While careful not to sound tolerant of sex crimes or harassment, critics declare that placing young men and women together during the first weeks of training, and particularly placing seemingly all-powerful male drill sergeants in charge of young female recruits, is simply a recipe for trouble (Berg pp).

Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a policy institute that studies defense issues, states, "Sexuality is a powerful force that doesn't always respond to commands and rules," and believes that the Army has put its young men and women into emotionally combustible situation, and that a policy of zero tolerance is unrealistic (Berg pp). Donnelly suggests that the broader issue is about human nature, "We have to live life as it is, not as we imagine it to be. The feminist philosophy that men and women are interchangeable in all roles is a risky idea in the military" (Berg pp). Donnelly and many others believe that the military services should reconsider coed training, and should also roll back the number of combat and near-combat jobs open to women (Berg pp). Chief public health officer for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Susan Mather, estimates that between 1992 and 1996, the VA treated more than 4,000 women for trauma relating to sexual abuse while on active duty (Berg pp). According to two VA studies, one in four women vets say they had been sexually assaulted while in the military (Berg pp).

Coed basic training was first implemented by the Clinton administration in 1994, and since then, there has been an atmosphere that is diminishing morale and leading to dangerous situations in the event of conflict (De Pasquale pp).

According to a congressional commission, "Not only is there evidence of serious problems in gender-integrated basic training,...

In a recent report by the Congressional Commission on Military Training and Gender-related Issues, military trainers were asked if discipline had declined during the five years of coed training, and 76% of male trainers and 74% of female trainers said discipline had either "somewhat" or "significantly" dropped (De Pasquale pp). Commission members found that most female trainees enjoyed coed training because the men would do things like lift heavy objects in exchange for the females doing their ironing and other domestic chores, thus, said the report, "Gender-integrated training may be reinforcing, rather than eliminating, stereotypes" (De Pasquale pp).
The top priority should be to ensure national security and that the military is as cohesive and effective as possible, and this should take precedence over feminist politics of gender equity (De Pasquale pp). There needs to be a commonsense separation of men and women in the military (De Pasquale pp).

Works Cited

Berg, Steve. "Military's move to mix sexes gets mixed results; Sex scandals raise questions about coed training, gender equity and the mission of the armed services." Star Tribune. 11/24/1996.

De Pasquale, Lisa. "Sacrificing Safety and Military Readiness in the Name of Safety" August 17, 1999. Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute. http://www.cblpolicyinstitute.org/coed.htm

Hart, Betsy. "COED TRAINING STAYS EVEN if ITS BAD IDEA."

Denver Rocky Mountain News. 3/20/1998.

Scarborough, Rowan. "Conservatives salute idea of ending coed basic training:

Cohen doesn't endorse independent panel's recommendation."

The Washington Times. 12/17/1997.