the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution. The court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The amount in controversy, exclusive of costs and interest, exceeds the sum of $10,000. Declaratory relief is sought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § § 2201 and 2202.
III.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
3. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to Rule 23 (a) and (b) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on their own ·behalf and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated. The members of the class are too numerous to be
joined in one action, although the precise number of class members is not known
at this time.
4. The class is composed of all past, present, and future women serving in the
Navy who have been, are, or will be adversely affected in their educational,
employment, professional service and career advancement opportunities, both in
the Navy and in their subsequent civilian careers, by the enforcement of 10 U.S.C.
§ 601:i.
5. The questions of law common to the class are whether 10 U.S.O. § 6015 violates plaintiffs' right to the equal protection of the laws ,guaranteed by the
fifth amendment to the United States Constitution and, if so, what relief is
appropriate.
6. The named plaintiffs have claims typical of the class.
7. Counsel for plaintiffs have extensive experience litigating sex discrimination
cases. The named plaintiffs are wholly committed to the goals of ending the sex
discrimination caused by enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015 and of obtaining adequate relief for themselves and the class. The named plaintiffs can therefore
fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
8. 'l'he defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the class,
thereby making appropriate final injunctive and declaratory relief with respect
to the class as a whole.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
81
IV. PA.BTIES
A. Plaintiffs
9. Plaintiff Yona Owens is a woman. She enlisted in the United States Navy
on June 1, 1973, and resides at 1200 South Court House Road, Apartment 705,
Arlington, Virginia.
10. Plaintiff Natoka Peden is a woman. She enlisted in the United States Navy
on September 7, 1973, and resides at 91-886 Makule Road, Apartment 103, Ewa
Beach, Hawaii.
11. Plaintiff Suzanne Holtman is a woman. She enlisted in the United States
Navy on November 23, 1973, and resides at 1200 South Court House Road, Apart>
ment 137, Arlington, Virginia.
12. Plaintiff Kathleen Byerly is a woman. She enlisted in the United States
Navy on February 21, 1966 and was commissioned August 18, 1966. She resides
a,t 3008 Driscoll Drive, San Diego, California.
13. Plaintiff Suzanne Rhiddlehoover is a woman. She enlisted in the United
States Navy on December 15, 1971 and was commissioned on June 9, 1972. She
resides at 2250 Flushing Drive, San Diego, California.
14. Plaintiff Joellen Drag is a woman. She enlisted in the United States Navy
on January 3, 1973 and was commissioned May 16, 1973. She resides at 912
Pomona Avenue, Coronado, California.
B. Defendants
15. Defendant Harold Brown is Secretary of Defense and, as such, is ultimately
responsible for the enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015. He is sued individually and
in his official capacity as a representative of all other administrators, officers,
and agents charged with enforcing 10 U.S.C. § 6015.
16. Defendant G. ,vmiam Claytor is Secretary of the Navy, and, as such, is
directly responsible for the enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015. He is sued individually and in his official capacity as a representative of all other administrators,
officers, and agents charged with enforcing 10 U.S.C. § 6015.
V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A.. Defendants' treatment of the class of Navy women
17. Defendants, by enforcing 10 U.S.C. § 6015, forbidding the service of women
aboard Navy vessels, have denied plaintiffs and members of their class educational, employment, professional service and career advancement opportunities
given to similarly situated men in the Navy. Because of the discriminatory
statute, plaintiffs and the members of their class have been denied opportunities
given similarly situated men to train for certain jobs, to enter certain occupations, to compete for and hold particular jobs, to receive re-enlistment bonuses
for those jobs, to use and develop the skills for which they have been trained, to
advance within the Navy, and to take part in life at sea, the most crucial experience for understanding the Navy's history, traditions, and mission, and the core
experience of Navy life.
B. Pla,i,ntiff Yona Owens
18. Plaintiff Yona Owens is an Interior Communications Electrician; Navy
members with this occupational specialty (hereafter, "rating") repair and maintain complex electrical equipment, much of it essential to the navigation of Navy
vessels and found only aboard ships.
19. Plaintiff Owens has requested that she be assigned a job (hereafter,
"billet") on a Navy ship, but the Navy has refused her request because 10 U.S.C.
§ 6015 prohibits the assignment of Navy women to Navy ships.
20. The Navy has assigned Plaintiff Owens only to shore billets; these assignments have given her less opportunity than similarly trained men in shipboard
billets to use, maintain and improve the skills and knowledge required for her
rating.
21. The Navy's refusal to assign Plaintiff Owens to a shipboard billet has also
deprived 'her of the supervisory experience given her male colleagues assigned
to shipboard billets.
22. In order to get promotions in the Navy, Interior Communications Electricians must pass exams which require mastery of the electrical work on complex electrical navigational equipment found only aboard ships. Men assigned to
shipboard billets have virtually daily experience working on such equipment and
thus acquire a competitive advantage in passing such tests over women who do
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
82
not have such daily experience. Plaintiff' Owens has achieved promotions, but
only by expending extra time, effort, and money-not required of her male colleagues-to acquire the requisite skills and information during her off-duty
hours.
C. Plaintiff Natoka Peden
23. Plaintiff Natoka Peden is a Navy photographer (the Photographer's Mate
rating).
24. Before enlisting in the Navy, Plaintiff Peden told a Navy recruiter that she
was interested in career opportunities in both photography and diving, but he
informed her that the Navy did not allow women to be divers. On information
and belief, the Navy has this policy because 10 U.S.C. § 6015 prohibits the assignment of women to Navy ships, and divers must work predominantly from ships.
25. Because of this policy, Plaintiff Peden did not apply for and was unable
to attend diving school after completing her training in her assigned rating,
although a similarly situated man could have done so; instead, she immediately
began work as a Photographer's M,ate after completing her training.
26. Subsequently, Plaintiff Peden sought tra,ining in ExpLosive Ordnance DisposaI diving, work involving both the handling ,of underwateT explosives and
sophisticated diving techniques. Plaintiff Peden attempted to apply for training
in this diving specialty, despite her knowledge that the Navy trained only men
for this work, but her Navy surperiors actively discouraged her from completing
the application process. Defendants have denied Plaintiff Peden training in
this diving S:Qeeialty. On information and beHef, the Navy still refuses to train
women for Explosive Ordnance Disrposal diving because of 10 U.S.C. § 6015.
27. The Navy has, however, trained Plaintiff Peden as ,a Second Ctass diver,
work involving the diving techniques-but not the hand1'ing of underwater
explosives-in which she was interested. However, the Navy has not assigned
Plaintiff Peden any work as a diver, uruike similarly trained male Second Glass
divers.
28. The Navy frequently assigns male Second Class divers as a fourth support
diver to three-man Explosive Ordnance Disposal diving teams; ,the team is deployed with a ship, and the support diver is assigned working dives along
with the Explosive Ordnance Disposal divers. However, the Navy refuses to
assign Pla,inti.ff Peden as a surpport diver to such a team because of 10 U.S.C.
§ 6015, 'and Plaintiff Peden is consequently denied occupational experience given
to men with the same training she has.
29. The Navy refuses to assign Plaintiff Peden any working dives, and aHows
her to dive only for recreational purrposes and to maintain her qualifications as
a diver.
30. When Plaintiff Peden lE:laves the Navy, she expects to become an oceanographer. Lack of diving experience will severely handicap her in this career,
but the Navy refuses to give her this professional development opportunity it
gives to similarly placed men.
D. Plaintiff Suzanne Holtman
31. Plaintiff Suzanne Holtman is a Yeoman.
32. Plaintiff Holtman joined the Navy for adventure, greater educational op-portunities, and the chance to be treated equwlly with men, without the discrimination based on sex she had encountered :in her civilian jobs. She would
like to serve aboard ship, as ma1e Yeomen do, but is precluded from such an
assignment by defendants' enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015.
E. Plaintiff Kathleen Byerly
33. Plaintiff Kathleen Byerly is an Unrestricted Line Officer who holds the
rank of lieutenant commander. Unrestricted Line Officers are the officers trained
to take command on the front lines of battle and to assume primary responsibility for management of Navy operations.
34. As a lieutenant commander with eleven years of Navy experience, Plaintiff
Byerly has reached the middle stages of her career. A distinguished officer she
is now serving as the Aide and }'lag Secretary to Commander Training Command, U.S. Pacific Fleet. This position entails 1acting as the administrative liaison officer between the admiral and his staff and the admiral and his ten
subordinate commands. She is the first women to hold such a position.
35. Plaintiff Byerly would like to take command at sea. For male Unrestricted
Line Officers, command at sea is one of the most prized assignments. Unlike male
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
83
officers, Plaintiff Byerly knows ·she cannot receive such a command because of
defendant8' enforcement of 10 U.S.C. §6015.
86. The most important assignments in the middle stages of Unrestricted Line
Officers' careers are tours of duty as Commanding Officers and Executive Officers. Commanding Officers are the officers charged with the ultimate legal and
moral responsibility for the safety, well-being, and efficiency of all personnel and
operations under their command. They are the officers who take command of a
ship, base or unit. Executive Officers are second in command and act as direct
representatives of the Commanding Officers.
87. Performance in tours of duty as Commanding Officers and Executive Officers is the prime criterion for assessing the abilities of Unrestricted Line Officers
and judging their capabilities for advancement to top Navy positions.
88. Most Commanding Officer and Executive Officer billets are either billets
aboard ship or billets on shore which require an officer who is eligible for command at sea. As a result of defendants' enforcement of 10 U.S.O. §6015, Plaintiff
Byerly has not and will not be permitted to sene in most billets for Commanding
Officers and Executive Officers. Thus, Plaintiff Byerly will be denied the most
challenging jobs and the jobs which would most enhance her opportunities for
career advancement.
89. Throughout her career, Plaintiff Byerly has been denied most of the assignments which would have allowed her to develop skills and establish leadership
credentials necessary to compete with male Unrestricted Line Officers for future
command level positions. Defendants' enforcement of 10 U.S.C. §6015 will continue to bar her from many challenging jobs available to male Unrestricted Line
Officers. These restrictions on job opportunities injure Plaintiff Byerly's opportunities for advancement.
40. Plaintiff Byerly has also suffered the same injury from the refusal of defendants to allow her to earn a warfare specialty as alleged in paragraphs 42-44.
P. Plaintiff Suzanne Rhiddlehoover
41. Plaintiff Suzanne Riddlehoover is an Unrestricted Line Officer who holds
the rank of lieutenant.
42. Plaintiff ruddlehoover, like virtually all women in the Navy, is prohibited
from earning a designation as a warfare specialist because 10 U.S.C. §6015 •bare
women from service at sea. Male Unrestricted Line Officers, in contrast, are all
permitted to work for designations as warfare specialists and learn how to take
command of a surface ship, a submarine, an aircraft squadron, or a special warfare unit. Thus, male Unrestricted Line Officers all enjoy opportunities for training denied Plaintiff Rhiddlehoover.
48. Lack of a warfare speciality injures Plaintiff Rhiddlehoover's opportunities for advancement in the Navy. Gaining competence in a warfare specialty is
the chief way junior Unrestricted Line Officers prove they are capable of aSS1Uming greater authority and responsibility. Because Plaintiff Rhiddlehoover has no
warfa1-e specialty, she cannot follow the normal path, available to all male Unrestricted Line Officers, for proving she is a good candidate for command. This
will injure her when she competes with men for assignments as Commanding
Officer and Executive Officer.
44. Most Unrestricted Line Officer billets are reserved for officers with a specific warfare specialty. Unlike male Unrestricted Line Officers, Plaintiff Riddlehoover cannot serve in many of the billets coded for warfare specialists and thus
cannot hold most of the jobs she would like in the Navy.
45. As Plaintiff Riddlehoover advances in her career, she will experience the
same injuries alleged in paragraphs 85-39.
G. Plaintiff Joellen Drag
46. Plaintiff Joellen Drag i-s an Unrestricted Line Officer who holds the rank
of lieutenant, junior grade. Defendants have permitted Plaintiff Drag to earn a
warfare speciality designation in aviation as part of the initial group of women
in a limited experimental program.
47. Plaintiff Drag is a helicopter pilot. She was recruited into the Navy to become a member of the first group of women trained as Navy pilots.
48. After completing flight training, Plaintiff Drag was assigned to a helicopter
combat support squwdron in San Diego, California. The principal work of the
squadron is supplying ships in the Western Pacific. Helicopter pilots in Plaintiff
Drag's squadron are temporarily assigned for six to eight months to supply ships
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
84
situated in the Western Pacific and assist these ships by transferring supplies to
the cruising vessels. Defendants' enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015 prevents the
assignment of Plaintiff Drag rto the supply ships, an assignment routinely given
to male helicopter pilots.
49. A secondary duty of Plaintiff Drag's squadron is supplying ships which
operate off shore in the area near San Diego, California. Pilots assigned to
this work take off from the squadron base, deposit supplies on the cruising ships,
and return to the shore bases ; they are not assigned to ships. However, defendants refuse to assign Plaintiff Drag to this work, commonly given male helicopter pilots, because defendants assert that 10 U.S.C. § 6015 bars Plaintiff Drag
from landing on or hovering over a vessel at sea.
50. Plaintiff Drag's opportunities to accumulate flight time and obtain additional qualifications within her warfare specialty have been and will be severely
limited by the restrictions on assignments mandated by 10 U.S.C. § 6015. Helicopter pilots, in the early stages of their careers, must qualify as aircraft commanders. This requires 300 hours of flight time. Because the Navy has so few
opportunities for flying helicopters which do not entail serving aboard a vessel
within the meaning of 10 U.S.C. § 6015, Plaintiff Drag qualified as an aircraft
commander much later than male pilots with similar training and capabilities.
51. Because 10 U.S.C. § 6015 restricts opportunities for women in the Navy,
Plaintiff Drag's opportunities for advancement will continue to be harmed by
her difficulty in finding Unrestricted Line Officer billets where she can develop
her skills as an aviation warfare specialist and an officer.
52. Plaintiff Drag will also suffer injury from the refusal of the Navy to permit women to command at sea and to serve in most billets for Commanding
Officers and Executive Officers as alleged in paragraphs 35---39.
VI. STATEMENT OF THE CLAIM
53. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate each allegation in paragraphs 1-52.
54. Defendants' enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015 discriminates against women
in the Navy on the basis of their sex by denying them educational, employment,
professional service and career advancement opportunities available to similarly situated men.
55. Accordingly, defendants have denied plaintiffs and the members ~f their
class the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the fifth amendment to
the United States Constitution.
VII. RELIEF
Wherefore, plaintiffs respectfully request that rthis court:
A. Certify this case as a class action.
B. Enter a final judgment declaring invalid 10 U.S.C. § 6015, to the extent
that it forbids women in the United States Navy from serving aboard Navy ves,:els, because it denies plaintiffs and the members of their class the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the fifth amendment to the United States
Constitution.
C. Issue a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining defendants, their
agents. employees, and successors from enforcing 10 U.S.C. § 6015 by refusing
to assign Navy women to serve aboard Navy ships and by otherwise adversely
affecting the educational, employment, professional service and career advancement opportunities of Navy women.
D. Award damages to plaintiff's and the class they represent for violations
of their constitutional rights, in an amount to be determined.
E. Award plaintiffs the costs of this action together with reasonable attorneys'
fees.
F. Grant nlaintiffs and the class they represent such other and further relief
as may be just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
,JILL LAURIE GOODMAN,
SUSAN DELLER Ross,
KATHLEEN WILLERT PERATIS,
American Oivil Liberties Union Foundation.
KATHERINE MAZZAFERRI,
TRUDY LEVY,
League of Women Voters Education Fund.
85
APPENDIX
B
United States District Court, District of Columbia
Y°ONA OWENS, NATOKA PEDEN, SUZANNE HOLTMAN, KATHLEEN BYERLY, SUZANNE
RHIDDLEHOOVEB, and JOELLEN DRAG, individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, PLAINTIFFS
v.
HAROLD BROWN, individually and in his capacity as Secretary of Defense, and
G. WILLIAM CLAYTOR, individually and in his capacity as Secretary of the
Navy, DEFENDANTS
Civil Action No. 76----2086
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOB CLASS CERTIFICATION
INTRODUCTION
This action, now before this court on a motion for class certification, challenges the constitutionality of the provision of 10 U.S.C. § 6015 which bars Navy
women from serving aboard vessels of the Navy.
The named plaintiffs are enlisted women and women officers who have been
injured by defendants' enforcement of the statute.' The enlisted women are an
Interior Communications Electrician who services electrical and electronic equipment, a Navy photographer who is also qualified as a Diver, and a Yeoman who
does secretarial work. The officers are a lieutenant commander at the middle
stage of her Navy career, a lieutenant who is still in the early stage of her career,
and a helicopter pl.[ot, recently trained as part of an initial experimental group
of women pilots in the Navy. All of these women have discovered that the challenged statute is a major obstacle to receiving training for certain jobs, entering
certain occupations, competing for particular jobs, developing skills for which
they have been trained, advancing within the Navy, and taking part in life at sea.
Plaintiffs seek to maintain this suit as a class action, pursuant to Rule 23
(b) (2), Fed. R. Civ. P. The class the named plaintiffs propose to represent
includes a:ll past, present, and future women serving in the Navy who have been,
are, or will be adversely affected in their educational, employment, professional
service, or career advancement opportunities, both in the Navy and in their
subsequent civilian careers, by the enforcement of 10 U.S.C. § 6015. Since the
action satisfies all prerequisites of Rule 23, Fed. R. Civ. P., it should be certified
as a class action.
POINT I--THIS ACTION SATISFIES THE PREREQUISITES OF RULE
RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
23
(a) OF THE FEDERAL
A. The class is so numero.us that joind,er of aZZ members is impraetieabZe
The six named plaintiffs, three enlisted women and three women officers, seek
to represent all women adversely affected by the statutory prohibition which bars
Navy women from service aboard Navy vessels. Because the restrictions flowing
from the challenged statute affect every phase of Navy life, the proposed class
encompasses virtually all Navy women. This vast number, including nearly
23,000 women now serving in the Navy,• is far too large to join in a single action.
In a service whose statutory purpose is organizing, training and equipping
operations at sea, 10 U.S.C. § 5012, it is entirely predictable that women would
find themselves handicapped by 10 U.S.C. § 6015, an absolute prohibition against
service at sea. Indeed, Navy women do find their opportunties for job training,
advancement and service in desired assignments greatly curtailed by the statute.
The 18,329 • enlisted women experience the effects of the statute as soon as
they enter the Navy, when they are denied entrance into and training for Navy
occupations. Many enlisted personnel are assigned ratings or job categories when
they enlist or during boot camp. The Navy then trains these people, through
both formal school instruction and on-the-job experience, in the skills they need
1 The suit was filed on behalf of a group of enlisted women. An amended complaint, addIng a group of officers. was flied simultaneously with this motion. Counsel for defendants,
pnrs11ant to Rule 15(a). Fed. R. Clv. P., has consented to the filing of the amended
comnlalnt.
• Women in the Nav;v In 1976 numbered 22,832. Defendants' answers to Plnlntlft's' First
Interrogatories (hereinafter "Answers to Interrogatories"), No. 1.
• Answers to Interrogatories, No. 9.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
86
to perform their jobs. Often this includes training in highly sophisticated and
technical skilils and crafts. The training is valuable both in the Navy and after a
stint in the Navy when it serves as the key to well-paying civilian jobs. But,
because women cannot go to sea, women are barred from certain ratings and job
training altogether, and their numbers are strictly regulated by quotas in other
fields. Women may not enter 15 ratings while entrance into 44 other ratings is
strictly limited;• women may not attend certain Navy schools.• In short, the
Navy quite naturally refuses to train women for the jobs they cannot do.
Enlisted women who manage to train for shipboard ratings in spite of quotas
find themselves trapped in other ways. Plaintiff Yona Owens, for example, was
sent to school to learn how to service and maintain complex electrical equipment
much of which is found exclusively aboard ships. However, when she finished
school she could find few billets or joh assignments where she could use her skills
and translate her schoolroom knowledge into on-the-job competency. As a result,
women like Plaintiff Owens find their skills lie dormant and eventually diminish
from lack of use. When these women take the competitive tests necessary for
advancement to a higher paygrade, they find they lack not only practical knowledge of sea life and shipboard procedures but essential knowledge in their own
fields. Only through expending extra time, not required of men, have women like
Plaintiff Owens achieved promotion. When these women re-enter civilian life,
they too cannot draw on Navy training to get decent jobs because their theoretical
knowledge has never become practical competency.
The 3663 • women officers in the Navy feel the effects of the challenged statute
in different but equally painful ways. Most women officers outside the Nurses
Oorps are Unrestricted Line Officers.~ The distinction of the Unrestricted Line
Officer is eligibility for command at sea; the goal of such an •officer is such
a command." Women Unrestricted Line Officers, however, are never eligible for
command at sea; they may never aspire to such a goal. Instead, their career
consists of trying to :lit into a pattern which was never meant for officers who
cannot '.Undertake sea duty.
Because women cannot go to sea, women, with a few rare exceptions 9, are
not permitted to earn a warfare specialty and learn how to take command of
a surface ship, a submarine, an aircraft squadron, or a special warfare unit.
The training in a warfare specialty serves as the foundation for a male Unrestricted Line Officer's career.1° Women have no comparable foundation and
thus no way of fitting into the normal pattern. Even without this handicap,
officers without a warfare specialty are barred from most Navy assignments
because billets for Unrestricted Line Officers almost always require an officer
with a specific warfare specialty.
When women pass the hurdle of finding a billet which a non-warfare specialist can fill, they :find additional roadblocks. Many of the prize middle level
and top -billets are either billets aboard ships or 1billets on shore which require
an officer who is eligible for command -at sea. Under the challenged statute,
women are not allowed sea duty nor are they eligible for command at sea. Thus,
they are excluded from most of the challenging jobs and the jobs most likely
to enhance their opportunities for career development.
As result of these severe limitations on the billets women Unrestricted Line
Officers can fill, women have few opportunities to develop managerial skills and
prove their value in difficult jobs. This in turn, hurts rtheir opportunities for
advancement in the Navy.
Thu§!, women in the Navy, both enlisted women and officers, live in a world
where outright prohibitions and strict quotas block their paths for training,
jobs, and advancement. These quotas and prohibitions hurt all women, because
when opportunities for certain training and jobs are restricted, competition for
the remaining opportunities becomes stiffer. In addition, because women cannot
a
• Answers to Interrogatories, No. 4, enclosure (3).
5 Answers to Interrogatories, No. 12.
• Answers to Interrogatories, No. 9.
• Of the 3,663 women officers, 1,195 are Unrestricted Line Officers and 2,112 are Nurse
Corps officers. Answers to Interrogatories, No. 6.
8 This statement of tnP purpose of goals of an Unrestricted Line Officer is found in Officer
Professional Development Division, Bureau of Naval Personnel. Unrestricted Line Officer
Carreer Planning Guidebook (hereinafter "Unrestricted Line Officer Guidebook") which is
prepared by the Bureau of Naval Personnel as the basic manual for career planning f-or
Unreatrictefl Line Officers. See pp. 7, 33.
• Plaintlfl' Joellen Drag, who has a warfare specialty in aviation, is one of the rare exceptions. Only 15 out of the 1,195 women Unrestricted Line Officers have warfare specialties.
In contrast, 35,060 out of 35,908 male Unrestricted Line Officers have warfare epecialties.
Answers to Interrogatorie~ No. 6.
10 See Unrestricted Linc, Officer's Guidebook, p. 7.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
87
go to sea, they are all denied the adventure and extra pay n that service at sea
entails.
Because the effects of the challenged statute reach into every corner of Navy
life, all of the nearly 23,000 women now serving dn the Navy are part of the proposed class. This alone makes a class obviously far too large to contemplate
joinder. In addition, the proposed class includes all past and future Navy women
who have suffered the effects of the challenged provision, which further augments the size of the ·class. See WetzeZ v. Liberty MutuaZ Insurance Co., 508 F. 2d
239 (3d Cir. 1975), and Afro-American PatroZmen's League v. Duck, 503 F. 2d 294
(6th Cir.1974).
Thus, the proposed class, without quesoion, meets the numerosity prerequisites
of Rule 23(a) (1).
B. There are questions of Zww and, fact oommon to the class
The significant questions in this case are those common to the class as a whole.
The dominant question is the constitutionality of a single statutory prohibition.
This question is common to all members of the proposed class, all Navy women
who have been adversely affected by the enforcement of the statute. The justifications the defendants will offer in defense of the statute will present questions,
both of fact and law, which again will be common to the entire class.
Of course, the precise nature of the injury varies from class member to class
member, but every injury emanates from a single statutory policy. In analogous
suits, alleging other kinds of discrimination, courts have certified classes in complex actions presenting varying fact patterns and raising diverse questions of
law. Barnett v. W. T. Grant Co., 517 F. 2d 543 (4th Cir. 1975), and Johnson v.
Georgia Highway E11Jpress, Inc,, 417 F. 2d 1122 (5th Cir. 1969). In this case, where
the challenge is directed toward a single statute injurying an entire class, the prerequisite of commonality is easily met.
C. The claims of the named, plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the class
The named plaintiffs are six Navy women who occupy different postions within
the Navy structure, who have been injured by the statute dn different ways. Together they present claims typical of the claims of the class they propose to
represent.
The named enlisted women hold a range of jobs typical of the kinds of work
done by Navy enlisted women. Plaintiff Suzanne Holtman is a secretary; her
claims are typical of women with jobs traditionally held by Nayy women. Plaintiff
Yona Owens, in contrast, is an electrician trained to service complex electrical
equipment; her claims are typical of enlisted women who are allowed to enter
fields traditionally reserved for men. In addition, these women have claims typical
of women serving in both shipboard job ratings requiring sea duty and shore
ratings. Plaintiff Owens, an Interior Communications Electrician, has a shipboard
rating while Plaintiff Hollman, a Yeoman, and Plaintiff Peden, a Photographer's
Mate, have shore ratings.
All three enlisted women have been injured in ways typical of the ways different
groups of enlisted women have been injured by the challenged statute. Plaintiff
Natoka Peden has claims typical of those Navy women who have been unable to
obtain job training. Plaintiff Peden sought training in explosive Ordnance Dispo.sal diving, work involving both the handling of underwater explosives and
sophisticated diving techniques. She discovered, however, the Navy refused to
train women for this job because of the challenged statute. Plaintiff Yona Owens,
as well as Plaintiff Peden, have claims typical of women who have managed to acquire some technical training but are barred from using that training to develop
practical competency. Plaintiff Owens is trained to service equipment which she
can neither .see nor handle because it is found only aboard ships; Plaintiff Peden
is supposed to service. As a result, passing competitive tests and gaining the pracPlaintiff Owens also has claims typical of enlisted women who find their paths to
advancement blocked by the challenged statute. She can acquire neither the practical sea experience her rating demands, nor the experience with equipment she
is supposed to service. As a result, passing competitive tests and gaining the practical experience necessary for promotion are both difficult. And Plaintiff Suzanne
Holtman has claims typical of the women, both enlisted and officers, who want
the adventure or experience of life at sea in order to understand the full breadth
of Navy life.
n Navy personnel receive up to $245.00 a month in incentive pay for serving aboard ships.
Answers to Interrogatories, No. 15, enclosure (21).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
88
The officers, like the enlisted women, represent a range of Navy experiences
typical of Navy women. Two plaintiffs, Kathleen Byerly and Suzanne Rhiddlehoover, have no warfare specialties. Their situation is typical of most women Unrestricted Line Officers, who have traditionally been barred from earning warfare
specialty designations because they cannot go to sea. One plaintiff, Joellen Drag,
has experiences typical of women who are part of the experiment in expanding
horizons for Navy women. She has a warfare specialty, aviation, and she is a pilot,
a role formerly reserved for men. Her situation is typical of women holdling nontraditional jobs in the Navy.
These officers also have claims typical of women in different stages of their
careers as Navy officers. Plaintiffs Drag and Rhiddlehoover, both relatively new to
Navy life, have claims typical of women beginning their Navy careers; Plaintiff
Drag has been an officer in the Navy for three years and Plaintiff Rhiddlehoover
for five. Plaintiff Byerly, in contrast, has claims typical of women in the middle
stages of a Navy career. A seasoned officer with eleven years of experience, Plaintiff Byerly now faces problems typical of those encountered by women Unrestricted Line Officers as they move toward the top of the Navy structure.
The injuries the named officers have suffered are also typical of the injuries
of the class they propose to represent. Plaintiffs Byerly and Rhiddlehoover, like
most Navy officers, have been denied the opportunity to qualify in a warfare
specialty and thus face the difficult task, typical of that faced by other Navy
women, of Jmilding a Navy career without the structure and goals which mark
the career of male officers. Plaintiff Byerly has the additional problem, faced
by all women. Unrestricted Line Officers in the middlle stages of their careers
of competing against men who have been able to distinguish themselves by serving aboard ships for positions as Executive Officers and Commanding Officers.
Plaintiff Drag's claims are typical of those of women who have, in the name of
equality for women, been permitted to enter new fields but find the challenged
statute restricts their opportunities to develop the skills necessary for proficiency
and advancement.
These six women, who have seen widely different corners of Navy life, together
satisfy the requirement of typicality.
D. The name plaintiffs wili fairly ana adequately protect the interests of the
class.
Fair and adequate representation of a class requires competent counsel and
plaintiffs with interests coinciding with those of the class. In Wetzel v. Liberty
Mutual Insurance Co., supra, the court said: "Adequate representation depends
on two factors: (a) the plaintiff's attorney must be qualified, experienced, and
)!'Pnerally able to conduct the proposed litigation, and (b) the plaintiff must not
have interests antagonistic to those of the class." Bee also Eisen v. CarUsle tf
JacqueZine, 391 F. 2d 555 (2d Cir. 1968).
Plaintiff's attorneys have had extensive experience litigating constitutional
claims on behalf of women. The named plaintiffs are all deeply concerned about
the position and future of women in the Navy. Their interests are in harmony
with those of the class, without antagonism or conflict. The named plaintiffs can
fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class and thus satisfy the
prerequisite of Rule 23 (a) (._4).
POINT II-THIS ACTION SHOULD BE CERTIFIED AS A CLASS ACTION UNDER
RULE 23 (bl (2) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
A certification under Rule 23 (b) (2), Fed. R. Civ. P., requires a case where
defendants "have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the
class" and where plaintiffs seek "final injunctive relief or corresponding dedaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole." Fed. R. Civ. P., 23 (b) (2).
This case fits squarely within that description. Defendants have refused to
permit any member of the class to serve aboard Navy vessels because the challenged statute prohibits them from doing so. Plaintiffs seek a declaration that
the statute is unconstitutional and an injunction forbidding the enforcement"
of the challenged statute and establishing procedures for women to begin serv-ing aboard Navy ships.
Rule 23 (b) (2) was enacted to facilitate litigation like this. According tothe notes of the Advisory Oommitee, Rule 23 (b) (2) was designed specifically
as a tool for civil rights litigators, Notes of the Advisory Committee on Rules
Relating to the 1966 Amendments of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 39 F.R.D.
102. Relying on the Advisory Commi ctee's description of the purpose of Rule 23.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
89
(b) (2), courts have found suits challenging discriminatory practices particularly well suited to class treatment under Rule 23 (b) (2). WetzeZ v. Liberty
Mutual Insurance Oo., supra, and Jenkins v. United, Gas Oo., 400 F. 2d 28 (5th
Cir. 1969).
This case, which fits so precisely the language and purpose of Rule 23 (b) (2),
should be certified as a (b) (2) class.
CONCLUSION
This suit satisfies all the prerequisites for a class action untler Rule 23 (a)
and (b) (2). Thus, this court should certify the action as a class action under
Rule 23(b) (2).
Respectfully submitted.
JILL LAURIE GOODMAN,
SUSAN DELLER Ross,
KATHLEEN WILLERT PEBATIS,
American OiviZ Liberties Union Foundation.
KATHERINE MAZZAFERRI,
TRUDY LEVY,
League of Women Voters Eaucation Fund.
Senator PROXMIRE. Colonel Hallaren, go right ahead.
STATEMEMT OF COL. MARY A. HALLAREN, U.S. ARMY, RETIRED,
AND FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE WOMEN'S ARMY CORPS
Colonel HALLAREN. This will take about 3 minutes, and I concede
the other 7 to anybody who wants them.
I am Mary A. Hallaren, executive director of Women in Community
Service, and a former director of the Women's Army Corps.
I understand that the utilization of women in the military has been
fully covered, and that I am to speak about women serving under
stress during World War II and their reactions. I have not made a
study of the subject, but I served overseas during the war years. I will
cite a few examples of stress and then be available for questions. I
might add that I was working this out under stress at 2 a.m. this
morning, when I got home. I am a Johnny-come-lately as a witness.
I received the notice to appear before the subcommittee yesterday.
I didn't know about the press release.
Senator PROXMIRE. You certainly are working under stress then.
Colonel lliLLAREN. Yes, so I would rather answer questions and not
go into too much detail.
I was commanding officer of the first ibattalion of American women
to ship overseas during World War II. When the Women's Army
Auxiliary Corps was established in 1942, apparently no one thought
that W AAC's would be serving in an overseas theater of operations.
But a requisition arrived from England and the first Women's Army
Auxiliary Corps battalion was mobilized. Before we embarked, however, the War Department-with great concern-sent representatives
to advise us that we were free to drop out of the shipment. As auxiliaries, we were not in the Army. If captured, we would not be protected by the Geneva Convention. I suppose we would be considered
"camp followers." The women's responses was typical, "We knew that
when we joined."
·when we boarded ship, the troop commander asked for the list of
women A WOL's. He said that we should not be surprised at any losses,
as there were always A WOL's from the men's units. He may have been
thinking, also, about the effect of the training film we were shown-of
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
90
an American troopship torpedoed in the North Atlantic. But we were
not surprised. The women were all present and accounted. for.
Parenthetically I should state the W AC's became part of the AUS
while overseas, and none of us was captured-WAC's served under
the buzz bombs and the V-l's and V-2's in London. During a raid,
there was a slight stiffening of the backbone until the bombing stopped.
Then everyone breathed freely again-until the next raid. However,
no one ever asked for transfer to a safe billet. I don't know whether
that could be said for the men or not. Those women were superb under
stress.
0£ course, they were volunteers-which may have accounted for
their fortitude. There are women-as there are men-who crack under
stress, who cannot take pressure; but working with men and women
over the last 50 years-iboth in and out of the Army-has convinced
me that it is the mdividual and not the gender that determines a person's strength under pressure.
Thank you, Senator.
Senator PRoXMIRE. Thank you very much, Colonel. [Applause.]
General Holm, please proceed.
STATEMENT OF MAJ'. GEN. JEANNE M. HOLM, U.S. AIR FORCE,
RETIRED
General HoLM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to start out by saying that I fully agree with your opening remarks.
I ·am pleased to have the opportunity to ·appear before you today. I
propose to skip over some portions of my testimony in the interest of
time.
'Sell!ator PROXMIRE. I might point out, as you may have noticed, the
light is broken. That is what happens when you have 100 men in the
Senate and no women to fix them.
General HOLM. How is this one 1
Senator PROXMIRE. Just speak into the mike; either one is fine.
PARTICIPATION OF WOMEN CITED AS IMPROVING EFFECTIVENESS OF MILITARY
General HOLM. There is ample evidence today that economies can be
realized and effectiveness enhanced by expanding the participation of
women in the Armed Forces.
1Ve are all acutely aware that serious implications of national security are involved, and I doubt if anyone who appears before this suboommittee would suggest that the capabilities of our forces to perform
their operational missions should be sacrificed to expediency or good
intentions.
As you have pointed out, Mr. Chairman, little is known about the
possible effects on military effectiveness as the numbers of women
increase and as they occupy more of the nontraditional jobs. Certainly
we need to move with caution where our combat capabililties are
involved.
I shall not take the time to relate how we got to where we are today
other than to say that the services have oome a long way in the past
10 or 12 years.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
91
In fact, I know of no other institutions in our country that ha·v•e ·accomplished what the Armed Forces have in this area during that time.
Having said that, the question before us today is not where we have
been but where we·are going.
I would like to touch briefly today on what seems to me to be the
central issues.
One of the questions you posed at the outset of these hearings, Mr.
Chairman, is whether, after the expansion of the past few yerars, the
services haven't decided to _slow down, level off, or even turn back the
clock.
Some of the data would indicate that a leveling off may have been
contemplated.
However, in view of the findings of the excellent study conducted
by the Brookings Institution and the latest Department of Defense
study, and, in view of the interest shown in this matter by your subcommittee, and the Secretary of Defense, renewed efforts on the part
of the services can probably be expected.
Increased utilization of military women has always been a difficult
concept for the milifary to accept. Military decisionmakers have traditionally thought of military women as the resource of last resort, after
substandard males, minorities, and civilians.
The fact that women jmprove the quality and cost effectiveness of
the force is a concept that military personnel planners have been reluctant to accept.
At the root of these attitudes is, I believe, a sincere but unsubstantiated conviction that somehow women will jeopardize the a:bility of
the Armed Forces to perform their operational missions. Also, there is
a. deeply held belief that national defense is a man's job.
In their final report, the Defense Manpower Commission observed
that, "The underlying concern in any discussion of military women is
the fear that too many women will lessen combat effectiveness." Yet,
they go on to point out that, by even the OSD definition of combat
forces, over half of the total active military strength is defined as
"support forces." They make the observation that the percentage of
women projected for 1978 "should have little, if any, impact on combat
effectiveness."
Both the Brookings study and the recent OSD study indicate that
the ability of the services to effectively utilize military women within
current policy and statutory constraints far exceeds future program
objectives. I agree with their assessments of the enlisted programs.
I only regret that neither study addresses the officer programs which
have generally been ovcrJookrd and ignored. The imbalances here and
the equal opportunity implications are far greater than with the
enlisted force.
In any discussion of expanding the roles of women in the military,
the bottom line is always combat.
Arguments for and against are largely ideological and emotional.
One of the problems is that distinctions between the various forms of
combat are usually not drawn. The vision of the foot soldier in the
foxhole is the most often elicited.
Obviously, there is a wide spectrum between the largely physical
roles of the infantry man and the technological role of the missilelaunch officer, so generalizations only cloud the issue.
23-366-78-7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
92
The present combat exclusions seem to be based more on policy considerations than on law or on known data concerning women's physical
capabilities, or-I must add-emotional stability.
The services have consistently asserted that their policies concerning
women and combat express the "intent of the Congress" and the "will
of the people." But I have never known the services to be shy
about expressing their views to Congress on other subjects. Nor have
they been reluctant to exert their influence on either the Congress or
the public. As you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, Congress must rely
on the military experts for advice in such matters. So must the public.
I know of no surveys that the services have conducted to determine
the will of the public on this subject. And I might add I know of none
conducted :for the Congress, for that matter.
But both the Army and Air Force have asserted that military women
should not be assigned to locations where they might be subject to
hostile fire for fear they might become combat casualties. Now, I assume that does not apply to nurses.
In this day of mobile strike forces, tactical and strategic bombing,
guerrilla warfare, and guided missiles, the rationale behind this
policy simply escapes me.
In view of the contribution of military women in every combat
theater during World War II and their service in Southeast Asia,
jncluding, I might add, the Tet offensive, it seems to me that the
services are, indeed, trying to set the clock back. American service
women have been shot at, some have died, from enemy action, s~me
have been prisoners of war, and many have received conibat
decorations.
As you know, there are two major statutory constraints on the
utilization of military women: Sections 8549 and 6015 of title 10 of
the United States Code. The former prohibits their use as members
of combat air crews engaged in combat missions. The latter applies
to service on combat ships of the Navy.No similar legal constraints are
imposed on the Army.
Without getting into the pros and cons of women in air crews and
combat ships, it seems to me that :from a purely management point of
view the Secretaries of the Navy and the Air Force ought to enjoy
the same prerogatives as the Secretary of the Army in determining
personnel policy and that they should have the same latitude under
the law to explore the full range of options in the utilization of their
people, subject always to the scrutiny of the Congress and policy
guidance from the Secretary of Defense.
I recommend that both statutes be repealed.
Repeal would not settle the combat issue, however.
There is a lot we don't know about women as combatants because
there is so little experience or data to go upon. Certainly, where is
reasonable doubt about their impact on combat effectiveness, caution
would be in order. As General Kingston has said : "We don't want to
do anything dumb."
Studies and tests that the services are currently doing could provide
very useful information and avoid serious mistakes.
On the other hand, it seems to me that the services could make some
commonsense judgment calls and not wait to be forced into decisions, as
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
93
with the academies, and, in some cases, without exhaustive studies
and test programs.
I do not need a fancy study or a test to tell me that a woman could
perform as well as man as missile-launch officer. I have been in missilelaunch facilities and have talked at length to the men with the keys.
There is nothing inherent in that job that a woman coud not or should
not do.
I agree with Secretary Chayes that this is a value question for the
military. However, I do not 'agree with the Air Force contention that
it needs to be resolved in the hght of public discussion and guidance.
This is a management issue in which the. Air Force can and should
take the initiative as it does in other more weighty matters. The Air
Force should bite the bnlJet and do it.
I applaud the Air Force's decision to train a few women as pilots
and navigators, but I am mystified bv what their best program is expected to prove; certainly not that women can fly airplanes. We already know that.
General Davis has alluded to possible "control pressure" problems.
Now, if that means what I think it does, it should apply equally to
men and women.
When I enlisted in the Army in 1942 and became a truck driver, I
suspect I had what might be classified as "control pressure" problems
driving a 2½-ton Army truck that had neither power steering nor
power brakes. The lesson I learned from that experience was that a
5-foot 3-inch, 115-pound person, male or female, probably didn't belong behind the wheel of a 2½-ton 1942 Army truck. It was simply
poor classification. I think 'l would have been better suited to fly a
B-29. [Laughter.]
In short, 11 see no reason why the Air Force program for training
women pilots and navigators needs to be so tiny.
The restrictions that keep women out of the cockpit have so profound an impact on opportunities for commissions and upon career
opportunities that early resolution of this issue is of paramount importance to ,the women officer program of the Air Force.
Full resolution, however, hinges on repeal of the law and resolution
of the combat issue. I have no problem with the idea of women as
members of combat air crews. Rated officer training programs are
voluntary. Anyone who applies must face up to the restrictions involved including the possibility of being shot down over enemy
territory.
As for the Navy, I recognize that they do have special concerns with
assigning women to combat ships and that accommodations represent
unique problems. However, these problems are not insurmountable
and could probably best be resolved on the larger surface ships like
aircraft carriers, at least initially.
One of the most PreSSing arguments for repeal of sedtion 6015 is
the realization that in the event of war when the Coast Guard is transferred to Na~ control, Coast Guard women would have to be removed
from their shipboard duties. This is a "Catch 22" situation. It simply
makes no sense. The change to section 6015 that has been proposed by
the Navy would not resolve this problem •and, in ,any case, is only a
half-way solution.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
!)4
While on the sutbjoot of the Navy, I am gratified that the Navy has
proposed, as a part of the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act,
DOPMA, to make provision for women officers of the line, supply,
chaplain, and civil engineer corps to compete with their male contemporaries for promotion. However, the history of DOPMA, as you
probably already know, has not boon encouraging. I would recommend
that se:parate legislation be introduced to remove the current restrictions.
I am also gratified that tb,e services 1are making conscientious e:fforts
to move women into the more nontraditional specialties. I fear, however, that.the systems they have set up may be too restrictive and that
opportunities for female applicants who •are qualified for the more
traditional jobs may be unnecessarily limited.
I am sure rthat all of us here today share the same objectives. In the
name of national defense we want to insure that the services maintain
forces of the highest possible quality and morale. All recent studies
on the use of military women indicate that they enhance the quality
of those forces and that the services, while they have made commendable progress in recent years, still have a long way to go in realizing
the full potential and benefits to be gained by expanded utilization of
this resource.
In the name of justice, equity, and fairness, we need to insure that
America's women are given the same opportunities to serve their
country fl,nd to share in the benefits and rewards that are derived
from such service. All myths must be separated from reality and then
reality must be dealt with in a manner that assures employment equity
to all human beings.
Thank you. :i: shall be pleased to respond to your questions. I assure
you I sh.all be as candid as I know how to be.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you, General Holm.
[The prepared statement of General Holm follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF
MAJ.
GEN. JEANNE
M.
HOLM
Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear before you today
on a subje<:t that has long been dear to my heart: The role of women in the
military.
There is ample evidence today that economies can be realized and effectiveness enhanced by expanding the participation of women in the Armed Forces.
We are all acutely aware that serious implications of national security are involved and I doubt if anyone who appears before this committee would suggest
that the capabilities of our forces to perform their operational missions should
be sacrificed to expediency or good intentions.
As you have pointed out, Mr. Chairman, little is known about the possible
effects on military effectiveness as the numbers of women increase and as they
occupy more of the non-traditional jobs. Certainly we need to move with caution
where our·combat capabilities are involved.
I shall not take the time to relate how we got to where we are today other
than to say that the services have come a long way in the past 10 or 12 years,
much farther than I envisioned in 1965 when I was appointed Director, Women
in the .Mr Force. Discriminatory policies and laws have been changed career and
job opportunities have expanded enormously, and the strengths have nearly
quadrupled in the intervening years.
Not all of this was welcomed with open arms by the military nor by all of the
women themselves. But I know of no other institutions in our country that have
accomplished what the Armed Forces have in this area during that time.
Having said that, the question before us today is not where we have been hut
where we are going.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
95
I would like to touch briefly today on what seem to me to be the central issues.
Most have already been touched upon in other testimony.
One of the questions you posed at the outset of these hearings, Mr. Chairman,
is whether, after the expansion of the past few years, the services haven't
decided to slow doV1n, level off, or even turn back the clock.
Some of the data would indicate that a leveling off may have been contemplated
on the assumption that the heat would be off.
However, in view of the findings of the excelLent study conducted by the Brooking Institute and the latest OSD study, and, in view of the interest shown in
this matter by your committee, and the Secretary of Defense, renewed efforts on
tlle part of the services can probably be expected.
Increased utilization of military women has always been a difficult concept
for the military to accept. They have traditionally thought of military women
as the resource of last resort, after substandard males, minorities, and civilians.
The fact that women improve the quality and cost effectiveness of the force
is a concept that military personnel planners have been most reluctant to accept.
Xegative attitudes and cultural bias run deep and are difficult to deal with.
rnfortunately, they are held in varying degrees by most of those who are in
positions to make or influence decisions.
At the root of these attitudes is, I believe, a sincere conviction that somehow
'i\·omen will jeopardize the ability of the armed forces to perform their operational missions. Also, there is a deeply held belief that national defense is a
man's job.
In their final report, the Defense Manpower Commission observed that "the
underlying concern in any discussion of military women is that fear that too
many women will lessen combat effectiveness." Yet, they go on to point out,
that by even the OSD definition of combat forces, over half of the total active
duty military strength is defined as "support forces". They make the observation that the percentage of women projected for 1978 "should have little if any
impact on combat effectiveness". Their contention was supported by a survey
they conducted of unit commanders. Of the units surveyed that had women
assigned, 53 percent said women had no impact on unit effectiveness, 27 percent
a positive impact, and 20 percent a negative impact. The Commission made no
attempt to determine what that negative impact might be. Of the units surveyed
that had no women assigned, many commanders indicated unsubstantiated fears
that women "might hamper effectiveness".
Both the Brookings study and the recent OSD study indicate that the ability
of the services to effectively utilize military women within current policy and
statutory constraints far exceeds future program objectives. I agree with their
assessments of the enlisted programs.
I only regret that neither study addresses the officer programs which have
generally been overlooked. The imbalances here and the equal opportunity implications are far greater than with the enlisted force.
In any discussion of expanding the roles of military women, the bottom line is
always combat.
Arguments for and against are largely ideological and emotional. One of the
problems is that distinctions between the various forms of combat are usually
not drawn. The vision of the foot soldier is most often elicited.
Obviously, there is a wide spectrum between the roles of the infantryman and
the missile launch officer, so generalizations only cloud the issue.
The present combat exclusions seem to be based more on policy considerations
than on law or on known data concerning women's physical capabilities.
The services have consistantly asserted thait their policies concerning women
and combat express the "intent of the Congress" and the "will of the people". But
I have never known ithe services to be shy about expressing ,their views to Congress on other subjects. Nor have they been reluctant to exert their influence on
either the Congress or the public. As you have pointed out, Mr. Chairman. Congress must rely on the military experts for advice in such matters. So must the
public.
I know of no surveyR that the services have conducted to determine the will
of the public on this subject.
Both the Army and Air Force have asserted that military women should not
be assigned to locations where they might be subject to hostile fire for fear they
might become combat casualties. I assume that does not apply to nurses.
In this day of mobile strike forces, tactical and strategic bombing, guerrilla
warfare, and guided missiles, the ra tionale behind this policy escapes me. In
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
96
view of the contribution of military women in every combat theater during
World War II and their service in southeast Asia, it seems to me that the services are indeed trying to set the clock back. American service women have been
shot at, some have died, some have been prisoners of war and many have received combat decorations.
As you know, there are two major statutory constraints on the utilization
of miilitary women: sections 8549 and 6015 of title 10, United States Code. The
former prohibits their use as members of combat air crews engaged in combat
missions. The latter applies to service on combat ships of the Navy. No similar
legal constraints are imposed on the Army.
Without getting inrto the pros •and cons of women in aircrews and combat
ships, it seems to me that from a purely management point of view the Secretaries of Navy and Air Force ought to enjoy the same prerogatives as the Secretary of the Army in determining personnel policy and that they should have the
same latitude under the law to explore the full range of options in the utilization
of their people, subject as -always to the scrutiny of the Congress and policy
guidance from the Secretary of Defense.
I recommend that both statutes be repealed.
Repeal would not settle the combat issue however.
There is a lot we don't know about women as combatants because there is so
little experience or data to go on. Certainly, where there is reasonable doubt
about their impact on combat effectiveness, caution would be in order. As Admiral Watkins said: "We don't want to do anything dumb."
Studies and tests that the services are currently doing could prove very useful
in avoiding serious mistakes.
On the other hand, it seems to me that the services could make some commonsense judgment calls and not wait to, be forced into decisions, as with the
academies, and, in some cases, without exhaustive studies and test programs.
I don't need a fancy study or a test to tell me that a woman could perform as well as a man as a missile launch officer. I have been in missile launch
facilities and hlave talked at length to the men with the keys. There is nothing
:inherent in that job that a woman could not or should not do.
I agree with Secretary Cbayes that this is a value question with the military. However, I do not agree with the Air Force contention that it needs
to be resolved in the light of public discussion and guidance. This is a man1age-ment issue in which the Air Force can and should take the initiative as it
does in other more weighty matters. The Air Force should bite the bullet and
do it.
I applaud the Air Force's decision to train a few women as pilots and navi_gators, but I am mystified by what their test program is expected to prove;
certainly not that women can fly airplanes. We already know that.
General Davis has alluded to possible "control pressure" problems. If that
means what I think it does, it should apply equally to men and women. When
I enlisted in the Army in 1942 'and became a truck driver I suspect I had what
could have been classified as "control pressure" problems driving a 2½ ton
Army truck that had neither power steering nor power brakes. The lesson I
learned from that experience was that a 5 foot 3 inch, 115 pound person. male
or female, didn't belong behind the wheel of a 2½ ton 1942 Army truck. It was
simply poor classification. I would have been better suited to fly Ill B-29.
In short, I see no reason why the Air Force program for training women
pilots needs to be so tiny.
The restrictions that keep women out of the cockpi,t have so profound an im.pact on opportunities for commissions and upon career opportunities that early
resolution of this issue is of paramount importance to the women officer program
of the Air Force.
Full resolution, however, hinges on repeal of the law and resolution of the
combat issue. I have no problem with the idea of women as members of combat
-nircrews. Rated officer training programs •are voluntary. Anyone who applies must
face up to the risks involved including the possibility of being shot down over
.enemy territory.
As for the Navy, I recognize that they do have special concerns with assiiming
women to combait ships and that accommodations represent unique problems.
However, these problems are not insurmountable and could probably best be re-solved on the large surface ships like aircraft carriers, at least iniUally. The
question of boy /girl relationships as they might affect orderly operation are
matters of leadership, discipline, and counseling as was proved in the sanctuary
experience.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
97
One of the most pressing arguments for repeal of section 6015 is the realization
that in the event of war when the Coast Guard is transferred to Navy control,
Coast Guard women would have to be removed from their ship-board duties. This
is a "catch 22" situation. It simply makes no sense. The change to section 6015
that has been proposed by the Navy would not resolve this problem and, in any
case, is only a half-way solution.
While on the subject of the Navy, I am gratified that the Nayy has proposed,
as a part of the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act (DOPMA), to make
provision for women officers of the line, supply, chaplain, and civil engineer corps
to compete with their male counterparts for promotion. However, the history
of DOPMA has not been encouraging. I would recommend that separate legislation be introduced to remove the current restrictions.
I am also gratified that the sen·ices are making conscientious efforts to moYe
women into the more nontraditional specialties. I fear, however, that the systems
they have set up may be too restrictive and that opportunities for female applicants who are qualified for the more traditional jobs may be unnecessarily
limited.
I am sure that all of us here today share the same objectives. In the name of
national defense we want to insure that the services maintain forces of the highest possible quality and morale. All recent studies on the use of military women
indicate that they enhance the quality of those forces and that the services, while
they have made commendable progress in recent years, still have a long way to
go in realizing the full potential and benefits to be g•ained by expanding utilization of this resource.
In the name of justice, equity, and fairness, we need to ensure that America's
women are given the same opportunities to serve their country and to share in
the benefits and rewards that are derived from such service. All myths must be
separated from reality and then reality must be dealt with in a manner that
assures employment equity to all human beings.
Thank you. I shall be pleased to respond to your questions.
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr.
STATEMENT OF CAROL C. PARR, CHAIR OF THE NATIONAL COALITION FOR WOMEN IN DEFENSE, ACCOMPANIED BY PAT LEEPER,
MILITARY EXPERT, NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN
Ms. PARR. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank
you for this opportunity to testify on the utilization of women in the
military.
I a,m Carol C. Parr, elected Chair of the National Coalition for
Women in Defense. This is a recently formed organization whose
purpose is to expand and protect the rights of women in the military,
families of military members and civilian women employed by the
military.
The prepared statement that I present today is endorsed by &
number of organizations, and I would like to name them, as well as
request permission to submit for the record later on the names of
some additional organizations which are considering endorsement and
have not yet been able to move towards a decision.
So today's written testimony is endorse by the following organizations which are participants in the National Coalition for Women
in Defense. They include ·Women's Equity Action League, educational and legal defense fund, WEAL fund, the organization which
employs me; the National Council of Jewish Women; the National
Organization for Women; the National Women's Political Caucus;
Wider Opportunities for Women; the Women's Equity Action
League and Women's Lobby.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
98
We all know that women as well as men love this country and have
defended it and have served it very well in countless ways going
back to the time of the Revolution when Molly Pitcher took over her
fallen husband's cannon.
If we are to maintain a volunteer armed forces, Congress and the
Department of Defense must make some critical decisions about the
role of women in the military. Recently published projections, which
have been alluded to here earlier, suggest that withm 5 years the
services will be able to attract only 75 percent of the highly qualified
male recruits that they need. Therefore, in order to meet personnel
needs, the services must either further lower their standards for male
enlistees or accept more women. At this time the enlistment standards,
as you know, are such that males who are high school dropouts are
being accepted for military service while bright, capable women who
have graduated from high school and wish to join are being turned
away. And despite the shortage of qualified male recruits, the military
services--except for the Navy-are planning no further increases in
female personnel.
In hearings before this subcommittee last July, representatives
from the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force described the improvements they have made in the utilization of women. These departments claim to provide equal opportunity for women. They tell us
that the women they enlist are better educated, attain higher scores
on standardized tests of mental ability, and have lower attrition rates
than their male counterparts.
Furthermore, the Binkin and Bach analysis of economic factors
relevant to the utilization of women estimates that the average annual
per capita costs associated with housing, medical care, and transportation are roughly $982 less for military women than for men. Thus,
based on differences in dependency status, the average military
woman costs the Department of Defense about 8 percent less.
In sum, at the present time it is more economical and cost effective
to recruit and enlist women than men. And although the services
admit that the women are doing an excellent job, they contend that
making better use of 51.3 percent of our population is somehow contrary to our national interests. We believe that better utilization of
women in the military may, indeed, be contrary to certain military
habits, but to allow these habits to dictate public policy is intolerable
in a free society.
. Let us look carefully at the increases in the utilization of women
in the Armed Forces. In 1971, 1.6 percent of the military personnel
were female; by 1976, 5.2 percent were female; by 1982, under current goals, 7 percent of military personnel will be female. In the
civilian work force women now comprise over 40 percent of it. To
put this all in another perspective, we are progressing from a military force that was more than 98 percent male to a military force
that will be 93 percent male. That can hardly be called a fantastic
increase. It can more appropriately be described as a slight change
in the degree of tokenism.
We urge the Congress to address these issues: Is it necessary for
the Armed Forces to continue to be more than 90 percent male~ Are
the military services being overly cautious in their reluctance to
admit women~ Is there any rational basis for the fear that increasing
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
99
the utilization of women will impair the accomplishment of military
missions? Are the Army, Navy, and Air Force ,underestimating the
capabilities of American women?
We believe that the armed services are greatly underestimating the
capabilities of women. It is time for the Department of Defense to
stop basing its judgments on narrow and stereotypical views of
women and start basmg them on women as they are-a diverse group
of individuals, with a great variety of skills, capabilities and motivations. Therefore, we make the following recommendations:
One, Congress should repeal sections 6015 and 8549 of title X of
the United States Code.
As has been described by Jeanne Holm, these laws greatly restrict
the assignment of women. Without repeal of section 6015, for example, the Navy cannot enlist more than 10 percent women. But the
effect of the laws is far greater than the actual congressionallymandated restrictions. They have been used as an excuse, particularly
by the Army, for restricting even further the utilization of women by
all the services.
The law governing the Air Force states that females "shall not be
assigned to duty in aircraft while such aircraft are engaged in combat missions." The Air Force has defined combat in such a way as to
exclude women from assignment as missile launch officers. The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force who testified earlier during these
hearings stated, "The deeper concern there is not only the isolation,
but the awesome responsibility for the release of nuclear weapons."
The result of this kind of emotionalism is an extreme interpretation
of the law whereby 40 percent of officer jobs and 6 percent of enlisted
jobs in the Air Force are closed to women. This still leaves 60 percent
of officer jobs and 94 percent of enlisted jobs in the Air Force which
could be held by either men or women. But can women compete for
those jobs? No. The Air Force uses the law as an excuse to keep the
personnel structure 92 percent male.
As you know, there is no law restricting assignment of women in
the Army. The Secretary of the Army has total authority to assign
female personnel as he sees fit. But the Army uses the laws restricting
the other services as an excuse to exclude women from the many jobs
they could perform and to keep the numbers of women very low. As
recently as 1976, the women in the Army study stated, and I quote, "It
is clear that the original intent of Congress and, by extension, the
intent of the American people, was that women perform in concombatant roles."
Thus, the Army, with no legal restrictions on the utilization of
women and in the face of evidence of the economies that might be
realized, arbitrarily limits the nature and extent of women's roles ..
Do the legal restrictions placed upon women's roles in the military
reflect the will of Congress and the will of the American people as the
Army asserts? If we take a brief look at the legislative history, we
might find some of these answers.
These restrictions were passed as part of the Women's Armed Forces
Integration Act of 1948. The bill as originally drafted would have
left the assignment of women up to the service secretaries. One memberof the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Vinson, had
the bill amended because he personally did not want women to serve
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100
on ships. During the hearings, Mr. Vinson made the following statements---referring to women:
Of course, they should not be permitted to serve on any ship.
Just fix it so they cannot go to sea at all.
As a result of Mr. Vinson's pressure, the bill was amended to
exclude women from sea duty and from service in combat aircraft.
In view of legislative history, it is accurate to state that keeping
women off ships is the will of the American people? Or was it simply
the will of one member of the House Armed Services Committee
nearly 30 years ago?
Repeal of outmoded legal restrictions would give the Secretaries
of the Air Force and Navy desirable flexibility in the assignment and
utilization of women. Even more importantly, it would remove the
justification for the severe restrictions imposed by all the services on
the number of women they will take, as well as on the assignment and
utilization of the women who enlist.
Our second recommendation is that the armed services should enlist
men and women according to ability, and do away with the ceilings
placed on the number of women they will take.
The major restrictions placed on the recruitment and assignment
of women in the military are the policies established by the military
services themselves. The services go far beyond the letter and the
spirit of the law. Those restrictions could easily be removed by the
services. The major barrier seems. to be the military establishment's
desire to remain predominantly male.
Congress has given us several hints of a change of attitude toward
women in the military since 1948. For example, in 1967, a law was
passed which struck down the 2 percent limitation on female enlisted
strength that had been in effect for 20 years. The Senate also defeated
the Ervin amendments to the equal rights amendment which would
have exempted women from combat duty and from the draft by very
wide margins. The bill to permit women to enter the military academies passed the House by a vote of 303 to 96. Despite these actions
by Congress, the military services continue to prescribe a very limited
role for women and use the will of Congress to justify their discriminatory policies.
We are hoping that one effect o:f these hearings will be to make it
clear that Congress envisions a greater role for women in the military than that reflected in the services' current goals.
Our third recommendation is that all o:f the military departments
should conduct market surveys to determine the potential number of
female recruits. They should also be required to keep records on the
numbers of qualified women who are turned away or put on a waiting Jist because of low quotas :for women.
The services have said that they cannot increase the number o:f
womrn further because thev do not know how many women would
be interested in enlisting. We ask: Why haven't they made an effort
to find out?
We know that the services are turning women away because we
receive complaints from women who have not been permitted to serve
their country.
The fact that the services do not know how many women would be
interested in enlistment is no excuse :for not trying to attract more
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
101
·women. In 1971, when the Department o:f Defense decided to increase
·the number o:f women from 40,000 to 100,000, they did not know if
they could recruit that number of women. They learned that women
were so interested in the military that the services had no problem
in meeting their goals. The Army was able to raise its standards for
women and still increase its female strength from 12,000 to 44,000
enlisted women in 5 years.
Our fourth recommendation is that the military services should
provide high school students and guidance counselors with information about the opportunities for women and the abilities and aptitudes required to enter and succeed in the military.
We believe that the military services could do much more than
they are currently doing to educate young women and guidance
counselors about the military.
The Department of Defense High School News Service publishes
a magazine called Profile which is distributed free to junior and
senior high schools, colleges, and universities. This publication does
show a few women in some nontraditional and traditional jobs in
the military. It would be immensely useful to include more information about the requirements for eniistment and success in those jobs,
and to give increased coverage to opportunities for women in this
publication.
I am fascinated by a recent survey of 17-year-olds that revealed
that only 3 percent of the young women listed housewife as their preferred career. This suggests to me, among other things, that if all
young women were better informed aboul the opportunities available to them in military careers. many of them would give serious
consideration to joining the armed forces.
Contrary to the testimony presented by General Davis of the Air
Force earlier this summer to the effect that women lack aptitudes :for
technical fields, we contend that women do have the potential to perform most jobs, especially technical jobs, as well as men, provided
that they are given appropriate training. Furthermore, the tests given
by the military, while called aptitude tests, actually test familiarity
with male-oriented subjects, like automotive mechanics, that young
women have not traditionally been allowed to learn.
Our fifth and final recommendation is the military services should
improve their research on women. better utilize the research that has
already been done and, most important, stop using the need to research
·as an excuse to drag their feet in taking more women.
Throughout the ,July hearings, the Army and Air Force continually
referred to the need to conduct more research. The Army spokesman
said, "The picture is still not clear. We have more than 200 years o:f
experience with millions of men but little experience with large numbers of women."
They speak of "unknowns" vague "problems,n the need for "more
•experience," "more tests," "resource availability." Fuzzy statements
.abound.
Actually the services have over 30 years of experience with women.
We question the validity of much of the research on women conducted by the military. We believe there is a clear bias against women
evident from the testimony presented during these hearings by the
military departments. The assumption was made that women cannot
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
102
withstand stress, are not ready £or awesome responsibility and that
they cause problems. Can an mstitution with these biases be trusted
to do objective research i Indeed, is some 0£ the so-called research
really research i
A case in point is the Air Force pilot testing program to train
women as pilots. According to the testimony 0£ General Davis, 20'
women per year will enter pilot training, as part 0£ a test program
to determine the optimum assignment and utilization 0£ £emale pilots.
As Jeanne Holm pointed out, we are not trying to prove that women
can fly airplanes.
So, in closing-, we would just like to emphasize some 0£ the negatiw
consequences 0£ any delay in implementing policy and legal changes
that will expand opportunities for women in the military. Present
policies which are based on the military's underestimation 0£ the
capabilities 0£ women, and the un£ounded £ear that greater utilization
0£ women will impair military effectiveness, are damaging to women
and the Nation. Not only are American women being denied access
to training, military careers, and the many benefits provided by military service. In adcl.ition, the Nation is losing the potential contribution women can make to its security and missing opportunities to
operate in a manner that is both efficient and cost effective.
Senator, Pat Leeper has accompanied me today, and both she and I
will be available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you, Ms. Parr, we are honored to have
Ms. Leeper here today. She is a military expert, I understand, for the
National Organization for ·women. Is that correct i
Ms. LEEPER. That is correct.
Senator PROXMIRE. vVe are happy to have you, Ms. Leeper.
[The prepared statement 0£ Ms. Parr follows :]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROL C. PARR
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity
to testify on the utilization of women in the military. I am Carol Parr, elected
Chair of the National Coalition for Women in Defense, a newly-formed organization interested in the status of women in the military. Our purpose is to protect
and extend the rights of women in the military; families of military members
and civilian women employed by the military. We wish to thank you for holding·
these hearings to explore issues relating to women's present and potential
contri~mtion to the Armed Services. Women, as well as men, love this country
and have defended it and served it well in countless ways such as when, during·
the Revolution, Molly Pitcher took over her fallen husband's cannon.
If we are to maintain a volunteer Armed Force, Congress and the Department
of Defense must make some critical decisions about the role of women in the
military. Recently published projections suggest that within five years the services will be able to attract only 75 percent of the highly qualified male recruits
that they need.1 Therefore, in order to meet personnel needs, the services must
either further lower their standards for male enlistees or accept more women.
At this time the enlistment standards are such that males who are high school
dropouts are being accepted for military service while bright, capable women
who have graduated from high ,school and wish to join are being turnl'Cl 11way.
And despite the shortage of qualified male recruits, the military serYiC'eSexcept for the Navy-are planning no further increases in female personnel.
In hearings before this subcommittee last July, representatives from the Army,
Navy, and Air Force described the impro-vements they have made in the utilization of women. The departments claim to provide equal opportunity for women.
They tell us that the women they enlist are better educated, attain higher
1 Mnrtin Binkin and Shirley J. Bach. Women and the Military, The Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C., 1977, p. 68,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
103
.scores on standardized tests of mental ability, and have lower attrition rates
than their male counterparts.
The Binkin and Bach analysis of economic fac.tors relevant .to the utilization of
women estimates that the average annual per capita costs associated with hon.sing, medical care, and transportation are roughly $982 less for military women
than for men.• Thus, based on differences in dependency status, the average
military woman costs the Department of Defense about eight percent less .than
the average military man.
·
In sum, at the present time it is more economical and cost-effective to recruit
and enlist women than men. And although the services admit that the wm;nen
are doing an excellent job, they contend that making better use of 51.3 percent
of our population is contrary to our national interests. Better utilization of
women in the military may indeed be contrary to certain military habits, but
to allow these habits to dictate publie policy is intolerable in a free society.
Let us look carefully at the increasl's in the utilization of women in the Armed
Forces. In 1971, 1.6 percent of military personnel were female; by 1976, 5.2 percent were female; by 1982, under current goals, 7 percent of military personnel
will be female. To put this in another perspectiYe, we are progressing from
a military force that was more than 98 percent male. to a military force that
will be 93 percent male. That can hardly be called a fantastic increase. It can
more appropriately be described as a slight change in the degree of tokenism.
We do not understand why the Department of Defense cannot expand the percentage of women more than this.
.
'\Ve urge the Congress to address these issu~: Is it necessary for the Armed
Forces to continue to, be more than 90 percent male? Are the military services
being overly cautious in their reluctance to admit more women? Is there any
rational basis for the fear that increasing the utilization of women will impair
the accomplishment of missions? Are the Army, Navy, and Air Force underestimating the capabilities of American women?
We believe that the Armed Services are greatly underestimating the. capabilities of women. 1't is time for the Defense Department to stop basiµg its
judgments on narrow and stereotypical views of women and start basing them
on women as they are-a diverse group of individuals, with a great variety of
skills, capabilities and motivations. Therefore, we make the following recommendations:
1. Congress should repeal Sections 6051 and, 8549 of Title 10, United, Statea
Code
Those laws greatly restrict the asignment of women. Without repeal of Section
6015, for example, the Navy cannot enlist more than 10 percent women.• But
the effect of the laws is far greater than the actual C-Ongressionally-mandated
restrictions. They have been used as an excuse for restricting even further the
utliza tion of women by all the services.
·
The law governing the Air Force states that females "shall not be assigned
to duty in aircraft while such aircraft are engaged in combat missions."· The
Air Force has defined combat in such a way as to exclude women from assignment as missile launch officers.• The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force who
testified earlier during these hearings stated, "The deeper concern there is not
only the isolation, but the awesome responsibility for the release of nuclear
weapons.""
The result of this kind of emotionalism is an extreme interpretation of the law
whereby 40 percent of officer jobs and six percent of enlisted jobs in the Air
Force are closed to women. This still leaves 60 percent of officer .jobs and 94
percent of enlisted jobs in the Air Force which could be held by either men or
women. But can women compete for those jobs? No. The Air Force u.ses the law
as an excuse to keep the personnel structure 92 percent male.
The Army is even more interesting. There is no law restricting asignment
of women in the Army. The Secretary of the Army has total authority to assign
female personnel as he sees fit. But the Army uses the laws restricting the other
services as an excuse to exclude women. from many jobs and to keep the numbers
of women very low. As recently as 1976, the Women in the Army Study stated,
"It is clear that the original intent of Congress and, by extension, the intent
Binkln and Bach, op. cH., p. 58.
Blnkln and Bach, op. cit., pp. 106-107.
• Binkin and Ba<'h. 011. cit .. ,p, 22.
• gtatement of Antonia Handler Chayes, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower. Reserve Afl'airs and Installations. before the Subcommittee of Priorities and Econ•
omy In Government of the Joint Economic Committee, July 22, 1977.
2
8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
104
of the American people, was that women perform in noncombatant roles."•
Thus, the Army, with no legal restrictions on the utilization of women and in
the face of evidence of the economies that might be realized, arbitrarily limits
the nature and extent of women's.roles.
Do the legal restrictions placed upon women's roles in the military reflect the
will of Congress and the will of the American people as the Army asserts? Let us
look at the legislative history. These restrictions were passed as part of the
Women's Armed Forces Integration Act of 1948. The bill as originally drafted
would have left the assignment of women up to .the service secretaries. One member of the House Armed Services Committee, Congressman Vinson, had the
bill amended because he personally did not want women to serve on ships. During
the hearings, Mr. Vinson made the following statements :
"Of course, they should not be permitted to serve on any ship."
"I think the Congress should take a positive stand on it and not leave it to
the discretion of the Secretary... Of course you can [sic] serve at shore establishments, but they have no place at all on ships."
"Just fix it so they cannot go to sea at all." 7
As a result of Mr. Vinson's pressure, the bill was amended to exclude women
from sea duty and from service in combat aircraft.
In view of legislative history, is it accurate to state that keeping women off'
ships is the will of the American people? Or was it the will of one member
of the House Armed Services Committee nearly thirty years ago? At the time
those hearings were taking place in the aftermath of World War II, the retention
of women in the military was being questioned. There have been many changes in
the roles of women are playing in our society, in the variety of jobs held by
women and in the aspirations of women themselves since the passage of the
Women's Armed Forces Integration Act. Certainly, the retention of women
in ,the military is no longer in question. The question before the Congress now is
this: Is the utilization and assignment of men and women in the Armed Forces
going to be governed by the prejudices of thirty years ago? Are women going
to be denied opportunities today because of an outdated law? Are the military
services going to be denied a great potential resource-our nation's womanpower-because of one man's limited vision?
Repeal of outmoded legal restrictions would give the Secretaries of the Air
Force and Navy desirable flexibility in the assignment and utilization of women.
Even more important, it would remove the justification for the severe restrictions imposed by all the services on the number of women they will take, as
well as on the assignment and utilization of the women who enlist.
!. The Armed Services should enlist men and women according to abilit11,
and do away 'With the ceilings r>laced on the number of women they 'Will take
The major restrictions placed on the recruitment and assignment of women
in the military are the policies established by the military services themselves.
The services go far beyond the letter and the spirit of the law in placing
restrictions on women. Those restrictions could easily be removed by the services. The major barrier seems to be the military establishment's desire to remain
predominantly male.•
Congress has given several hints of a change of attitude toward women in
the military since 1948. For example, in 1967, a law was passed which Rtruck
down the two percent limitation on female enlisted strength that had been in
efl'ect for twenty years. (The law set no limit on the percentage of women
that the Armed Forces could take, yet the services did not increase the percentage of women in uniform until 1972.) The Senate defeated the Ervin
Amendments to the Equal Rights Amendment which would have exempted
women from combat duty and from the draft by very wide margins. The bill
to permit women to enter the military academies passed the House by a vote of
303 to 96. Despite these actions by Congress, the military services continue to prescribe a limited role for women and use the will of Congress to justify their
discriminatory policies.
We are hoping that one efl'ect of these hearings will be to make it clear that
Congress envisions a greater role for women in the military than that reflected
• DPnartment of the Army, Women in the Army Stuily, 1976, p. 1-6.
7 U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Armed Services Committee, Subcommittee No.
3, ONenlzatlon and Mobilization, 80th Congress, 2d Session, pp. 5689, 5711.
1 Blnkln and Bach, pp. 22-30.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
105
in the services' current goals. Martin Binkin and Shirley Bach, in the Brookings Institution study Women and the MiUtary, estimate that "the number
of military enlisted women could eventually reach 400,000, or 22 percent of the
force."• even without removal of the legal restrictions prohibiting Navy and
Air Force women from serving in combat positions. We would see that as an
interim goal-at least until the Title 10 restrictions are repealed.
3. All of the military departments should conduct market surveys to determine
the potential number of female recruits. They should also be required to
keep records on the numbers of qualified women who are turned away or
put on a waiting list because of low quoias for women
The services have stated that they cannot increase the number of women
further because they do not know how many women would be interested in
enlisting. We ask why haven't they made an effort to find out? They routinely
survey men of enlistment age, and these surveys can and should be broadened
to include women. We know that the services are turning women away because
we receive complaints from women who have been told by recruiters that the
field they are interested in is closed to women for six months, or that they
will have to wait many months to enlist because the quotas for women have
already been met.
The Air Force claims that they cannot increase their goal for women because
many women do not have the mechanical and electrical aptitude required for
Air Force jobs.10 The Air Force has no idea how many women with those abilities could be attracted because the Air Force has not yet made a concerted
effort to recruit them. Since the Air Force potentially could open most of their
jobs to both sexes, they should find out how many women with mechanical and
electrical ability would be interested in an Air Force career.
The fact that the services do not know how many women would be interested in enlistment is no excuse for not trying to attract more women. In 1971,
when the Department of Defense decided to increase the number of women
from 40,000 to 100,000, they did not know if they could recruit that number of
women. They learned that women were so interested in the military that the
services had no problem in meeting their goals. The Army was able to raise its
standards for women and still increase its female strength from 12,000 to 44,000
enlisted women in five years. When the military services want to attract large
numbers of women, when they believe it is to their advantage to do so, they
are able to find them. They did this in World War II and they can do it today.
4. The military services should provide high school students and guidance
counselors with information about the opportunities for women iand the
abilities and aptitudes required to enter and succeed in the military
The military services could do much more than they are currently doing
to educate young women and guidance counselors about the military. As a
start, recruiters need to emphasize the opportunities for women in their contacts with high school personnel. Pamphlets and brochures address to young
women could be developed. There are pamphlets available now, but they stress
the traditional jobs for women. They do not contain sufficient information on
the physical and mental preparation needed for military services.
The Department of Defense High School News Service publishes a magazine called Profile which is distributed free to junior and senior high schools,
colleges, universities, libraries, career centers and ROTC units. This publication does sh.ow a few women in some non-traditional and traditional jobs in
the military. It would be immensely useful to include information about the
requirements for enlistment and success in those jobs, and to give increased
coverage to opportunities for women in this publication.
A recent survey of 17-year-olds revealed that only three percent of the young
women listed housewife as their preferred career.11 If all young women were
better informed about lthe opportunities available to them in military careers,
many of them would give serious consideration to joining the armed forces.
Moreover, with appropriate information and encouragement from guidance
counselors about the relationship between technical and physical proficiency
and success in military service, they could better prepare themselves. Contrary
to the testimony presented by General Davis of the Air Force earlier this sum• Binkin and Bach, I). 109.
Lt. General B. L. Davis, Deputy Chief of Stair for Personnel, Air Force, Hearings,
10
op. cit., ,pp. 85-86.
11
National Assessment of Educational Progress.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
106
mer to the effect that women lack aptitudes for: techni<:al fields, 11 we contend
that women do have the potential to perform most jobs as well as men, provided that they are given appropriate training. Furthermore, the tests given by
the military, while called aptitude tests, actually test familiarity with maleoriented subjects that young women have not traditionally been allowed to
learn.
5. The military se_rvices should improve their research on women, better utilizf3
the reearch that has-already been done and, most important, stop using the
need to research as an excuse to drag their feet in talcing more women
The Air Force and Army throughout their testimony at these hearings continually referred to the need to conduct more research. The Army spokesman
said, "the picture is still not clear. We have more than 200 years of experience
with millions of men but little experience with lariz;e numbers of women." u
They speak of ''unknowns," vague "problems," the need for "more experi·ence," "more ,tests," resource availability." Fuzzy statements abound: "There
are differences now that we are just not sure of." "I am sure there were problems. I don't have the details."
Actually the ser,·ices have over thirty years of experience with women. There
were over 200,000 women in the military during World War II. Women in the
Army served in every theatre of the war-North Africa, France, the Southwest
Pacific-often close to the front lines. They lived in tents, followed advancing
field armies, endured hardships and stress. Every detail and aspect of. this experience was exhaustively researched, and findings were published in the Army's
excellent study, The Women's A.rmy Corps. Many of the questions the Assistant
Secretaries claim to need answers to were answered in that book. Instead of
spending money on further· research, they ought to read it. Some of the conclusions and recommendations are outdated-largely because social attitudes to·wards the role of women have changed so much-but much of the study is sound
and relevant today.
The services now have five years of experience with their expansion program.
What research have they been conducting during this time? Have opportunities
·tor research been missed? Where is the published report on the Navy's Sanctuary
experiment? As far as we can determine, the only evaluation of the Sanctuary
is an internal memorandum. It appears that the reason the "picture is still not
clear" is that there has been little.effort on the part of the services to test and
find out about the capabilities of women. Tests which show that women do well
are "buried." Now, faced with pressure to take more women, they have ·suddenly
discovered the need for "research."
We question the validity of much of the research on women conducted by the
military. A clear bias against women is evident from the testimony presented
during these hearings by the military departments. The assumption was made
that women cannot withstand stress, are not ready for awesome responsibility
and that they cause problems. Can an institution with these biases be trusted
to do objective research? Indeed, is some of the so-called research really research?
A case in point is the Air Force program to train women as pilots. According
.to the testimony of General Davis, twenty women per year will enter pilot training, as part of a test program to determine the optimum assignment and utilization of female pilots. We have two comments to make concerning this test. The
first is that it is totally unnecessary. All General Davis needs to do is read Army
Air Force Historical Study No. 55 to learn that over 800 women served as
Women's Air Force Service Pilots (WASPS). They ferried all types of military
. aircraft, and in all have compared favorably with male pilots. The data are
there--in great detail. Our second concern is the size of the sample. You do not
have to be a sociologist or a statistician to know that ten women per training
. cycle is not a meaningful sample size. As a research project, this test is ludicrous.
, It makes no sense at all. If the Air Force truly wants to find out how women
perform as pilots, this is not the way to do it. With the historical evidence
already available, no test is needed but if the Air Force insists on researching
again what is already known, a minimum sample of 100 women is needed. So if
this is not a test program, but in fact a pilot training program, when will it be
. open to women, and particularly to women who complete ROTC programs, and
womE>n who receive training at the academies?
"'Lt. General B. L. Davis, Deputy Chief of Stall' for Personnel, Air Force, Hearings,
.
··
u Statement of Robert L. Nelson, Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve
A:tl'airs; and Major General J. P. Kingston, Assistant Deputy Chief for Personnel, Army,
Hearings, op. cit., p. 9.
op. cit., pp. 85-86.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
107
The Air Force pilot training program is a typical example of inadequate research and exercises in foot-dragging. 'l'he services repeatedly state that women
have done well in every program in which they have been evaluated. Women
performed well on the Sanctuary, in the Army's Basic Initial Entry Test, and
the early reports from the MAX/WAC test are favorable. Yet the services still
don't know, aren't sure, can't say. How many more te!!ts, more research projects,
more studies will it take before women have proven themselves?
In closing, we would like to emphasize the negative consequences of any delay
in implementing policy and legal changes that will expand opportunities for
women in the military. Present policies which are based on the military's underestimation of the capabilities of women, and the unfounded fear that greater
utilization of women will impair military effectiveness, are damaging to women
and the nation. Not only are American women being denied access to training,
military careers, and the many benefits provided by military service. In addition,
the nation is losing the potential contribution women ran make to its security
and missing opportunities to operate in a manner that is both efficient and costPffective.
DECRE.~SING COSTS TO MILITARY
Senator PnoxMIRE. ·well, all these statements have been so thoue;htful and helpful. I might say, l\fs. Parr, you added for us a statistic
which had not been called to our attention, at least not to my memory.
That is the fact that women cost less to the military. You said 8 percent, and that is logical because, of course, the dependency element
is not as heavy with women. This is a very, very important consideration when you recognize that so many people have pointed out that
56 percent of our military cost is personnel cost, and here obviously
is an area where we can make some real economies without in any way
decreasing the strength and force of our military.
I will ask each of you; l am going to ask you questions by name.
Don't feel inhibited to comment on any question I ask another panelist. If you want to step in and comment, that would be very welcome.
General Holm, Ms. Goodman challenges the current approach followed in the Brookings' report that full integration of women should
be postponed while experiments are designed, studies made, and reports filed. She says this approach is based on the false assumption
that women must prove themselves in each separate job and that it
demands a degree of certitude impm;sible to satisfy. What is your view
about this?
General HoLM. I think the Brookings study is the best thing that
has ever been done on that subject historically. I think there are unanswered questions with regard to women in combat that still need to
he answered. Whether or not the Army studies or the tests they are
conducting now are going to produce the answers remains to be seen.
I have a feeling these tests they are conducting, as has been implied,
may be weighted against the women. Whether they will be objective or
not, I don't know. Rut there are still unanswered questions aboutSenator PROXMIRE. What are the answers, do you feel~
.
General HoLM. The fundamental requirements in a combat infantry
environment, for example-Senator PROXMIRE. About their combat physical abilitiesi
General Hour. Abont how they could perform in the combat infantryman role. I think that remains to be seen.
·senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Goodman, would you like to comment?
Ms. GooDMAN. I would begin by saying that I am sure General Holm
and I agree on the basic issues. I don't think we arc> adwrsaries
23-36~78--8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
108
in this matter. Whether women have the physical capacity for a particular job can be tested. Any person undertaking a physically difficult job, man or woman, should be able to handle it.
My point is that characteristics, including characteristics of physical strength, are not distributed according to sex, and the fact that on
the average women are weaker should not in any way hamper the
women-Senator PROXMIRE. Could I interrupt? Why can't this be done on an
individual basis? Why say that women are necessarily incapable of a
particular physical job? Can't you develop a standard-undoubtedly
there are men who are a lot weaker than many women are. To say that
all women would be excluded until you can make this test, it seems to
me is a clear discrimination of a group.
GENF.JlAL HOLM SAYS WOMEN SHOULD BE GIVEN JOBS IF CAPABLE
General HoLM. I have no disagreement with that in philosophy; I
think any woman who is capable of doing the job ought to have the
job. But unfortunately the services don't really have physical stand
ards. That is, they have health standards and general height and
weight standards, but as of today, with the exception of the rather
shallow standards that the Air Force has developed, the services have
never established physical standards for most jobs, physical stamina
and strength standards for men or women.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me give an example from my own experience. Running, jogging. Until about 4 years ago, no woman had run
a marathon, that is 26 miles, in less than 4 hours. Today you have
women who have run the marathon in about 2 hours 30 minutes. Their
time improvement has been far, far greater than men. Many people
think within a few years women will beat men as the top marathon
runners in the world.
This is clearly a physical capability that people didn't envision. But
the overwhelming majority of men couldn't come close to running the
marathon in 4 hours; now many women can.
The point is this should be an individual determination, not a determination of a group by sex. But you feel that these studies should be
made first, before we proceed?
General HoLM. I think it is the wise route to go.
Senator PROXMIRE. At any rate: if you did, you confine this primarily to infantry combat, which is a relatively small proportion of
the combat area.
General HoLM. Yes, it is.
Senator PROXMIRE. There was a time when that was the overwhelming field, but it is no longer true.
·
General HoLM. Yesl 1t involves only a small percentage of the armed
~ervices. One of the ngures I say was 8 percent of the total Armed
Forces would be combat infantrymen of all the forces.
Senator PROXMIRE. And you have no problem with women in comhfft other than the one you specified here, in the infantry?
n<'neral HoLM. No, sir.
Senator PRoxMIRE. General Holm, you said the Air Force pilot
training ,program is-Ms. Goodman. Excuse me.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0
109
Ms. Go·oDMAN. I would like to add something to the subject of
physical strength. The experience of women in the armed forces has
been that many of the tasks that men have traditionally relied on
brute strength to accomplish can be done equally well without expending as much strength simply by chaMing procedures.
For example, the Navy told us that one of the problems women had
was carrying heavy mail sacks. The solution to this problem was
simply to use two mail sacks instead of one. In short, you can use your
brains to over-come work problems ,as well as your back muscles.
Senator PROXMIRE. Very good.
PROCRASTINATION BY MILITARY SEEN BY GENERAL HOLM
General Holm, you said the Air Fovce pilot training program for
women is too small. Ms. P.arr, I believe, stated the research problem,
that as a research project it is, as she said, ridiculous. It is based on
too smaJl a sample and makes no sense at all.
Do you agree with Ms. Parr and would you say that it illustrates
footdragging and dilatry tactics on the part of the Air Force?
General HoLM. Yes, sir.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Now, Colonel Hallaren, Ms. Goodman summarized the objections to women in combat quite well. She said that
the question of the rightness of women in combat is based on concern
over whether-this is the first time I have seen this confronted so
bluntly and directly, it was refreshing to get it-was over whether
women should be killed in battle or should be the ones to do the
ki1ling.
I think that is something that is in the minds of many people,. But,
it occurs to me that women ·are now employed in the front ranks of
man:y police forces in major cities where there is a possibility they
may be killed and some have been killed, and where they may have
to do the killing. Would you discuss this analogy and state whether
yon agree with Ms. Goodman that all statutes, rules, reguJationR. and
policies that restrict the services of women should be abolished?
THE TEST OF ACCEPTABILITY SHOULD BE THE INDIVIDUAL NOT THE GF1NDER
Colonel HALLAREN. Well, in the first place, I feel as that the utilization of women should be limited only by the phvsical and mental
the way as far as apply:·apacit): of_ t~e individual. I am with you
mg-the rnd1v1dual measure to the person. I don't think combat service
has anything to do with sex or gender. I would agree with Jeanne
Holm in establishing the physical capabilities for all jobs. I would
rule out specifications as to who is going fo kill here, there, or somewhere else. I don't think it has anything to ,do with the point. Future
w~rfare wiJl be in our own back yard. I don't think we will go out
with gun to Europe to shoot anybody. I think we are going- to he
under the buzz-bombs as we were in World War II.
I think in the future "·omen should be trained in any element of the
military servic~s for which they are physica11y and :mentally competent. I don't thmk that combat per se has anything to do with it.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
all
110
SENATOR PROXMIRE ASKS HOW TO DETF.RMINE THE THOROUGHNESS OF THE
DOD REPORT ON RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE ROLE OP WOMEN IN THE
~IILITARY
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr, as a result of an amendment I introduced in the Senate in l\fay of this year, the ,secretary of Defense will
soon release the report ori how to jmprove the role of women in the
military. That report could be very good and conclusive, or it could be
very inconclusive and just a snow job. What are the telltale signs we
should watch for in the report to determine if it is thorough, conclusive, and a real effort on the part of the Department of Defense to improve the role o:f women in the military~
Ms. PARR. ·well, as you know, Senator, we have had a number of
these studies already conducted. To determine whether or not this particular study is thorough and conclusive, one matter we can look at is
the data they provide. ·we can look at the actions that are planned and
the policy changes that are planned to implement some of their recommendations that come along with the report.
Senator PRoxMIRE. May I interrupt to say that I didn't ask for t'he
study; it got. amended on the floor to get the study. I wanted this action
taken immediately and, unfortunately, the only way to get it through
the Senate last year, this last May~ was to accept that amendment.
Ms. PARR. Yes, sir, I recall. Mr. Nunn, I believe.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is right.
Ms. PARR. But the effectiveness of studie&-regardless of how effective this study is, we just hope it is a terrific study, we hop0 that it is
fantastic, we hope it contains a number of well-documented recommendations about increasing the utilization of women in the military.
But we have studies, we have stacks and stacks of studies, we have the
Binkin study, the GAO studies, a lot of other re:J.)Orts, and the question
is really how the studies are translated into pohcy decisions and then
some sort of followup on that.
Senator PRoxMIRE. You would say that whether or not the study
triggers a policy recommendation that would repreSffilt progress is
one guidei
l\fs. PARR. That wm1ld be my measure, my personal measure o:£ its
effectiveness.
General Hour. May I comment on that, Mr. Chairman?
Senator PRoxMIRE. Yes.
General Hour. It has been mv experience throughout the years that
whenever someone asks for a stucly in the Department of Defense, those
who conduct it end up learning things they had hoped not to learn.
[Laughter.]
· Usua1ly the study is done with a weighted notion in mind; it's designed to prove preconceived notions, and inevitably they learn more
than thev had hoped t.o learn supporting the opposite point. Every
time vou· ask for thC'se studies the servicedearn something from it. So
it's no-t. a wasted exercise.
Senator PROXMIRE. ·well, that is a very refreshing viewpoint.
l\Is. Leeper, Ms. Goodman mentioned the morality issue, the boy~irl problem.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
111
Ms. GoooMAN. I am sorry, Senator. That is not what I meant by the
"morality" is:sue at all. The moral question to which I referred was
rjghtness of women in combat.
MILrrARY ISSUE EXAMINED
Senator PROXMIRE. 'Then I will mention the morality issue, the socalled boy-girl problem, because I am sure this is in the minds of many,
many people, whether we want to face it or not. But it is a fact of life,
particularly with respect to the Navy and women on ships. They are
concerned there may be a very serious problem here.
.
"Morality" may not be the proper word, but a problem of discipline
and problem of efficiency, and so forth.
I understand that you are a Navy wife.
Ms. LEEPER. True.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Has there been a survey of attitude of Navy wives
of t:he prospects of women serving on board ships with Navy '.husbands i
Ms. LEEPER. There has been recently, I mentioned that briefly, and I
am running on the rising stress between the two groups. The study that
I saw was taken in San Diego and actually s11rprised me. It indicated
that a;bout 50 percent, about split down the middle, 50 percent of the
Navy wives do not mind if their husbands serve on board ships. Some
women would actually ask their husbands to get out if they were so
assigned. I think what it comes down to, though, are we going to limit
the careers of active-duty career women, are their careers going to be
determined by other people who are not even really dfrectly involved
in the services. I think that is really the crucial issue.
I think we have Reen this before m police departments where women
and men have been assigned to the same squad cars, et cetera, et cetera.
I think it's something tlmt is simply going to have to resolve itself
out and come out in the wash. But I would not expect in the long run
that the Navy wives will determine whether Navy women serve on
board ship. At least, even as a Navy wife, I would be very disappointed
if that were so.
Senator PRoXMIRE. You are a Navy wife?
)Is. LEEPER. That is right.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Let me ask General Holm. ell, you indicated
your personal view is that you would be disappointed, you say, if
they were determined on that basis. You would not be-would you be
concerned as a Navy wife?
:\Is. LEEPER. Would I be concerned? I am Rorry. I am afraid I
thought you were addressing General Holm.
Srnator PROXMIRE. I want to get to General Holm, but a staff member suggested I follow up, and I think I should. What is your personal
viewi
Ms. LEEPER. My personal view is that women should serve in the
military any place they are qualified to serve. I do not say it does not
present in some certain areas practical problems. There are those practical problems when men and women work together in offices any
place else. And, of course, they will come up. Not everybody is reRponsible, not every individual is moral. They will come up.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
"r
112
However, to blame these problems on women alone and to solve the
problem by simply excluding women is vastly immoral.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Holm, would you address that problem,
in the course of your statement you didn't read it directly; you
skipped over it. But would you give me your response? You seem ~o
feel that matters of discipline, that the :Navy with the proper will
and determination could undoubtedly solve the problem.
GJ<JNERAL HOLM MAKES REFERENCE TO EISENHOWER'S VIEWS
General HoLM. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I don't think the situation is
different from what we have in the Air Force at isolated radar sites,
many of which I visited while I was director of women in the Air
Force. There was much concern about putting women at these isolated
sites, on tops of mountains, say, in Taiwan where they have small
organizations, very tightly knit communities. Wherever the commanders were properly briefed and wherever they briefed their troops,
as to the purpose of having women there, that they were not there to
"service the troops," that they were there to be qualified members
of the organization, we found there were no problems.
As a matter of fact, none of the problems envisioned so far as I
know ever came up. In fact, as General Eisenhower pointed out in his
testimony in 1948, the units, in fact, improved in morale and attitude
toward their jobs and they, in general, shaped up.
Senator PROXMIRE. So it's a matter of leadership. I was impressed
by the Eisenhower statement, too. General Eisenhower indicated, as
an old Army man at first, I think, he said he was violently against
having women in the military, but he change<l his min<l completely
because of the experience in World War II.
As you say, not only did women do a fine job, but they improved
the performance of men; they gave men more pride and more concern
with their performance than they had otherwise.
Colonel Hallaren?
Colonel HALLAREN. I:f I may comment on this boy-girl relationship
in a very general way. Back in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps
we had a regulation in the Army that women's barracks had to be
at least 150 feet from the nearest male barracks. Well, this was fine in
Iowa and Nebraska, but when we landed in Englancl, we found the
situation a litt~e bit different. We found that if you reached your
hand out the wmdow, you could practically touch the boys' barracks
next door. The British apparently had not heard about our regulation,
so we were housed there. Or perhaps the British men had more self
control than the Americans. [Laughter.]
But, at any rate, the commandants over there were very much concerned. I remember the first post I went to for the assignment of a
company. The commander of the post had hung up GI blankets, one
story high, between the men's and women's barracks. '\Vrll, it wasn't
long before the walls of Jericho came tumbling down.
At the next post, the commander said, "We are going to post MP's
all around the women's barracks because it isn't safe for them here."
It was wonderful the way they were taking care of us. "'\Vait," I said,
"until we have the first incident." He agreed to compromise. We had
the first incident that week. A couple of GI's who had been on the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
113
town came back after midnight and not identifying their home,
since the barracks all looked alike, crashed into the WAC barracks.
ell, they came out feet first, and we never had any more arguments
about posting MP's. They had everything, including barbed wire,
t_hey wanted to put up for protection of the women. Now we have
gone by all that.
- The Army today puts women and men in the same buildings. I assume they are on different floors. Of course, the colleges don't abide
by that. But we have chan$'ed, and I think for the better.
Senator PROXMIRE. That 1s very helpful.
General Holm-then I would like to ask others to comment-I was
glad to hear your statement ·about the Air Force policy excluding
women from being utilized in certain positions. As you know, Assistant Secretary Chayes told this committee, and I quote:
,v
The deeper concern, and there is not only isolation, but the responsibility for
release of nuclear weapons. Both military and congressional leadership feel
uncomfortable about imposing this responsibility on women.
Do you see any reason, mental, emotional, physical, or social, why
women should not be in a position to turn the keys to launch nuclear
missilesi
General Hour. I have no reservations a.bout that whatever, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Pnox:mRE. Any other comment from other panelists?
Does your silence indicate your agreement?
Ms. PARR. Yes, indeed.
Ms. GoonMAN. Yes.
Colonel HALLAREN. Yes.
Senator PnoxMIRE. I gather you do not feel that a pilot flight control situation would cause women pilots to burst into tears and beco~e
helpless. Is there any situation that they might not be able to meet 1
General HoLM. I don't know of any.
LAWSUIT CHALLENGES CONSTI'.rUTIONALITY OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST
WOMEN IN THE NAVY
·Senator PROXMIRE. ~Is. Goodman, I understand your class action
lawsuit against the Navy is still in litigation. I wouldn't expect you to
give us your side of the argument at all, but could you give me an idea
of the issues at stake in that suit?
Ms. GoomuAN. ·we are challenging the constitutionality of the statute
which says that, with very small exceptions, women cannot serve
aboard Navy ships. This statute violates the rights of women in the
Navy to equal protection of the law.
According to well-established constitutional principles classifications by gender must serve important governmental objectives and
must be substantially related to achievement of those objectives.
As far as we have been able to determine to date in the course of our
litigation, there are absolutely no governmental objectives served by
that statute. Indeed, as far as we can see, the interests of government
tn·e defeated by enforcement of the statute.
""\-Ve have heard testimony, for example, that women cost the armed
services less and that women recruits are at least mentally more capable than male recruits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
114
Senator PROXMIRE. And, of course, what this does, is it not true, not
permitting women to serve aboard ship g1,eatly limits their promotion
opportunities, it means they not only have lesser opportunities for
women to serve in the Navy, but it also means that the opportunities to
serve in positions which pay more and which have more authority
and more responsibilities are denied women.
Ms. GooDMAN. The tales of the women who are plaintiffs in this suit
are very interesting. Yona Owens, the woman who originally came to
the ACLU and asked us to take her case, was; trained as an interior
electronics technician. She was trafoed at great expense to the Government to service and maintain electronics equipment found only aboard
ships.
· Yet she was never allowed on a ship except as a guest. As a result, she
has never used the skills the Navy sent her to school to learn. Her inability to use her skills alone was nry frustrating to her. But, in addition, when she took the examinations which are required to advance to
higher pay grades, she was tested on equipment she had never actually
seen. Her mitle counterparts sitting for that same examination had had
daily experience with that equipment. Obviously her chances of advancement were greatly restricted. She did manage to pass those tests
b.ut only by putting in extra hours of studying, not required of a man.
PREGNANCY
ISSUE EXAMINED
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr, I ,vant to confront another buga.boo. It
may be unpleasant to discuss it, but I think it is necessary for us to
bring it out and look at it.
How does pregnancy of soldiers a:fiect military operations i How
much time is lost from duty and what are the costs of pregnancy to the
ser¥ices~
Ms. PARR; I can provide you with some of those statistics, Senator
Proxmire.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
The following information is from the May 1977 report of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense entitled "Use of Women in the Military" (pp. 27 and
28):
T.he Army collected data during fiscal year 1976. For pregnancies terminated in
abortion, the lost time approximates that of a minor illness, averaging 10-12 days,
including 4.8 days of hospitalization.
According to the Army, approximately 8 percent of the women become pregnant each year and 5.4 percent of the women on active duty go to term and deliver
a child each year. The average pregnancy carried to term causes 105 days lost time
or 29 percent of a manyear. At any given time, 3.8 percent of the women can be expected to be pregnant or on postnatal convalescent leave. For the Army, some 40
percent of the women giving birth on active duty request release from active
duty after postnatal leave.
The Air Force reported similar results with approximately 8 percent of their
women becoming pregnant each year. The Air Force reported that women have
about twice the lost time as men due to medical absence. Much of this lost ti~ is
due to pregnancy and related female medical care.
The pregnancy problem is similar in the Navy and Marine Coi,JS, but the.Navy
pointed out that lost time due to pregnancy and abortion ,should be weighed in the
context of total lost time. The following table compares major lost time categories
in the N"avy for enlisted men and women ..
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
115
COMPARISON OF LOST TIME FOR ENLISTED MEN AND WOMEN IN THE NAVY
Lost days as a percent of total
days available
Lost time category
Alcohol abuse ___ --------------------------------------------------------------3~~~ti~~ized absence (AWOL)____________________________________________________
Returned deserters______________________________________________________________
Abortion __________________________________________________ ----------___________
Pregnancy ______________________________________________________ ---------_-----Tota L __________ • ___ __ __ __ _______ _____ __ ______ __ __ _____ _______ __ _______ __
Women
Men
0. 09
:
• 07
• 03
• 37
0. 12
g~
:. ~I62
0
0
- - --63 - - -l_10
Even though pregnancy is the major cause of lost time among women, they
lose, on the average, only about half as much time as men. Men's lost time to
desertion, alcoholism and drug abuse tend to result in the loss of several consecutive months, similar to pregnancy. Lost time for unauthorized absence is usually a matter of days lost, as is abortion. However, both desertions and unauthorized absences may correlate with unpleasantness of an individual's job.
Women are less likely to be in such jobs than men, especially in the Navy. All
Services are initiating studies of comparative lost time for men and women.
Ms. PARR. As :far as pregnancy, I want to make a few statements.
One is women do have some choices about pregnancy. I can think of
few institutions outside the military that are as superbly qualified to
provide information and training. I have had a phone call from a
friend in the service who said:
"Yon know a lot of women, a lot of my friends, here are confronting this. It is a difficult issue for us. But we believe that a lot of the
women who are getting pregnant are women who are not choosing to
become pregnant."
And my friend said, "If the military were doing a better job of
providing information and training about contraception, the pregnancy rate would decrease." She cited a small unit where this, in fact,
had happened. A lot of the young women who went to the military
are from parts of the country like I am from, the South, where sex
education is prohibited in the public schools. So the information that
they have about their own sexuality, about how they get pregnant, is
extremely limited, and for the most part it is very inaccurate.
Now, the military, as I understand it, provides about an hour of
training in boot camp about human physiology 'and about the reproductive system.
I think that if the military wanted to address this issue squarely,
that they could do it by providing more information and training
and not just once a year, but perhaps provide some sort of counseling
services along these lines and certainly provide more information. I
think the pregnancy rate would probably drop, but I can't say for sure.
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me give statistics. According to the Army,
full-term pregnancy resulted in 106 days lost, about 8 percent of women
in the Army get pregnant each year. The Army estimates that over
12 months, 200,000 days are lost as a result of pregnancy.
So it is a problem.
At the same time, again to put it into perspective, when you compare it with the days lost by males, it is far less, including that and
all other reasons for women losing time.
23-366-78--9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
116
Ms. PARR. Right.
Senator PROXMIRE. Because of the greater problem that men have
with alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and AWOL in general.
Ms. PARR. When you compare the averages, male to female averages~
of course the female average-in the female average pregnancy is what
raises it. But, nevertheless, on the average, men lose more time than
women do, but the causes are different. The causes there are for the
most part alcohol and drug abuse.
Senator PROXMIRE. Then I understand, also, that the Air Force
policy-I would like you to comment on this-women getting pregnant
or otherwise acquiring minor children may remain on active duty
unless they request a discharge. Is this a proper policy?
Ms. PARR. Yes; I think so.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Ms. Leeper.
Ms. LEEPER. I have done a lot of looking into this matter, and I
believe that it is a problem. Apparently the Army believes it a bigger
problem than the other services, and it may be for them.
Senator PROXMIRE. Speak a little louder, please.
Ms. LEEPER. I think this area in the military is one of the most important areas where women have to realize that equal rights means
equal responsibility and even where pregnancy in the military is a
choice, one of the things I believe they need-the women in their
classes in basic training in sex education in basic training need to be
taught, thou~h they have individual rights to be pregnant, that it is
immensely difficult for many of them, motherhood is, combined with
service life.
Some of them do cope and cope very well. But many, we have to
face the fact, do not; many of them can, I think, look ahead and make
appropriate arrangements, the same as when a man is sent overseas and
he is doing his duty. If a mother is sent overseas without her child, she
is going to get a great deal of criticism for being an unfit mother
and deserting her child. Very few women have the emotional strength
to stand up under that.
I do think that all of these things, what the practical implications
of pregnancy are for service women-maybe they might want to
delay it until they set their career patterns or when they are fairly
sure they will be on a large base where it is practical. I think all these
things, the practical applications of what will happen to them when
they make this choice, must be taught at the basic training level.
That is one of the major reasons, though it's often a choice, it's one
in which you find women dropping out as soon as they are shipped
overseas; it's causing problems, and I think we have to admit that.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Holm.
SEX EDUCATION PROGRAMS EFFECTIVE
General HoLM. Mr. Chairman, I would like to agree with everything
that the other two witnesses have said and enlarge a little on the
experience in the Air Force in the late 1960's when we found the pregnancy losses were inordinately high; at least we thought they were.
So we embarked upon a rather effective sex education program for
the women, and we found that the bases where we had effective programs the pregnancy rate was cut in half.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
117
Another interesting thing we learned was that contrary to the myths
in our culture, young people are not as sophisticated on the subject
of sex as we think they are. Particularly those fresh out of high school.
They exchange ignorancies in the dormitories. We found that by having an effective sex education program we were able to reduce losses
rather dramatically. I think it is a management problem more than
anything else.
PARR SUGGESTS MEN ALSO HAVE SINGLE PARENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Ms. PARR. I think, too, as far as single parents are concerned, that
we should consider that a management issue, not necessarily a women's
issue, but with divorce rates increasing the way they are, there are
increasing numbers of men who are serving in the military and who
have total responsibility for the care and well-being of their children.
I think this is an issue that does have to be addressed, but I don't think
it is necessarily a women's issue. It is a parents' issue.
Senator PROXMIRE. I would like to ask both Colonel Hallaren and
General Holm, Ms. Goodman discussed the case of the woman who
was trained as an electronics expert, and then not allowed to serve
on ships where she could have practical experience in certain electronics equipment.
From your knowledge, is this an isolated case or does it happen frequently? Do the present rules and regulations prevent women from
serving in roles for which they were trained?
Colonel HALLAREN. I have been out of the service for 17 years and
I am not up on the latest, but I do think that there are many instances of this kind. I have heard of instances, but I don't know
whether they are isolated or represent large numbers. I cannot say
today.
I think, Jeanne, who has more recent experience in the Air Force,
could tell you.
General HoLM. It is a problem. It is a problem for officers as well
as enlisted personnel. This is what I refer to as "job shuffling," particularly with officers. Officers with backgrounds m intelligence, for
,example, being shifted to protocol or administration, there is a
general reluctance on the part of local commanders often to accept
a woman as a professional in a nontra.ditional field.
There is a tendency to move them into the more traditional jobs
after they have been trained at great expense. Of course, this has a
distinct effect on their career progress.
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr, do you have any observations along
this line?
Ms. PARR. Well, no, sir; but I would like the opportunity to go
through our files and look for letters and correspondence that provide
examples of these kinds of problems and submit those for the record.
Senator PROXMIRE. Fine.
[The following information was subsequently supplied for the
record:]
High loss rates of women from non-traditional occupation groups is a problem
of concern to the National Coalition for Women in Defense. The extent of the
difficulty was documented in the previously mentioned OASD report "Use of
Women in the Military." Before quoting from that report, however, I want to
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
118
emphasize that the statistics are somewhat misleading inasmuch as they are
based upon very small sample sizes. Theda ta are as follows :
Losses from the most non-traditional skills are much higher for women than
men. In electronic equipment repair, 76 percent of the 1973 female accessions
had left the occupation group by the end of fiscal year 1976 as compared to 51
percent for male. In the same year group, 90 percent of the women had left
maintenance as compared with 53 percent of the men. In crafts, 88 percent of
the women were gone and 55 percent of the men. Even in services and supply
handling, 77 percent of the women had left that skill as compared with 58 percent of the men. Those women in the more traditional skills had much lower
loss rates than men. In administration, only 30 percent of the women had left at
the end of three years as compared to 60 percent of the men. In communications/
intelligence, 31 percent of the women were gone as compared to 57 percent of the
men. In medical/dental, there was a 25-percent loss rate for women and 54 percent for men.
In interpreting this data, the military offers the explanations to the effect that
"many women who do not adjust well in non-traditional skills may be leaving
the Service" and "women who try non-traditional occupations may be migrating
to the more traditional ones."
I believe that negative attitudes of supervisory personnel toward women in
non-traditional jobs and a working climate that produces isolation of these
women are factors that contribute heavily to this kind of job shuffling. In this
regard I would like to call the attention of the subcommittee to regulations proposed by the Department of Labor, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs on Women in Construction (Federal Register, vol. 42, No. 158, August 16,
1977, 60-4.3(a)7a).
Here it is proposed that construction contractors and subcontractors be obliged
to "ensure and maintain a working environment free of harassment, intimidation, and coercion." Moreover, the contractor, "where possible, will assign two
or more women to the construction project ... and shall specifically ensure that
all ... supervisory personnel are aware of and carry out the contractor's obligation to maintain such a working environment, with specific attention to minority
or female individuals."
Anecdotes informally relayed to me and other Coalition participants by
women currently serving in the Armed Forces support the argument that inadequate training of military personnel to overcome sex-role stereotyping and needlessly inhospitable working environments, as well as the Services' narrow interpretations of rules and regulations, prevent women from serving in roles for
which they were trained.
LIMITATION TO TRAINING PROVIDED TO WOMEN
Ms. GooDMAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to add these comments.
Yona Owens, the lead plaintiff in our Navy suit, was put in an awkward position by the Navy. She enlisted soon after all the ratings
were open to women, was assigned to a shipboard rating, trained in
skills required abroad ships, and then never permitted to use those
skills.
I don't know how many women are in precisely her position. However, the alternative to putting women in Yona Owen's position is to
restrict their opportunities, to say they may not learn electronics
skills, they may not get the kind of training that men who enlist in
the Navy can expect as a matter of course.
One of our other plaintiffs, N atoka Peden wanted to train as a
diver when she entered the Navy. She was told no, she could not train
as a diver because she is a woman and could not go aboard ships.
Only much later did she managed to get that training.
The situations of these two plaintiffs illustrate the alternatives open
to the military as long as there is only partial integration : either t,o
train women for jobs they cannot do, or to refuse to give them the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
119
very valuable training the armed services offer. Neither solution is
good.
Senator PROXMIRE. General Holm, 11 occupation fields are closed
to enlisted women by the Air Force. Do you think women should be
allowed to enter any of these: Aerial gunner, in-flight refueling operator, flight engineer, aircraft load master, pararescue recovery teams,
ground radio communications equipment repairman~
General HoLM. Yes, sir, I think they should be authorized to enter
any field in which they qualify, on the same basis that a man would
have to qualify for the same job.
Senator PROXMIRE. What were your actual responsibilities when
you were director of the Women's Air Force and assigned to staff
duty in the Pentagon and overseas 1
General HoLl\f. I was the titular head, if you wil1, of the women
in the Air Force. I had no command responsibilities whatsoever.
I was on the staff to report to the deputy chief of staff for personnel,
and I also advised the Secretary and the Chief of Staff on the utilization of military women.
I traveled a great deal to find out firsthand what was going on in
the field at base level ; I made recommendations for policy changes;
and made recommendations concerning strengths, and recruitment
policies; nniforms; any policy that affected women either directly
or indirectly.
Senator PROXMIRE. Were your duties the same as a man's in a similar position?
General HoLM. I don't know of any similar position in the Air
Force.
Senator PROXMIRE. Were you ever assigned duties you could
not handle because you were a woman?
General HoLM, No, sir. The final job that I had before I retired was
as Director of the Air Force Personnel Council that had been held by
male major generals and I think I did that job as well as any of them
and better than some.
Senator PROXMIRE. I would like each of you to comment on this
observation. No less than the commander of the Marine Training
Base on Parris Island has stated, "There is no reason a female cannot
fight just like a male."
I would like to ask each of you to say whether you agree, what jobs,
if any that women might not be able to handle.
Ms.Leeper.
Ms. LEEPER. Hooray; and, none. I think you had two questions there.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Yes; we are ready.
Ms. LEEPER. I said, "Hooray, and none." That is really my only
comment. I am glad he made the statement; and, no, I don't think
there are any positions that they cannot serve.
Ms. PARR. I agree, but perhaps you would like to repeat it since we
have had the break.
Senator PROXMIRE. The statement was, the commander of the
Marine Training Base at Parris Island said, "There is no reason the
female cannot fight just like the male."
Ms. PARR. Well, I agree. There is no reason a female cannot fight
just like a man.
Senator PRoxMIRE. General Holm.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
120
General HoLM. There is an assumption there that all men can fight.
[Laughter.] And I don't buy that. I think some people can and some
people cannot. I don't think it is necessarily limited by their sex.
Senator PROXMIRE, In fairness to the commander, he didn't say
"all," he said, "There is no reason the female cannot fight just like the
male."
He wasn't saying "all men can fight." Obviously, you are right,
they all cannot.
General HOLM. I think there are some men who can fight, just like
women.
Senator PROXMIRE. What you are saying is that women as a group
canfight-General HoLM. I am saying that generalizations are not terribly
useful. Generalizations are not terribly useful at all.
Ms. GooDMAN. His statement is a hard one to argue with. I think
we have all said today the same thing in different words.
Senator PROXMIRE. Now, you have the other extreme. For example,
when William Westmoreland, the former commander in Vietnam,
acknowledging he never would have made such a statement while on
active duty, said:
Maybe you could :find one woman in 10,000 who could lead in combat, but she
would be a freak; and we are not running a military academy for freaks. The
pendulum has gone too far. We are asking women to do impossible things. I
don't b'elieve women can carry a pack, live in a foxhole, or go for a week without
taking a bath.
Do you have any comments on that~
General HOLM. I think that General Westmoreland, when he said
that got into bed with General Hershey [laughter], who is known to
have said that he thinks that women are nothing but defective men
and that the Armed Forces could be run by defective men. He also
compared women to men in wheelchairs and he said you cannot run
the Armed Forces with men in wheelchairs. I cannot agree with General Westmoreland on this.
Senator PROXMIRE, Any other comments~
Ms. GoooMAN. He is wrong. [Laughter.]
Ms. PARR. I think that women at the academies this first year are
providing abundant evidence of just how wrong he is. I understand
these women are doing very, very well, particularly academically,
but they are also measuring up physically. I am sure they are carrying packs and doing all those things he said they couldn't do.
Senator PROXMIRE. I don't know where he got the idea they couldn't
go for a week without taking a bath. Unfortunately, I have known
a few who have been capable of that. [Laughter.]
SENATOR PROXMIBE EXAMINES 'l1lIE TRADITIONAL PERCEPTIONS
OF THE MILITARY
Do you have any figures, General Holm, on how many soldiers will
be sent in direct combat~
General HoLM. No, sir, I do not.
Senator PROXMIRE. Any notion of how small a percentage that is,
in direct combat~
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
121
General Hour. The latest combat information I have is based on
the Gates Commission study and maybe the Manpower Commission
study that estimated it in the neighborhood of 8 percent actually will
see direct combat in terms of infantry combat.
Senator PROXMIRE. That is my understanding. That is a very significant point because people still think of the military as being a
job for the person who is down there in the foxhole, as General Westmoreland might put it, in a front line with a bayonet or rifle shooting
at somebody who is 100 feet away.
As you say that is 8 percent, I think probably that is a high figure,
it is probably less than that. In fact, the supply, support logistic tail
is very long and-General HoLM. And _gets longer.
Senator PROXMIRE Lcontinumg]. Gets so complicated, and so on.
Then, take the other areas, drivmg a tank, flying a plane, working
with missiles, submarines and so forth-General HOLM. Or flying an airplane.
Senator PROXMIRE. All of those, it is certainly something a woman
can handle as easily as a man.
AIR FORCE PROMOTIONS BASED ON "RATING"
General HoLM. To point out how insidious this restriction with
regard to flying combat aircraft can be, since they have interpreted
the law to mean women may not fly any kind of aircraft, approximately half of the officers in the Air Force are pilots and navgators, known as rated officers.
Senator PROXMIRE. The rest are not in combat.
General HoLM. Nonrated. The rated officer has a leg up on everybody else. As in all organizations, there is a pecking order for promotions, particularly for career advancement.
The top of the pecking order in the Air Force officers' structure is
the rated officer. Next is the academy graduate who usually is a rated
officer as well. Next would be the regular officer. Academy men are
the only ones with regular appointments as second lieutenants. Next,
I think you might say, those who have had combat duty and the
services have done their best to keep women out of combat duty.
Also, pilots have preference for command jobs, very important for
promotion to general officer rank.
It is difficult to be a commander of a wing or base commander if
you are a woman and nonrated and those are the best jobs in the Air
Force. You also get _preferential treatment in selection for the top
professional schools. So, it is an insidious thing.
Also, you go back over to the procurement process for the last 20
years and you will find that women were eliminated from most of
the procurement programs for the Air Force.
One of the excuses for using so few, putting so few into the Academies, has been that they may not fly airplanes. It was also a reason
for excluding them from any scholarships offered by the ROTC.
Anyone who applies for commission through OTS as a rated
officer, has a better opportunity to get into the officer training school
than one not qualified to fly. So, it 1s an insidious thing.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
122
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me ask you, are women promoted to the
general and flag rank in the same way as men?
General HoLM. I am the equal opportunity example today. I am
so far the onlv women in all of the Armed Forces who has ever been
promoted to the rank of major gener~l. I find it hard to believe t~at
I am the only one qualified. I don't thmk they have equal opportumty
to achieve the top ranks.
In the Air Force, one of the reasons they don't i'S they are excluded
from rated officer jobs.
Senator PROXMIRE. When you retired from the Air Force, what
rank had been attained?
General HoLM. Major General.
Senator PROXMIRE. If you were to reenter the service, to what rank
would you be assigned?
General HoLM. Major General.
Senator PROXMIRE. The only one?
General HoLM. Yes, sir.
CONCERN FOR WOMEN'S SAFETY NOT VALID
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr, it seems that many types of duties are
closed to women not because women are unfit, but because of £ears for
the women's safety. Is that a valid concern?
Ms. PARR. I think it is a concern of the military, some of our military leaders. I don't believe that it has any validity. I think women
now are actively seeking a number of jobs where physical danger is
involved.
We have women on police forces; we have women State troopers;
we have women climbing mountains; women are falling out of airplanes; women are crop dusters.
As a parent, I suppose I would have some qualms if either my
daughter or my son was to choose a hazardous occupation, whether
that would be to be a crop duster or even to be an X-ray technician, I
understand their longevity on the average is less than other people's.
But to deny these opportunities to all women on the basis of perhaps some parents' £ears or grandparents' fears is really outrageous.
Senator PROXMIRE. Do you think that most mothers £eel that wa v
about both their sons and daughters? They have the same feeling. o·f
care and concern about their well-being, but do you think it is a feeling of more concern for a daughter than for a son or do you think it
is about the same?
Ms. PARR. Well, I think Jill said it very nicely. She said, "Parents
don't weep more for their daughters than for their sons." Indeed not.
We want our children to have equal opportunities to succeed professionally and personally, and we don't want them to come to any harm,
but we don't make distinctions on the basis of sex, at least in my family and in the families that I know about in terms of whose life is
more valuable.
MOOD
OF THE NATION TOWARD WOMEN IN COMBAT
Senator PROXMIRE. Could I ask, Ms. Leeper, how do you think the
American people as a whole would react to allowing women to volun
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
123
teer for combat? I mentioned it in my survey and Wisconsin respondents indicated they approved it, but how do you feel the reaction is
likely to be?
Ms. LEEPER. I think you would have to phrase the question very
carefully so that it was apparent that it was voluntary and it was apparent that only those qualified and had the ability.
If you say, women in combat, I found that it does tend to be a red
flag to many people.
Therefore, as I say, if we are to run a poll, let's make sure that it
is understood it is voluntary. I think there is a philosophical problem
in many people's mind that in essence, what you are saying is it may
be unfair to men because you are asking it if women may voluntarily
do things where men have no choice.
Senator PROXMIRE. Now, let's confront that part of it. How do you
think the American people as a whole would feel or are they likely to
change their mind on whether or not women should be in on exactly
the same basis as men and being required to serve under circumstances
in which the country's life is at stake?
Ms. LEEPER. I have learned over and over again, and I am not an
expert on what the American people feel, because they constantly surprise me--and I suspect they surprise you-I don't think we will know
until we ask.
I did notice one thing, the Pentagon or the various services, when
they were making their arguments about keeping women out of the
service academies made the same argument, that it is not the will of the
American people.
The women went into the academies and there was no uproar from
the American people and that is about as close an indication as you are
going to get.
Ms. PARR. I think, too, back to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, would that
ever have been passed if we had to rely on our judgment and our assessment of the will of the American people. I think sometimes people need
to be led and we look to you in Congress to provide that sort of leadership that we have a democratic system, but sometimes this Congress
passes legislation that is extremely unpopular but it is important to
explore what the American public think or believes about a particular
issue, but if you, here in Congress, in your wisdom, we believe that it
is in the best interests of this Nation to use women in combat positions,
then I b'elieve you have the responsibility to make that possible.
FEW WOMEN PROMOTED TO TOP RANKS
Senator PROXMIRE. General Holm, I want to get back just for a minute to the very interesting point you raise on the opportunities for
women to be promoted to the top ranks in the military.
I think that is not only important in itself, but it is important in
making it obvious to women throughout the country that here is an
areas where thev can aspire to a top rank. It may be very discouraging
for women to feel they can serve in a subordinate position but not
achieve what their capability should permit.
There are now only four female colonels out of 4,534. In other words,
one-tenth of 1 percent, in the Air Force.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
124
The Air Force claims this is true in part because of a ceiling on the
number of women officers that existed before 1968 ; is that true i
General Hour. No, sir, it is not. First of all, there are only two
colonels left as of today as far as I know.
Senator PROXMIRE. One retired i
General HoLM. One retired, but I don't know where they got the
four. So far as I know, there are only two left. One recently retired
and another was promoted to brigadier general. There has never been
a ceiling on the officer strength of the women in the Air Force, referring to the line, of course, as opposed to the medical and professionals.
There is a common misconception that the 2 percent imposed by
Public Law 625, the Womens Armed Services Integration Act of
1948, on the regular officer structure should be interpreted to apply to
the total force. It has never been so.
The 700 they talk about was a result, the strength of 700, which
existed in 1965 and 1966 was merely the result of gains and losses. We
had very few gains and the losses compensated for the gains.
LACK OF PROMOTIONS LAID TO MISTAKES IN THE 1950'S
Senator PROXMIRE. Do you see the promotion rate for women officers
in the Air Force improving now?
General HoLM. It is difficult to tell because the number of eligibles
is dwindling so rapidly. One of the reasons we have only two colonels
now is we procured so few officers in the 1950's.
We are paying now for the mistakes we made in the 1950's and early
1960's by not commissioning more women officers.
It depends on their rate of selection from among eligibles. I would
say probably with the colonels and lieutenant colonels, it is probably
equal. I would question, however, whether the selection to major provides equal opportunity and, of course that is the crunch.
If you don't get selected for major and you get passed over a couple
times, your chances for a future in the Air Force are nebulous at best.
Senator PRoxMIRE. I would like to ask you and Colonel Hallaren
and Ms. Goodman to comment on this in light of what you have told
us.
How would the defense personnel management act work? How
would that work to equalize promotion between men and women in
view of the poor prospects for the Defense Officer Personnel Manageme_nt Act, what method yould you recommend to increase the opportumty for advancement of women officers i
General HoLM. I don't think it would affect it, Mr. Chairman, except for the Navy. I think it would be helpful for the women in the
Navy to be considered for promotion in the line along with their contemporaries, today they have to be selected separately. Whether or not
they would fare as well remains to be seen because I assume that when
women are competing with one another, they probably have some kind
of a quota or cutoff system that would provide them with the same
opportunities as the men in the line.
I think it is a career progression kind of thing that is involved here.
If you don't compete with your contemporaries, male and female, you
don't know whether you got your promotion on an equal basis or
whether you were as qualified as your male contemporary being promoted or vice-versa.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
125
Senator PROXMIRE. Colonel Ha.Haren.
Colonel HALLAREN. I don't know anything in the act that would improve the current situation.
Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you. Ms. Goodman.
Ms. GooDMAN. I am not familiar enough with the act to comment
intelligently on that.
LACK OF HOUSING RESTRICTS USING WOMEN IN MILITARY
Senator PROXMIRE. Again, 72,700 Air Force positions overseas are
closed to women because of limited housing facilities. Does that seem
reasonable to you~
General HoLM. No, sir, it does not.
Senator PRoxMIRE. What can be done about it~
General HoLM. There are misconceptions that exist in the military
about what is required to house women. The fact is that most women
in the military live in buildings built for men, so I don't know what
the hullabaloo is about.
I don't know what the problem is. Most of our dormitories these
days are coeducational. Now the women in the enlisted dormitories
live on one floor, the men on another. Officer quarters have ·always been
coeducational. So I don't understand the problem. It is consistently
used, however, as an argument against assignment of women.
Senator PROXMIRE. Any problem you feel can be handled by proper
leadership and discipline which you think the services are capable of
achieving~
General HoLM. Yes; I think we should plan our facilities around
the individuals, not the reverse. Housing should not dictate how the
services use their people. The reverse should be the case.
Senator PROXMIRE. I would like to ask every one of you five witnesses to comment on the fact that 1976 brought a marked decrease in
the percentage of women as total recruits to the Army, Navy, and
Air Force.
I would like to ask you what you think the reason for that is. We
will start off with Ms. Goodman and go down the line.
Ms. GooDMAN. I don't think I understand the question. Is it that
fewer women have been accepted into the military or fewer women
are interested in the military~
Senator PRoxMIRE. Well, the total number of women recruits, that
would perhaps be a product of the number who tried to be admitted,
but it could also be a product of whether the services would take them
or not.
As you pointed out, some of them ·are turned down who were qualified. But I would like to have your notion as to how this developed. I
am talking about the rate of increase in women recruits.
Ms. GooDMAN. If we are talking about the number of women actually entering the military, I think we can find-RATE
WOMEN ENTER MILITARY DECLINING
Senator PROXMIRE. Let me correct what I have said, because what I
have said was not phrased properly the first time. I said a marked decrease in the percentage of women; I should have said a marked de-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
126
,crease in the rate of increase; isn't that correct? That is quite different.
These things-these statistics are sometimes confusing.
I will give you the figures and you can give me your reaction from
that.
In the Army, the percentage of total recruits in 1972 was 3.3 percent women. For 1973, it was 4.1; 1974, 8.4; and in 1975, 10.3 percent. In 1976, it declined to 8.8 percent.
In the Navy, 2.5, 5.3, 7.5, 6.7, and declined to 5.9 percent.
In the Marine Corps, 1.3, 1.4, 1.9, 2.3, and then it was 2.4 percent,
a slight increase in that case, that was exceptional.
The Air Force, 5.4, 6.8, 11.1, 13.2, then it declined in 1976 to 12.0
percent.
The Department of Defense total was in percentage, 1972, 3.3,
1973 up to 4.6, 1974 rose to 7.9, 1975 rose to 8.8, 1976, it declined to
7.9 percent.
So, we have more women in the military than we had before, but
the rate of actually going in is less. So I hope my question is clear.
Ms. GoomrAN. I think I understand the question, now.
The number of women entering the military is determined by the
military itself. The military has very strict quotas. Women, often
very qualified women, at least in the Navy, are turned away all the
time.
So, what we are talking about is a decision on the part of the armed
services to slow the growth that we have seen in the percentage of
women.
I believe, as I have said in my testimony, that that is a direct result
of the problems that come from partial integration of women into
the armed services, where, for example, women are accepted into the
Navy and then told they cannot go aboard ships. They are accepted
into the Army and told they cannot fight. They are accepted into the
Air Forces and are told they cannot fly.
This creates an absolutely impossible situation not only for the
women involved, but for the armed services themselves. There is a
maximum number of women the services can use as long as their
roles are so drastically restricted. For example, in the Navy, where
half their billets are billets at sea, there is no way on the £ace of the
earth the Navy can have more than 50 percent women. But, in addition, the Navy must also reserve a £air number of shore billets for
men who are on shore duty so that men are not forced to spend all
of their time at sea.
I see the decrease in initiatives concerning women as a direct result
of the problems that arise from partial integration. And I see the
answer as full integration.
Senator PnoxMIRE. Colonel Hallaren.
Colonel HALLAREN. I think that the lower figure recently is due to
the lack of upward mobility and I think the women are alert to that.
I think that when opportunity is opened up, there will be more
coming in if the services lift the quotas.
Ql;OTAS AND RESTRICTIONS BAR WOMEN FROM ENTERING MILITARY
General Hour. Mr. Chairman, I think we have always histoicioally
nnderest.imwted the resource tfat,t is out !there that is willing to join the
Armed Forees. In 1966, when I did it!he first interservice study on the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
127
possibility of expanding the utilization of military m>men, we tried
to estimate what that capability was and we fell far, far short of what
it :really was.
I think the services, wiltfu. all due respect, have tried to guess what
they think tJhe availaJble resource of interested people will oo. By the
same token, I also fool there is a sense thaJt maybe, 'by the outside pressure will be off, off from the Congress, off from the press, off from the
Secretary of Defense, so 11:Jh.ey oan resume business as usual.
Bult, basically, I think it is an eduooted guess on what they think
they can recruit.
Senator PROXMIRE. Well, whiaJt they actually did recruit was less in
1976 than in 1975. It was the first dropoff in a long time. That is what
concerns me.
General HoLM. I couldn't answer thaJt question.
Senator PROXMIRE. Ms. Parr.
Ms. PARR. I think there are probably a number of very complicated
and intefll'elrut.ed factors entering into this decrease, ibut I think one of
t,he most important faclors is the military policies and the quotas they
are est,ablishing.
We have heard from individuals, one in particular, who tried to
enlist and was told-and she was a college graduate. She was a magna
cum laude college graduate, she was told she would 'have tJo wait 6
months before she would be taken in booause the quolt;as were full and
even if she waited 6 months She was waiting 6 months for a job as a
cook because the quotas for the other specialties which did interest her,
the quotas for women were full.
I would like to, if I could, read something here. I think it helps make
the point ,about' tlh.e rel,ationsihip between unemployment and
recruitment.
When unemployment rates go up, the military has traditionally
found it easier to recruit volunteers.. The unemployment rates for
women have been much, mucJh higher than those for men, so theoretically, it should be easier to recruit them; plus the military jobs are
good jobs for women.
There was a "Dear Abby" column recently in Teen magazine and
Dear Abby said. Looking for a job-she was saying this to teenagers-use this check list on your job interviews.
First, ask for at least $374 a monrt.h plus free room and board.
Second, insist on 30 days vacation in the first year.
Third, demand $300 for new clothes upkeep iallowance.
Fourth, be sure full and free recreational facilities are available,
golf, theaters, horseback riding.
Fifth, scream if you don't have a free meal and dental plan wirt.h
unlimited sick leave. Tell your boss you expec;t; $150 a month raise jf
you get married.
Sixth, don't be hassled because you are without experience. Pound
the table and let it be known you expect to learn a skill at his expense
with full pay.
And, seventh, finally, insist on the option of quitting after 3 years
to go to college and you expect him to contribute two-thirds to an
educational fund of more than $8,000.
The punchline is, if an employer agrees to all these terms, you are in
the U.S. Army. [Laughter.]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
128
Senator PROXMIRE. Terrific. Very good.
Ms PARR. What jobs can provide these opportunities in the civilian
sector~
So, again, I believe that these decreases are more a result of military
policies and procedures than disinterest on the part of young women.
General HoLM. It may also, Mr. Chairman, be a result of the recruiting philosophy which is basically a walk-through-the-door philosophy.
It is much easier for the recruiter to have the applicant walk through
the door.
I seriously doubt if there is much of an outreach program particularly in view of the ceilings they have imposed on the more technical
jobs and the traditionally women's jobs. I think arbitrary ceilings they
have established by career field have turned many women away who
could qualify for the more traditional jobs, but have been turned away
because they don't qualify as engineers, scientists or mathematicians.
RACIAL EXPERIENCE SHOWED INTEGRATION ENCOURAGED ACCEPTANCE
Senator PROXMIRE. I understand that certain Army and Air Force
training films promise to make a man out of the recruit. That isn't
much incentive for a woman, is it~
General HoLM. That is not untypical of many of the recruiting
programs.
Senator PROXMIRE. I just have a couple of more questions; Ms. Parr,
at least one study has shown that as racial segregation decreased, and
as integration increased in the military, so, too, did acceptance of
blacks by the whites increase.
Do you anticipate the same trend with women i
Ms. PARR. Yes; indeed I do. But I do believe there is a need for the
military to provide more training on the subject of sex discrimination
and sexual stereotype roles.
Senator PROXMIRE. Not only that, don't you think there is a clear,
positive element here; don't you think it is more attractive, it seems to
me, to go into the armed forces if there are women in the armed forces,
too, just as it is more attractive to the majority of men who go to
college who want to go to a college where there are women also, and
the same thing for women.
They want to go to a college, by and large, that isn't segregated. The
segregated women's colleges have almost disappeared now. As you
have an opportunity for people to meet others of the same age of the
opposite sex, it seems to me that is a positive and wholesome and
proper appeal.
Mr. PARR. Yes, indeed, it is but perhaps some of the Marine recruiters might not agree with you.
Senator PROXMIRE. Unfortunately, that is true. One of you, I know
who it was, did discuss the fact that we have overcome quite successfully the racial discrimination which was such a pain, such a great cost
to our country in the past.
And, now, it would be shocking not to give an equal opportunity for
the blacks and Spanish-speakin~ people and so forth to serve equally
with whites, with the, majority, m the military in every capacity.
And, yet, we don't have that feeling about women. It is a strange
sort of discrimination.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
129
Ms. PARR. I think there should be some special efforts made with
regard to minority women and in spite of my earlier claims about the
fact that we have probably had enough research on a lot of subjects,
we have done preliminary studies which show that minority women
are underrepresented in a lot of the areas that even other women
are finding in the military in some of the training opportunities and
so on.
When we have tried to get more information about this subject,
we have received the answer that data is often not broken down
by both sex and race. I think it is important that as a general policy
matter that this information is kept in that particular form so we
can get the answers to some of these questions.
EFFECT OF THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT ON THE MILITARY
Senator PROXMIRE. As you know, the equal rights amendment
is still in the balance. It needs three States to confirm it. How would
passage of the equal rights amendment affect women in the military i
Ms. PARR. I am not a legal scholar, and all I can do is report some
of_ the things that I have read. I think you probably read the same
thmgs.
Before I answer that question directly, I would like to digress for
a moment to say that some of us believe that, perhaps, passage of the
equal rights amendment would be easier if the women-in-combat
issue were separated from it.
I just came back from Louisiana where I lived and worked several years and worked very hard for the equal rights amendment. It
is still not ratified there and one of the main reasons for that is because
of the women-in-combat issue, because the State legislators are very
fearsome of that issue and very much opposed to women playing a combat role.
But if the women-in-combat issue were separated from the equal
rights amendment, if we dealt with these issues as two separate
ones-and, indeed, they are--I believe that passage of the equal rights
amendment would be easier as far as what effect it has.
Perhaps, Ms. Leeper would like to speak to that.
Senator PROXMIRE. Yes.
Ms. LEEPER. I agree with Ms. Parr; I do think that I-I sometimes say I think the only valid claim of our opponents in the
ERA is the combat issue. But the point we have in response is that
Congress has had the J?Ower always to draft women if they desire and
if they need to, they, m fact, will, regardless of whether the amendment passes.
I believe that the time may well come if we reinstate the draft
just for men, we may find men bringing suit as /being unfair not to
also draft women because I believe we have actually in this society
come that far.
Ms. GooDMAN. I would like to point out there have been such suits
on behalf of men. If the ERA were passed, those suits would be
won by those plaintiffs. And, I have no question if the ERA were
I>assed that I would not be litigatin~ this case about women aboard
ships the way I am before Judge S1rica right now.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
130
Senator PROXMIRE. So you think the ERA would be very help-
ful in providing greater opportunities for women in the military i
Ms. GooDMAN. Absolutely. We would win the war instead on engaging in endless trench warfare.
General HoLM. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, it has already
helped enormously.
Senator PRoxMIRE. Even though it has not become law.
General HOLM. Yes, sir; when it was being debated in the Congress, many of the services went back to do their, what I referred
to as, "what-if studies," to determine what would be the impact if the
ERA is ratified.
As a result of some of those studies, many of the policies that
we had had a very difficult time with, that we had proposed changes to,
were changed almost overnight because the services did these "what-if"
studies and determined there wasn't much logic to those policies anyway, so they changed them.
I would expect that if ERA could be postponed another 3 or 4
years, the issues that presently are holding up ERA, which I agree
are combat and drafting women, would be overtaken by events and that
those issues would be settled by changing the laws and policies. ERA
would then merely be a capstone.
Senator PROXMIRE. I would like to ask both General Holm and
Colonel Hallaren to comment on this last question; in view of the
anticipated shortfall of qualified men in the early 1980's, do you
think the All-Volunteer Army can survive as an All-Volunteer
Army without attracting large numbers of qualified women i
General Hour. I don't think it is possible, Mr. Chairman.
Senator PROXMIRE. Colonel Hallaren.
Colonel HALLAREN. I agree 100 percent.
Senator PRox~nRE. Thank you.
First, I want to thank you panelists. This is as fine a panel as I have
heard in a long, long time. You have all done an excellent job, I think,
in expressing your views and responding to questions on this issue.
It is clear to me that we need to attract more women to the military
to preserve the all-volunteer force concept. More importantly, it is time
to extend full and equal opportunities to women in the military, an
institution which happens to be the largest employer in the Nation.
It makes no sense economically or militarily to maintain the antiquated, backward, unfair restrictions against women. The military,
despite notable progress made in the past several years is a bastion o-f
myths and mindlessness where women are concerned.
This is unacceptable to the American people and to Congress. The
Defense Department seems to be slowly seeing the light, and I am confident the light will dawn if not on the W estmorelands, on the Browns.
Surely, in the present situation, it is inconsistent with the ideals and
policies of President Carter. The subcommittee plans to hold additional hearings which I hope to announce in the near future.
I want to thank you all very, very much.
The subcommittee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12 :07 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, subject to
the call of the Chair.]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
APPENDIX
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTEUS OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, D.C., September 16, 19i7.
The Hon. RICHARD BOU.ING,
Chairman, Joint Economio Committee,
Dirksen Senate office Building, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The League of Women Voters of the United States would
like to be listed as endorsing the goals outlined in testimony presented by Ms.
Carol C. Parr on behalf of the National Coalition for Women in Defense. The
Coalition's testimony was heard September 1, 1977, before the Subcommittee of
Priorities and Economy in Government's hearings on "'.l'he Role of Women in
the Military."
Sincerely,
RUTH C. CLUSEN, Pres-ident.
,vAsHINGTON, D.C., .A11gust 31, 1977.
JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE,
Subcommittee on Priorities and Economy in Government,
U.S. Congress, Washington, D.C.
;DEAR COMMITTEE MEMBEUS : The following statement is submitted for the
record of the September 1 hearing on "The Role of Women in the Military."
My name is Mira Nan Marshall. The following is a description of my recent
experience with the Army recruitment process. I hope it will illustrate for you
the impact of current military personnel policies on women who might wish to
serve in the United States .Armed Forces.
My background : 25 years old ; bachelor's degree in urban studies, magna cum
laude, University of Massachusetts; employed since age 17 at a variety of jobs
including factory machine operator, gas station attendant and assistant hotel
housekeeper; ACTION volunteer, 1974-75; female. I'm currently employed by
an organization which is a member of the Coalition for Women in Defense. My
father recently retired after more than 30 years service in the Army.
In October 1976, after spending the previous 12 months in an unsuccessful
search for full-time, permanent employment that would be in some way related
to my education, experience and interests, I decided to try joining the military.
My interest in military service stemmed from a variety of factor!>, listed below.
Underlying all of these reasons was an assumption that since the military was
now all-volunteer, there would always be immediate openings for people willing
to make certain trade-offs. This was later proven to be false in the case of
women enlistees.
Why the military? (All these are selfish reasons. I also wished to use my
skills and talents for the "good" of the people/community/nation.)
(1) Acquire a skill.-1 had been brought up to be independent and self-supporting. If I couldn't spend my life getting paid to do exactly what I cared
about, I thought that I should at the very least provide myself with a skill that
could be traded for a reasonable paycheck.
(2) Leadership training.-! enjoy leading people and managing operations,
so I thought th:e military could provide me with experience in this, if I became
an officer.
(3) Opportunity for advancement.-The idea of steady advancement, if one
does well, where "the rules of the game" are set out in advance, appealed to me.
(4) Educational assistance.-The various programs of educational assistance
were another attraction, since I would like to continue my education, but would
like to avoid any further indebtedness (I worked throughout my undergraduate
career, but still required education loan assistance.)
( 131}
23-36~78--10
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
132
(5) OhaZZenge.-Being unemployed was painfully demoralizing. I thought the
challenge of the discipline and completely new environment of the military
would help shake me up and get me moving again.
(6) Steady inaome.-Of course, while I wanted all the other opportunities, I
really needed an income, so I could pay my debts and no longer be dependent on
my parents for the necessities of life.
Following up on my interest in becoming an officer, I investigated the opportunities in all the services. All of them, except the Army, made it abundantly
clear that the soonest I could actually get in would be six months from that
time. The Army gave that time-frame for their "direct commission" program
for women, but the local recruiter in Alexandria did not have clear information on a time-frame for the enlistment/OCS option. I chose to attempt the
Army enlistment process, because it seemed to offer the most immediate opportunity and because I believed it would offer the most realistic and serious introduction to service life.
I took the Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Test, and qualified for all military
occupational specialities (MOS). The local recruiter then took me to Baltimore.
Here I was given a physical examination. (I was in perfect health except for
my poor eyesight.) I was then told about current available training opportunities. There were very few-the only one that sticks in my mind is "cook." I
had previously compos·ed a list of those M.O.S.s which were of any interest to
me (taken from the list of those available to women). They ranged from data
processor to draftsperson to law clerk. When I inquired about their future
availability, I was told that none of them would be available for at least a year.
But then I got a real shock-even the most immediate opening, that of cook,
wasn't really available for six months. For women entering the Army, there
was at least a six months lag between date of enlistment and date of actually
beginning basic training. Yet, male enlistees can enlist and leave for boot camp
on the same day, if they choose certain M.O.S.s (not all of which are currently
available to women).
Quite frankly, I would rather be a foot soldier in the infantry than a cook in a
mess hall. I certainly wasn't about to wait six months to let the Army waste
its money training me to do something that I had no interest in and would consequently use for the briefest time possible. I needed some sort of paycheck as
soon as possible plus I wanted a skill that I had a reasonable expectation of
enjoying performing. How many other women must reach these same conclusions?
Senator Proxmire, members of the subcommittee, why can't women who want
to be soldiers be judged by the same impartial criteria men are? What makes a
young man who's a high school drop.out a better soldier than a young collegeeducated woman? The military was once known as the great equalizer-why
can't it perform this same function for men and women?
Respectfully,
MmA NAN MARSHALL,
[From the LADYCOMmunicatlons magazine, June 1977]
WOMEN ABoABD SHIPS: A PosrrIVE STEP
(By Pat Leeper)
Ten years ago, I would have been among those Navy wives who oppose the
assignment of women to sea duty. I was even guilty at the time of stating
that ... "a woman belongs to a man, but a man belongs to the world."
'It is an understatement to simply say my whole philosophy has changed over
the years. Therefore, I would like to share my feelings on the question, as
well as examine the practical problems, historical precedents and political
implications.
At the emotional level, I want women to serve on board ship because of past
limitations I still resent in my own life. Long ago, I may have accepted them like
most women, but I never forl!'.ot. Later, I was to work hard to make sure that
younger women could fulfill one of my old dreams-attending the Naval
Academy.
,second, I have always despised the double standard, sexually applied. Many
arguments against permitting women to go to sea are based on the fear that the
servicewomen will become sexually involved with the men. Sometimes this
"suspicion" is couched in subtle ways. For example, a poll was recently taken
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
133
of Navy women and Navy wives in San Diego; 86 percent of the wives and 90
percent of the active duty women thought women should be allowed to work at
any job they are capable of performing.
However, 15 percent of the wives thought women joined the Navy to find
boyfriends or husbands, 46 percent of the Navy women said they have experienced resentment from Navy wives and 24 percent of the wives believed that
somehow Navy women behave differently than they would in a civilian job.
Obviously some hostility exists between the two groups.
Is sex the issue? If so, let's look at the practical problems involved. Consider
the following: (1) There will be far fewer women than men on board each ship.
Some of the women will be married or have emotional ties elsewhere. The rest,
if they are interested in forming personal relationships, are going to be far more
interested in single men than married men. (2) The very closeness of the quarters
will actually rob ship personnel of .the privacy needed for romance. It will be
difficult, at best, to pursue romantic inclinations, even if they surface. (8) Captains are used to dealing with personnel problems. If and when the "unthinkable" happens, both parties will get into trouble. Once it is made clear that
troublesome "attachments" will be cause for punishment, most concerned will
comport themselves accordingly. (4) Members of the crew will be more tightly
controlled art sea than on shore, because they have to be. The safety of the ship
depends upon strict discipline.
While there will always be those immature individuals who will find some way
of making a mess of things, I am confident that this venture will not dissolve
into the Sodom and Gomorrah others seem to fear.
Some will say, why not just eliminate the problem by not letting women serve
at all? What this really means is that only women will be penalized for the
weaknesses of both sexes. It also means that the Navy cannot utilize its best
and brightest women due to problems that may occur because of the antics of
a few men and women.
This discussion overlooks the fact that, just as there are practical problems
to overcome, there are good practical reasons why women should go to sea. The
military is having no trouble at all recruiting high quality women. It is having
trouble recruiting high quality men. Women are needed to fill the jobs that must
be done. Unless the bar to sea duty is removed, the expansion of the numbers of
women cannot be accomplished without affecting the sea/shore rotation schedules for men. Conversely, the more women at sea, the more time the men and
women get at home-eertainly a desirable by-product.
It has been argued that an increase in the numbers of women will decrease
military ·readiness. As long as they are qualified and well-trained, I believe that
just the opposite is true. Surely any nation who can count on the resources of
both sexes is better off than one forced to rely on only one half of the population.
I suspect w,e don't worry about this because we have been able to export our
wars, and our women have not had to face the prospect of being either combatants or victims.
Those who oppose any more expansion of the role of military women are fond
of citing "negative" statistics and studies. Women, they say, have trouble performing certain tasks or have more emotional problems. What they don't mention is that men, as a group, tend to specialize in problems of their own. A recent
DOD study shows that men lose more time and cost the services more because
of AWOL, court martial, drug abuse and alcoholism. I submit that we have no
cause for alarm unless, proportionate to their numbers, women actually lose more
time, get into more trouble, or do poorer work than men, in all situations. For
example, some will assert that some women have trouble with the physical requirements and are therefore "holding back" the men. Ironically, at the academies,
the women are out-performing the men scholastically, yet no one accuses the men
of lowering the standard set by the women.
It is helpful to put the whole issue into historical perspective. This century has
seen an unprecedented movement of women into all phases of social and working
life. And every move--from the vote, to higher education, to women's work in
"untraditional" jobs-has been met with cries of outrage. Doom, societal breakdown and untold disaster have been predicted. One would think that the survival
of civilization depends on tightly controlling the function and whereabouts of
women.
Even today there are those who refuse to accept the fact that most women
work out of need, and that millions lack that economically solvent mate who
makes a "traditional" life, in which husband is the sole wage-earner, possible.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
134
This attitude or bias of perception exists widely. Nevertheless, we have come to
the point in America where only the military has the right "legally" to limit the
numbers of women, set higher standards for them and to refuse their admittance
into certain job categories. It is highly unlikely that the military will hold out
forever against political pressure and the overall movement for change.
Politically, the issue of women aboard ships would seem to be an emotional
one. Opponents of the ERA have had great success in making military service for
women a source of terror. However, I believe that shipboard duty for women
will not be denied simply because Navy wives don't want it. Nor will it be
granted solely because women's rights groups are pressing for it. No, Congress,
the courts and the Pentagon will act according to their own prejudices and in
accord with what they believe to be in their own best interests. They are relatively immune to emotional arguments from both sides, unless those arguments
serve the policymakers' own ends. For this reason, those of us who are "pro" try
to present our case as a logical way to benefit the military, as well as demand it
as an ethical "right." I believe that both a real need and the winds of change
make it likely that women will be serving in expanded roles in all branches of
the armed services.
The Navy has proposed its own legislation to allow women to serve on board
ships not expected to see combat. The Army Chief of Staff recently stated that
he sees no reason why women cannot serve in combat units in support roles.
Many observers support an increase in the numbers of women as a way to save
the all-volunteer force. This movement for military women is "historical," but
really no more remarkable than the whole history of women in this century.
My final point is philosophical, and is inseparable from my deepest held convictions that cover the whole area of human rights, not just sea duty for
women.
I believe that there are no guarantees in life for most people. There is no God
given right to own or possess another, even one's spouse. There is no law, rule,
regulation or church doctrine that will assure we will be loved forever or that
our sex "guarantees" that we will have emotional or economic security. I further believe with all my heart that the greatest gift we can give ourselves or
another is freedom to create, achieve, work, experiment and, yes, the right to
make our own mistakes and learn from them.
I believe that spontaneity and freedom, rather than creating chaos (barring
criminal acts, of course), will enrich us all. In times of rapid change, our peace
of mind comes from our attitude toward change. If we are fearful, we will
want to restrict those who disagree with us.
Do I have the right to tell a housewife she must be a welder? Does the housewife have the right to tell me where, how and with whom I can work? Do any
of us have the "right" to try to control the possible behavior of our husbands
by curtailing the placement and jobs of other women? Is it futile anyway?
Life is an ongoing ex,periment. Do we really want to keep other women from
following their own destiny because of our fears? Are we not in danger of
treating other adult human beings like children, denying them their own
choices and talents because "we don't like it" or "we know best"?
Do we have the right to deny them? I say no. I will always say no. I may
envy these women their adventure, but I will never begrudge it. If my husband
is stationed on board ship with Navy women, I will be happy he is learning
new ways to relate to women professionally. He will go with my blessing.
I not only support the right of women to serve on board ship, I will .actively
work for it, and for any women and all women striving to take their full
place in the sun and in the world, as fully equal partners with men.
[From the LADYCOMmunlcations magazine, June 1977]
WOMEN ABOARD SHIPS : A SERIOUS MISTAKE
(By Linda Pinegar)
In the wake of the debate over the Equal Rights Amendment comes the question of the advisability of having women serve aboard Navy ships. The positive
resolution of this question will have an effect on me, as a Navy wife. But more
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
135
important, it will have far-reaching consequences for the Navy and our national
defense. In my opinion, the real issue is not whether women should have the
equal right to serve on ships, but rather whether the benefit to the Navy will
outweigh the drawbacks.
As with any policy change, without question, the first consideration must be
the combat readiness of each individual ship and the overall effectiveness of
the Navy. The United States is currently trailing the Soviet Union in numbers
of shi,ps and in some weapons capabilities. If women are allowed to go to sea,
extensive alterations will be necessary to provide privacy for sleeping and
personal hygiene. A recent tour of the berthing and lavatory facilities aboard
an aircraft carrier proved to me, at least, that major changes will have to be
undertaken at considerable expense before most ships will be suitably equipped
for women. Is it logical then to take funds now earmarked for new ships, upto-date weapons systems, and other modern equipment, and redirect it to the
renovation of existing ships, simply to accommodate females? Should we trade
overall strength and capability for the personal rights of women, who make
up only four percent of the total Naval force?
Next on the list of priorities is the effect any policy change would have on
morale. Everyone agrees that the demands of a Navy career place unusual
hardships on the men and their families. In a Navy marriage, separations connected with sea duty are especially difficult to cope with. There are stresses for
the men, who must adapt to living and working aboard ship, and stresses for the
wives, who must accept additional responsibility for the family and the household. The importance of a wife's psychological well-being, in particular, cannot be over-emphasized, because a man's morale is directly related to that of
his spouse. His morale, in turn, affects his ability to carry out his dutiel'I. If his
<"Oncentration is broken due to domestic problems and worries, he is more
likely to make a mistake in judgment that could jeopardize his mission, endanger his shipmates, or cost him his life.
If women were allowed to go to sea, the morale of the Navy wife would be
seriously eroded and possibly even totally destroyed. My contemporaries take a
dim view of having their husbands go to sea with other women. Their attitude
is overwhelmingly negative. One friend put it very simply when she said, ""We've
got enough problems. Who needs that kind of aggravation?"
Many Navy wives are seriously concerned about the probability of an in<>reased rate of extramarital affairs if women are allowed to go to sea. The
isolation, sexual deprivation, and loneliness which characterize sea duty would
mol'lt certainly tempt even the most faithful husband to ,;tray. (I do not suggest
that the rate of infidelity among Navy men is any greater than in any other
segment of society, but merely that the probability increases due to the unnatural lifestyle and expanded opportunity connected with sea duty.)
In ten years as a Navy wife, I have survived my husband's twelve-month tour of
duty in South Vietnam, a subsequent two-and-one-half year sea tour off the
coa,;t of North Vietnam, a tour in Japan, the unique experience of living in Patuxent River, Maryland, and a move to our newest Navy home, ,Jacksonville, Florida.
Through the years, I have observed that men who would not think of having an
affair at home become the most aggresisve Lotharios when their ships pull into
foreign ports. It is reasonable to assume that a wife could forgive an indiscretion
with someone thousands of miles away. On the other hand, not even the mma:t
tolerant wife could readily cope with the idea of her husband ha,·ing continual
accei,s to a lover aboard ship with him, while she sat at home alone with the
children. baking browni!'s, and writing him newRy notes.
Infidelity is a fact of life in the Navy, but putting females aboard N:wy RhipR
would add insult to injury for Navy wives. BecaURI' thl":V view femiile crewmembers as a threat to the already precarious marital relationships they work
RO hard to preserve, wives' morale will be adversel:v affected. Tn tnrn, thf'ir
husbands' morale and concentration will deteriorate, threatening his i,afetv anrl
his ability to carry out his duties. Such a negative chain reaction wo,1ld hl!Yf'
critical consequences for morale, readiness, and retention throughout the entir<'
Nav:v.
Whether you agree with this way of thinking or not, the fact rem11in« thnt
these feelings do l'Xist: they run deep, ar!' widespread. and are not likPly to
change dramatically. Not even the Equal Rights Amendment can reverse the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
136
natural sexual attraction between men and women. No amount of legislation or
social change can alter the fact that jealousy is a very real part of the human
condition and can destroy even the most stable marriage if given the proper fuel.
Adding females to ship's crews will be emotional dynamite. It will dredge up insecurities that most of us don't even know we have, and fuel the fire of jealousy,
resulting in destructive side effects for individuals, units, and whole ships. It simply is not worth the risk.
In considering morale, we must also be aware of the effects mixed crews will
have on a single Navy man. Certainly in ·this day and age of the so-called "new
morality," we cannot realistically expect single men and women not to develop
emotional and/or sexual relationships among themselves. Emotional entanglements between crew members aboard operational Navy ships would destroy individual objectivity and adversely affect the ability of crew members to function
in emergency situations. Since every ship has the potential of becoming drawn
into a combat situation, total objectivity and strict discipline are essential to
combat effectiveness and to routine operational efficiency as well. Romantic ties
would destroy objectivity and contribute to the breakdown of discipline.
Another threat to morale aboard ship is the problem of ego. In any mixed
group of males and females there is inevitably competition among both sexes for
the attention of the other. In an all-male or all-female environment egos are a contributing factor in the competitiveness which is directed toward accomplishing
the tasks at hand. In a mixed environment some of that same ego-directed
energy will be spent competing for the attention of the opposite sex. Those who
lose out on the attention will suffer a blow to their pride and thus their morale.
Those who win will have gained an ego massage, but ,the Navy will have lost <the
time and energy spent in its pursuit. At sea, dedication to the mission is necessarily total. There is little leeway for individual pursuits not directly related
to the business at hand. Until ships are manned by robots, problems of this
nature must be taken into consideration.
Recently I had the opportunity to discuss the issue of women going to sea
with a group of Navy women. I was also able to observe them at work. There is no
question that these young women are capable of "pulling their weighe' in
typically male specialties. They are conscientious and serious about careers in
the service of their country. They expressed the willingness not only to go to
sea, but to participate in combat, if necessary. There is no doubt that they deserve
the same opportunities for traffiking and advancement as their male counterparts.
Though all of the women I spoke to were eager to go to sea, I noted with interest
that none had even visited a ship, inspected its living quarters, or observed its
operations. The one important conclusion that I can draw from the women themselves is that if the opportunities for a•dvancement were available ashore, they
would have little or no interest in sea duty. I respectfully suggest that it would
be in the best interest of the Navy to make these opportunities available,
Unfortunately, the subject of Navy women serving aboard ships cannot be
separated from the issue of whether they should serve in combat. We have only to
think of the U.S.S. Pueblo (a non-combatant auxiliary ship), and the men who
were held prisoner in North Korea for eleven months, to appreciate the dangers
involved. The Defense Manpower Commission study of April 1976 concluded
that "societal attitudes, including that of many women, do not find the combat
role for women to be acceptable." Nevertheless, the question is not whether
women have the ability to serve in combat. They have proved in the past that they
are capable of performing under fire and can endure combat conditions for long
periods. The question is the acceptability to society, because society as a whole
is not prepared to accept women in combat roles interchangeably with men.
The Defense Manpower Commission recommended that "the prohibition regarding assignment of women to combat roles should continue."
It is my personal opinion that women should not be assigned to sea duty. The
cost of adequate accommodations would be prohibitive. The effect on the morale
of the men and their wives would be adverse. The negative effect on combat readiness would be unacceptable. and societal attitudes would present a substantial
barrier to their acceptance aboard ship. In today'·s Navy, the disadvantages of
allowing women to pursue equal rights aboard ships outweigh the advantages.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
137
United States District Court, District of Columbia
CIVIL ACTION NO. 76-2086
YONA OWENS, NA.TOK.A. PEDEN, SUZANNE HOLTMAN, KATHLEEN BYERLY, SUZANNE
RHIDDLEHOOVER, JOELLEN DRAG, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHEB
PEBSONB SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS
"'·
HABOLD BROWN, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS SECBETABY OF DEFENSE
AND G. WILLIAM CLAYTOR, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN RIB CAPACITY AB SECBETARY OF
THE NAVY, DEFENDANTS
PLAINTIFFS' SECOND INTERBOGATOBIEB TO DEFENDANTS AND BEQUEST FOB
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Plaintiffs hereby request that defendants respond, under oath, to the following
interrogatories in accordance with Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These interrogatories shall be deemed to be continuing so as to require
defendants seasonably to supplement or amend their answers thereto in accordance with Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Unless otherwise
specified all interrogatories refer to the Department of the Navy. In answering
these Interrogatories, if any information called for has already been provided
in answers to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories, defendants may incorporate
any such answer, if responsive, by reference herein.
In these interrogatories "job" is used interchangeably with "billet" and
"occupation" is used interchangeably with "rating."
Please take notice that copies of defendants' answers must be served upon
the undersigned within 30 days after the service of these interrogatories. It is
requested that defendants' answers restate each of these interrogatories in full
before responding to it.
Plaintiffs hereby request pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, that defendants produce for copying all documents requested herein
within 30 days at the offices of the American Civil Liberties Union, 22 East 40th
Street, New York, New York.
1. Please state the name, official position and location of each person who has
prepared or is the source of information used in preparing the answers to each
of the following interrogatories.
2. With regard to any recommendation(s) made by the Department of the
Navy to any other governmental agency, including the President of the United
States or the Cong,ress of the United States, that 10 U.S.C. § 6015 (hereafter
§ 6015) be amended or modified in any way, state :
(a) Who made the recommendation, to whom it was made, and the date(s)
on which it was made;
( b) Each and every basis or reason why the recommendation was made; and
(o) The exact contents of the recommendation (s) or, in the alternative, attach
copies.
3. With regard to the most recent recommendation referred to in answer to
Interrogatory 2 (hereafter "the proposed amendment"), state whether defendant
Claytor or any other official within the Navy or the Department of Defense has
asserted the proposed amendment to § 6015 would allow the Secretary of the
Navy to take fuller advantage of the skilled talent available in the female Navy
personnel and increase the operational effectiveness and flexibility of available
forces (as quoted in the New York Times on March 3, 1977). If so,
(a-) Attach a copy of any written statement made by any official or any "newsgram" issued ; and
(b) State how the proposed modification or amendment to § 6015 would accomplish the goals referred to in Interrogatory 3.
4. State whether defendant Claytor or any other official within the Navy or the
Department of Defense has asserted that the proposed amendment to § 6015
would provide a broader training base for women midshipmen and junior officers
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
138
and insure they have the best career opportunity feasible in naval service? If
so,
(a) Attach a copy of any written statement or "newsgram" issued to this
effect; and
(b) State specifically how the legislation proposed would (i) provide a
broader training base for women midshipment and junior officers, and (ii)
insure that women have the best career opportunity feasible in naval service.
5. State specifically each and every Navy career opportunity, i.e. opportunity
for training, opportunity for entry into any rating and opi[)ortunity for promotion, which is presently unavailable to women because of § 6015, but which
would be available to women under the proposed amendment to § 6015.
6. State whether there are any Navy career opportunities which would be
unavailable to women if the proposed modification of § 6015 were enacted. If
so, state each and every such opportunity which would continue to be
unavailable.
7. State whether defendants maintain that it is not feasible for women to
have any of the career opportunities referred to in response to Interrogaotry 6.
If so, state,
(a) Which career opportunities defendants maintain it is not feasible for
women to have, and
(b) For each career opportunity, every reason why defendants maintain it
is not feasible.
8. State each and every reason why defendants have not recommended that
the provision of § 6015 which forbids women from being assigned to Navy vessels other than hospital ships and transports be eliminated.
9. State why the proposed amendment to § 6015 provides for:
(a) Temporary, not permanent, assignment of women to combat vessels during peacetime ;
(b) Assignments at the discretion of the Navy, rather than on the same
bai-is as men ; and
(c) Non-assignment of women to combat vessels during wartime.
10. Does § 6015 have the effect upon the Navy of making it "turn away
skilled women" (this statement was attributed to a Pentagon official in the
New York Times, March 3, 1977). If so,
(a) Explain in detail each and every way in which § 6015 produces this
effect, and
( b) Indicate specifically how and why admitting more than the number of
women set by the Navy as a goal (see Answer to Interrogatory 2, Plaintiffs'
First Set of Interrogatories) is "necessary .to preclude a disproportionate adverse affect on male seashore rotation in popular ratings."
11. (a) What is a critical rating?
( b) What steps does the Navy take when a rating becomes critical?
(c) Is it anticipated that the proposed amendment to § 6015 would serve to
recluce the number of critical ratings? If so, explain in detail how it would have
this effect.
12. Is it anticipated that permitting women to serve aboard ships ( other than
hospital and transport ships (a) in accordance with the proposed amendment
to § 6015, or (b) with no restrictions on service by women would result in any
savings or benefits to the Navy, e.g., by reducing the costs for re-enlistment
bonuses.
If the response to a) and/orb) is affirmative, describe fully and separately
for a) and b) all such changes or benefits and provide copies of any studies
or reports on this subject.
13. Describe all changes which you 1mticipate in female enlistment goals (Defendants' Answer No. 2 to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories stated "female
goals are under periodic review and future changes are expected").
14. 8tate in detail all preenlistment criteria for: (a) Men, and (b) women.
15. If the preenlistment criteria for women are stricter, explain whether
these stricter criteria are applied because of the effect of § 6015. If they are
not. describe fully the legal justification for the stricter or higher standards
for women, and provide copies of all applicable statutes, regulations, and legal
memoranda.
· ·
16. As to any quota, limit or goal established by the Navy on:
(a) The admission of women into particular (i) ratings; (ii) career classifications; or (iii) training schools; or
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
139
(b) Promotional opportunities for women, state what the quota is and
whether it is imposed because of§ 6015.
In any instance where the quota is not imposed because of § 6015, describe
fully the legal justification for the quota and provide copies of all applicable
statutes, regulations and legal memoranda.
17. (a) State whether women are ever denied enlistment into the Navy because (i) quotas for females at particular recruiting stations are filled; (ii)
there are no openings for females in the occupations desired by the female
enlistee.
(b) If the answer to (a) (i) or (a) (ii) is affirmative, state how often women
were denied enlistment in 1976 for the reason referred to in (a) (i) or (a) (ii)
and compare the frequency with which women were denied enlistment with the
frequency with which men were denied enlistment for each of these reasons.
18. State whether the Navy has validated the relationship between any of
its admissions standards and performance in the Navy. If so,
(a) Htate the extent to which the standards haye been validated (i.e., thP
degree of correlation between the standards and subsequent performance) ; and
( b) Attach copies of any validation studies.
19. Have any plans or projections been made concerning the number of
women who would serve aboard ships if the proposed amendment to § 6015
were enacted? If so, state:
(a) Each and every such plan and projection; and
( b) The basis for it.
20. If the proposed amendment to § 6015 were enacted,
(a) What jobs would women be permitted to perform that they are not now
permitted to perform?
(b) (i) What jobs would rthey continue to be restricted from performing; and
(ii) State each reason why any job restriction would be imposed.
21. If the proposed amendment to § 6015 is enacted, state whether:
(a) The Navy would assign women to ships; or
(b) The Navy would give women the option of serving aboard ships'!
22. Identify by title, author and date, each study performed by or for the
Navy since 1970 concerning the Navy's future personnel needs.
23. (a) Has it been projected that the number of males in the Navy enlistment eligible pool will decrease approximately 15% or by any other percentage
in the mid-1980's?
( b) If so, starte the projected percentage decline and whether it is a primary
reason for wishing to expand the number and utilization of women in the Navy?
24. (a) Would the ability to assign women to ships permit the Navy to increase the amount of shore duty assigned to men?
( b) If so, starte whether it is believed that the ability to assign an increase
amount of shore duty to men would enhance the Navy's ability to retain male
personnel.
25. (a) Describe in detail each and every difficulty you anticipate would
arise if women were assigned to ships; and
(b) State the reason why you believe each difficulty would arise, including
any supporting dmta or studies substantiating the basis for such reasons.
26. State whether the Navy would undertake any training or planning programs prior to assigning women to ships. If so, state:
(a) The nature of the training or planning ;
(b) What Navy personnel would be involved;
( c) The length of time which the training or planning would take; and
(d) What the planning or training would be expected to accomplish.
27. State whether defendant Claytor made the statement, with reference rto
the assignment of women to Navy ships, that "any time you have boys-girls it's
a little difficult but the problems I guess are no different from what's happening
in college dormitories" (as quoted in the New York Times on l\Iay 1, 1977). If
he did not make the quoted statement, state any remarks he made on or about
April 30, 1977 concerning the assignment of women to ships.
28. State whether defendants or any official authorized by defendants has
made any statement(s) in any form to any person or group regarding§ 6015, the
proposed amendment to § 6015, or the assignment of women to Navy ships. If so,
(a) State (i) The name and address of each person who made the statement;
(ii) TIie name and address of each group of persons to whom such statement
was made; and (iii) The date of each such statement was made.
(b) Attach a copy of each such statement.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
140
29. Has the Navy had training programs in race relations for Navy personnel?
If so, state:
(a) The reasons for the programs ;
( b) The nature of the training programs ;
( c) What Navy personnel have been involved;
( d) The length of time the training programs have been in existence;
( e) The cost of the programs ;
(f) The goals of the programs;
(g) Whether cost-effectiveness of the programs was considered; and
( h) Whether the programs are considered cost-effective.
30. Have there been any studies or projections of the length of time it would
take to integrate women to serve aboard all ships, including combat ships? If so,
(a) State how long it is projected that integration would take; and
( b) Attach a copy of any studies which have been performed.
31. Were women ever assigned to Navy transport or hospital ships? If so,
(a) When were they assigned ;
( b) How many were assigned;
( c) What jobs did they perform ;
(d) Was their performance in these positions ever evaluated by the Navy and,
if so, attach a copy of each evaluation.
32. (a) Is there any type of ship in the Navy now which is the equivalent in
function of the transport ship in use in 1948?
( b) What is this type of ship now called?
(c) When and why did the Navy cease ref,erring to such ships as transport
ships?
33. When and why did the Navy cease having:
(a) Hospital ships ; and
( b) Transport ships?
34. (a) In terms of problems that might exist with having women serve on
ships, is there any difference between (i) hospital and transport ships; and (ii)
all other Naval ships?
( b) If so, explain each and every asserted difference.
35. Describe what "temporary" duty on a combat ship in peacetime would
consist of.
36. (a) What are auxiliary ships?
(b) How many are there in the Navy?
(c) How many positions are there aboard these ships?
(d) How many positions are there aboard non-auxiliary ships?
37. Has defendant Claytor prepared or submitted any statement to the effect
that the Navy's experience to date indicates that sea service women are highly
motivated, dedicated and very capable (quoted in Washington post, March 18,
1977) . If so,
(a,) State the basis for the conclusion he reached, and
( h) Attach a copy of the statement.
38. (a) State whether, prior to the experiment in which women were utilized
aboard the U.S. Swnctua1'y, any reports, hypotlheses or projections had been
made or prepared by the Navy or the Department of Defense concerning problems which were anticipated during the experiment. If so, attach a copy of each
such report.
(b) Were there any reports or studies prepared on the results of !!he U.S.S.
Sanctuary experiment other than the Navy Ships Engineering Command Report
supplied in response to Plaintiffs' First Request for Production of Documents?
If so, attach a copy of each such report or study.
39. Describe to what extent and in what manner the experience of the U.S.S.
Sanctuary experiment has been considered in determining that an amendment to
§ 6015 is appropriate.
40. (a) Are there physical requirements for entrance into the Navy of (i)
enlisted personnel; and (ii) officers?
(b) If so, what are those requirements?
( c) Are they the same for men and women? If not, state all ways they are
different.
(d) Do women and men pass these requirements in equal proportion? If not,
describe all differences fully and provide copies of all studies and reports relating to such differences.
41. Are there tests measuring physical ability administered to potential recruits? If so,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
141
(a) Describe these tests ;
( b) State what physical characteristics they measure; and
(c) State whether they are administered to men and women.
(d) If there are any differences between the tests administered to men and
women, (i) describe any differences; and (ii) state the reasons for the differences.
(e) Do women and men pass these requirements in equal proportion? If not,
describe all differences fully and provide copies of all studies and reports relating to such differences.
42. Are there additional physical requirements beyond those listed in response
to Interrogatory 40 for Navy personnel entering particular ratings? If so,
(a) State how many and which ratings have special physical requirements;
( b) Describe the tests and the characteristics the tests measure ;
(c) Are they the same for men and women? If not, state all the ways they are
different; and
( d) Do women and men pass these requirements in equal pro.portion? If not,
describe all differences fully and provide copies of all studies and reports relating to such differences.
43. If a potential recruit or officer fails to meet the physical requirements set
forth in response to Interrogatories 40 and 42 what is the Navy's response? State
the answer separately for officers and recruits.
44. Are there any jobs aboard ships which the Navy maintains that most or
all women could not perform? If so, state,
(a) What are those jobs;
( b) What are the reasons why most of all women cannot perform each such
job;
(o) What percentage of women could not perform each such job; and
(d) Provide copies of all studies substantiating that some or all women can
not perform such jobs.
45. Can all men perform each job listed in response to Interrogatory 44? If
all men do not have the physical ability to perform each job, state,
(a) The method used to ensure that the men who are assigned to those jobs
have the physical capacity to perform them; and
( b) What percentage of men are unable to perform each of the jobs referred
to in response to Interrogatory 44?
46. What percentage of the total number of jobs aboard ships is it maintained
women could not perform? State how this figure was determined.
47. Is it maintained that there are more jobs aboard ships engaged in combat
than there are aboard ships during peacetime that women would be unable to
perform? If so, state the basis for this conclusion as to each job which it is
asserted women could not perform aboard a ship engaged in combat, and supply
copies of any substantiating studies.
48. If it is contended that women cannot perform combat jobs on Navy vessels,
state,
(a) Which combat jobs women cannot perform;
( b) The Sll)ecific duties of each such job women cannot perform ; and
(o) The reasons why it is contended that women cannot perform these duties.
49. Describe fully all studies documenting that some or all women cannot
perform the duties described in reSll)onse to Interrogatory 48, including the percentage of women determined to be unable to perform each of the duties. Provide
copies of all documents reflecting such studies.
50. What is done at present with crew members who become ill or injured
while at sea? If the answer depends on the size of the ship, explain fully for
each type of ship.
51. If a crew member is so seriously ill or injured that he cannot continue to
serve on that voyage, is a replacement always secured?
(1) If not, how often is a replacement secured; and
(2) What factors are considered in determining whether a replacement will
be secured.
52. State the number of times during 1976 that a crewmember became incapacitated and had to leave his ship.
53. Describe the system the Navy maintains to ensure that sufficient replacements for ill or injured personnel will be available on a systemwide basis.
54. (a) As to each of the following categories of vessels state whether it is
sent to sea with every bunk filled: (i) Ships; (ii) aircraft carriers; and (iii)
submarines.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
142
( b) For each category of vessel which is sent to sea without every bunk filled,
state how often it is not staffed to that extent, and the percentage of open
bunks maintained.
55. (a) Can a submarine function adequately if one crewman is not available?
(b) If the answer to subsection (a) depends on which job is being considered,
state what positions are considered so essential that if one crew member with
that job is absent the mission will be jeopardized.
56. (a) Have there been any studies done of the comparative number of days
lost from work by women and men ( i) officers ; and (ii) enlisted personnel?
( b) If so, describe fully the results of these studies and provide copies of any
documents reflecting such studies.
57. Have there been any conclusions reached about whether the figures concerning .the days lost from work by women would change if women were assigned to ships? If so, state the conclusions reached and the basis for them.
58. Are there situations in which having women aboard ship would place them
in greater danger than that faced by men in the same positions? If so, describe:
(a) In which situations this would be true; and
( b) The reasons why it would be true, and
(c) Describe any studies documenting the existence of such greater danger
and provide copies of any documents reflecting such studies.
59. For each of the following wars, state how many and what percentage of
Navy personnel on ships engaged in combat were taken prisoner:
(a) WWII;
(b) Korean War; and the
(c) Vietnam War.
60. (a) In order to permit women to serve aboard ships, what ship modifications or adjustments has the Navy concluded would be necessary for (i) officers;
and (ii) enlisted personnel.
(b) State the reasons why each of these adjustments or modifications would
be necessary.
(c) State the cost of each of the proposed modifications, and the percentage
of the total Navy budget for fiscal year 1976 that such cost would represent.
(d) Does the Navy renovate or refit its vessels on a regular or periodic basis?
If so, state (i) How often each type of vessel is refitted; (ii) What the refitting
consists of; (iii) How many ships were refitted in 1976; and (iv) The cost per
ship in 1976, and the percentage of the total Navy budget for fiscal year 1976
that such cost represented.
61. Is the Navy engageu in or does it have any plans to undertake any program to increase the amount of privacy available on its ships for male personnel? If so,
(a) Describe the plans or program, and
( b) State the reasons for it.
62. (a) State which shore command billet assignments women officers have
been precluded from holding because they are ineligible for command at sea
(referred to in the 1976 Navy Affirmative Action Plan, E-9 at p. 89).
( b) Of the shore command assignments referred to in response to Subsection
(a), how many have duties and responsibilities which make it essential that
they be filled by personnel who are eligible for command at sea?
( c) For each such assignment, state (i) what the assignment is, (ii) which
of its duties and responsibilities demand fulfillment only by persons eligible
for command at sea; and (iii) why eligibility for command at sea is essential for
those duties and responsibilities.
63. (a) Have there been any changes made in 1977 to eliminate the requirement of eligibility for command at sea for any of the shore command assignments listed in response to Int. 62.
( b) If so, describe each such change fully.
64. Are there any statutes or regulations, other than 10 U.S.C. § 6015, which
prevent the assignment of women on the same basis as men to jobs in the Navy?
If so, identify each statutory provision and regulation and attach a copy of
each regulation.
65. State in detail each and every fact relied upon by defendants for all allegations in defendants' answer which deny any of the allegations in plaintiffs'
complaint.
66. (a) Is it contended that § 6015, insofar as it prohibits the assignment of
women to vessels other than hospital ships or transports, bears a rational relationship to a legitimate governmental objective? If so, state what the legitimate
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
143
governmental objective is and each and every way in which § 6015 is rationally
related to it.
(b) Is it contended that § 6015, insofar as it prohibits the assignment of
women to vessels other than hospital ships or transports, substantially furthers
an important governmental objective? If so, state what the important governmental objective is and each and every way in which § 6015 substantially furthers it.
MARJORIE MAZEN SMITH,
SUSAN DELLER Ross,
JILL LAURIE GOODMAN,
KATHLEEN WILLERT PEBATIS,
American OiviZ Liberties Union Foundation.
KATHERINE MAZZ.AFERRI,
TBUDYLEvY,
League of Women Voters Education Fund •
.JUNE
14, 1977.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0
@FedFRASER