Rejecting Patriarchy for Equivalence in the US Military

A Response to Anthony King’s “Women Warriors: Female Accession to Ground Combat

Dados Bibliográficos

ID2340948
AutoresConnie Brownson (Texas State University, autor correspondente)
Ano2016
Volume42
Fascículo1
Páginas235-242
Data de publicação2016-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoArmed Forces & Society (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0095-327X • E-ISSN: 1556-0848
EditoraSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0095327x14547807
OpenAlexW2044705614
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas7

This article is a response to Anthony King's 'Women Warriors: Female Accession to Ground Combat.' King rightly asserts that the accession of women to combat roles is a notable historical departure in warfighting. He critiques Brownson's conceptual ideal of 'equivalency' as a potentially profound force of transformation of gender relations in the military. While conceptually progressive, he errs in framing the potential transformation within the concept of 'patriarchy.' Further, King is unable to recast binary gendered language to acknowledge fully the concept of 'kinship.' For females to maximally succeed in the military, and particularly in combat roles, patriarchy as the defining explanation for male-female interaction must be discarded and the enabling concepts of equivalency and kinship must be embraced. The continued strength of military organizations and the individuals within them emerges from the reciprocity of these two concepts

Framing (construction) · Kinship · Negotiation · Patriarchy · Political science · Reciprocity (cultural anthropology) · Social science · Sociology · Engineering · Gender Studies · Gender, Security, and Conflict · Historical Gender and Feminism Studies · Law