It takes an Outrage.

In 1992, thanks to outraged spurred by Anita Hill's accusations of then-nominee Clarence Thomas in front of a panel of male senators, a record-breaking 4 women were elected to the US Senate.  This unprecedented election led to the year being dubbed "The Year of the Woman."  20 years later, Congress had another record-breaking year for women, bringing the number in the Senate above 20 and in the House nearly 80.  In the London Olympics, the women of the United States won 29 medals, a count that would have put them in third overall if they were a country on their own.  A women was named CEO of Yahoo!, and a woman was awarded the Woodrow Wilson award for best book on politics and international affairs.  There is a woman as the Secretary of State, and driving in NASCAR.
However, tragically, it is not this positive news that has led many to call 2012 the "Next Year of the Woman."  All of these positive contributions and achievements were overshadowed by the controversy surrounding all things women this year.
Anne-Marie Slaughter wrote passionately that women can't have it all (something I already addressed), Congress repeatedly politicized women's reproductive rights, political candidates tried to legitimize rape, a young girl was shot in the face for going to school, the realities of gang-rape cover ups were thrust front and center in the US, India and throughout the world.  Oh yea, and Lance Armstrong's most egregious confession apparently centered on whether or not he called Betsy Andreu fat.
There has been little that has polarized the American public like the place and rights of women.  Suddenly everyone had an opinion.  Talk radio junkies called college students sluts and whores; the New York Times was concerned with the Secretary of State's hair; the DoD's announcement of the opening of Combat roles to women was met with jokes about PMS.
Throughout my life, I have had a bit of an involuntary adverse reaction to the term "feminism."  To me, it always seems academic, detached, and removed from the hardship and ugliness of reality.  It was the realm of those who studied "women's studies" but were afraid to venture outside the classroom.  The word for those who like to protest "egregious wrongs" but prefer to live in the comfort of their suburban bubble than take on the pain of the fight.  Feminism has become a water-downed term to make people who want to feel good about themselves able to do so without taking any risk.  It gives social and political clout without possibility of failure or loss.
For 2013, I hope we, as woman, can take on the challenge to return outrage-spurred action to feminism.  If 2012 was proposed to be the new Year of the Women due to the negative controversy surrounding women in the press, I hope 2013 can be the real Year of the Women due to action.
To launch my part in this, I am excited to have a part of Shannon Galpin's new endeavor, Combat Apathy.  Focused by the slogan "it takes an army," Combat Apathy is rooted in action.  It is rooted in outrage.  It is rooted in woman who have committed their lives to letting their doing doing the talking.  It is comprised on women who are not perfect, but defy the notion that they can't have it all; women who have been told to "reevaluate their life choices" and keep on living; women who fully embody the sacrifices they have made to pursue the life other only study as a social experiment.
Hillary Clinton famously coined the phrase "it takes a village".  For 2013, I propose that "it takes and outrage."  For every outrage produced by the media stories of 2012, let there be action in 2013.  Let the focus be on women doing, rather than women being pawns.  Let it be full of stories of the power of women in the political, athletic and academic arena.  Let us show what action outrage can spur, and make a real year of the women.  

Those who should, will

Secretary Panetta lifted the ban on women on combat roles.  The Washington Post calls this a "watershed policy change that was informed by women’s valor in Iraq and Afghanistan and that removes the remaining barrier to a fully inclusive military."

Given my time spent as an AH-1W pilot in the Marine Corps, my phone, email, Facebook, twitter, etc has been bombarded with questions about how I feel about this.  So rather than answer everyone individually, below, I wrap up all question and give my response. 

First, a disclaimer.  I am no longer in the Marine Corps.  The views, idea, feeling, rants, offensive comments, off color remarks, or general pissyness are mine and mine alone.  They do not reflect the the views of the Corps, or University of Denver.  So, with that aside, here I go. 

Historically, the central question of the women in combat debate has been “are women physically capable of performing the duties required for combat?” This question is quickly and easily answered.  Objectively, women are increasingly proving themselves as physically capable as men.  In both endurance events and tests of strength-to-weight, women are evening the playing field and living up to what has been thought of as “mens standards.”  Women have also proven themselves tactically as capable as men in all objectively measurable fields. 

If these objective standards – how fast one can run, how much one can lift, how well one can shoot – were the only indicators of success in combat there would be no argument or debate; those meeting the standard would be inarguably successful.  However, success in combat units is determined by more than just objective abilities, and thus the debate deepens. It is universally accepted that the safety and success of our military units is paramount.  It is for this reason that I believe the debate needs to shift away from “are women capable” of serving to “are women a value added”.   This changes the argument from “can or cannot” to “should or should not”; a question that needs to be addressed top-down rather than bottom-up. 

Throughout the last decade-plus of the United States’ involvement in the conflicts encompassing the Global War on Terror, there is no arguing that women have found themselves “in combat situations.”  In these situations, women have shown valor, strength, leadership, fortitude, and upheld the values of honor, courage and commitment.  Many have given the ultimate sacrifice, and each and every one of them deserves a place in history and our hearts as a true hero. 

But being “in combat situations” is not the same as being a “combatant.”  Combatants are offensive.  Their mission is to close with and destroy the enemy.  They seek engagement.  Their primary purpose is to assert superiority over an enemy force. 

Having the technical and tactical skill to react properly when coming under fire during the performance of primary duties – whether it be an ambushed logistics patrol, FET team patrol, or MP checkpoint attack – provides a foundation of knowledge and experience necessary for the argument supporting a woman’s ability to be in combat.  However, mastery of this baseline alone does not necessarily equate to success of a woman in the role of a combatant. 

Successful combat units are a product of the intangible – the fabled esprit de corps – as much as technical and tactical proficiency.  This elusive intangible cannot be “trained in” to a recruit.  It cannot be taught in infantry school.  No amount of extra pushups, remedial weapons training or nights in the field ensure that it exists. 

Women are just as capable as men of developing the necessary esprit de corps.  But it cannot be forced.  I hope that in implementing these changes, no arbitrary timelines are put in place.  If it takes 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years or 2 decades for the right women to come into combat roles, so be it.  The US military is an all-volunteer force, and to respect that tradition, combat roles must be volunteer.  Quota systems will only set the work of every woman who has served back, by making light of the sacrifices involved in paving the paths they did.

I have the upmost trust that the DoD will set standards appropriately.  And I sincerely hope that the civilian oversight and general population will let this change grow organically and fruitfully, while respecting the grave responsibility for life given to each member of the US military. 

I can say from experience that the road for these women will not be easy.  I have chronicled much of my coming to grips with what my experience and service mean.  But I know that I, and all my sisters in arms, are more than capable to serve in all roles necessary for defense of this great nation.  Yet it will not be easy.  And hopefully the public will understand that in such a situation we all must be patient for the women who should emerge to lead our sons and daughters in arms, and not force them in their time.      

Calm in the Storm

I write as I am sitting between classes on my marathon day of Grad School.  I probably have some reading, some project, some something I should be doing to be a "good student."  But I need this hour to not completely fry my brain today.
I took on another job this week with Oceans Beyond Piracy, and organization I am beyond excited to be involved with.  I am still involved with Dr. Chenoweth's research, and taking a full-time load of classes.  And I recently had the privilege of becoming involved with Combat Apathy... but expect a full post on the awesomeness that is that in the near future.
And I am doing all I can to be supportive of Andy's bike shop endeavor, Golden's Newest hot spot, Rise Above Cycles.
Oh yea, and I'm trying to race my bike.

With all this going on, I have moments of thinking I'm biting off more than I can chew.  I have fears that I am not going to be a good student, researcher, employee, racer, partner, lover, friend.  I fear that my wide-eyed excitement of realizing that my experiences have positive and exciting implications for my professional future will lead me to isolation.

Especially around the new year, there is a lot of talk about balance.  About finding in in one's professional and personal endeavors, about shedding the negative, and "detoxifying" life choices.  The image most often associated with this is a quiet beach, or a flower, or a loan bird.
However, I prefer to think of is more like this:

I know I have taken on a lot.  But I also know that I have the strength to remain balanced.  For once I feel supported and confidant that going forward my decisions are wise.