Lara Johann-Reichart English 4220: Essay#1 Prof.

Ratcliffe 25 February 2013

Xena, The Pink Power Ranger, & Barbie Walk Into a Bar President Obamas 2013 State of the Union Address sparked a debate between the competing cultural logics regarding gender in the United States. The controversy lies within the Presidents call for removing the ban against military women serving in combat. Even in the 21st century, the country continues to ride the fence on what message it tells young boys and girls about their potential. To every Mulan-watching, manny-sitted1, adolescent is a woman denied certain job experiences or a man held to different expectations. The result is a polarized citizenry disagreeing over whether the job of a soldier on the frontlines is solely a mans job. By applying Ratcliffes analysis of competing cultural logics we come to understand that the debate over lifting the ban is deeply entangled in the countrys historical cultural expectations of gender and the progressive views on gender introduced in recent history. While girls are told they can be Xena the Warrior Princess, a Power Ranger, or Barbie the culture of the United States has yet to determine if these choices are a joke and their future is already decided by gender expectations that have been prescribed for a century past. The United States since its origin has viewed gender through a lens of patriarchy. Be it stated that the country is Under God, watched over by forefathers, or through always being under the leadership of male presidents: the countrys power structure is male dominated. Ratcliffes argues that patriarchy supports the claim that men in American culture signify physical, intellectual, and public sphere superiority, (Ratcliffe 10). As we view Americas history, both recent and past, we see this analysis to be true. Conversely, women hold the
1

Manny is slang for a male nanny

Johann-Reichart 2

superiority on the domestic front through historically being the caretakers of the household and being the primary gender in occupations such as nursing and teaching, which are culturally associated with caretaking and childrearing. The idea of a stay at home dad or a man being a nurse is thought of as effeminate and a sign of failure on the mans behalf.2 Thus, when Obama stated, We will draw upon the courage and skills of our sisters and daughters and moms, because women have proven under fire that they are ready for combat, (Obama, State of the Union), he is going against what the historical culture of the United States has learned to be true. The images associated with daughters and moms historically differ starkly with the images engrained in minds of what a soldier looks like. Further, the images of women soldiers fails to live up to Obamas rhetoric, amidst it being true that women have fought under fire. Of course, Obama is not the first to challenge the cultural logics of gender. Everything from pop-culture, to women voting, entering the workforce, and even running for President, prove that women are not destined to remain at the home front. Further, the War in Afghanistan has shown women as far as the war front, amidst the lack of public acknowledgment. Although women have not been formally introduced on the front lines, over one hundred women have been killed in hostile fire in Afghanistan, (Kurtyka 8). Thus, amidst the cultural logics, women by and large go against what is considered the norm. Yet, what remains is a glass ceiling. As Hillary Clinton noted in her concession speech in 2008, a glass ceiling remains but with 18 million cracks one can only wonder, when or if the ceiling will ever break. The difficulty with breaking the glass ceiling in the United States is that gender is a slippery category, (Ratcliffe 11). Such that, gender isnt the sole variable in what makes up an individual and therefore it cannot be the sole defining factor of an individual. Race, religion, and
2

Men who are not the breadwinners of their families are often greeted with the joke Well, we know who wears the pants in your family. Alex Williams NY Times Article Just Wait Until Your Mother Gets Home elaborates the cultural stigma towards the rising trend of stay-at-home fathers.

Johann-Reichart 3

many other social categories play a role in what comprises a person which makes it nearly impossible to make broad assumptions about a gender, i.e. women are capable/incapable of fighting on the frontlines. Yet, it is sweeping bans that are often determined by cultural beliefs and broad assumptions about gender. The diversity amongst women is a key argument in the opposition to women serving in the front lines. Many opposed to women fighting on the frontlines argue that the women they know could never be put in that danger. Phrases such as you hit like a girl reiterate the belief that women are a physically weaker sex. Matt Barber, a conservative columnist and political commentator, has loudly proclaimed his opposition to women serving in combat through stating that being a combat soldier goes against the very nature of being a woman, (Barber 1). Barber summarized his argument by stating, Women are no more made for the front lines than men are made for childbearing, (Barber 2). He references his wife and his two young daughters with pink nail polish as evidence that women are fragile and lack the ability to be soldiers that kill. Thus, Barber has a narrow perception about gender that has defined gender as a whole based upon his individual experience with women. This exemplifies the notion of Ratcliffes slipper category because an individuals perception on the abilities of one gender is stretched to create a broad perception. Interestingly, the images associated with soldiers differ between the home and war front. According to First Lt. Riannon Blaisdell-Black, Out here we dont see gender, we dont see race, (Nordland, For Soldiers, Death Sees No Gender Lines). When faced with the eyes of the enemy many soldiers admit to being unified and blind towards differences amongst their unit. In fact, dismissing what separates the unit is an integral part of their training process as combat

Johann-Reichart 4

soldiers. Yet, when the conversation comes back to America, differences between male and female soldiers are quickly pointed out as hindrances in a male and female combat group. Retired Lt. General Jerry Boykin, the current executive vice president of the Family Research Council, views women on the frontlines as a deeply flawed idea, (Boykin, Women in combat). He refutes Blaisdell-Blacks claims that gender is irrelevant, citing underlying sexual tensions and not pretty living conditions for women, as examples in which the differences between genders would become obvious and problematic. As Boykin referenced sexual tensions as a problem with women on the frontlines, it is revealed that it is not only what cultural logics say a woman cant do, but the foibles of men as well. Barber furthers Boykins analysis as he argues that the presence of women on the frontlines will compel male soldiers to act upon forces of sex, jealousy, and chivalry, (Barber 2). Barber sees introducing women on the frontlines as a major distraction towards male soldiers that will cause tragedies. Thus, culture has influenced Barber to believe that gender influences ones abilities in the world and their interactions with the opposite sex. It is Barbers assertion that men and women are born with natural abilities and inabilities. Through his cultural experiences in America he has found to be true that men and women are destined to different sectors in society. To question or change these distinct sectors, in his eyes, would be moronic, (Barber 1). Once again, Ratcliffes slippery category is depicted, as we see the images and ideas associated with gender dependent upon the frame of reference of a particular individual. As we closer examine those with strong beliefs in regards to the ban, the incredible differences among each emerge. For example, Blaisdell-Black was a twenty-four year old serving in Afghanstan, while Boykin served during Vietnam; Blaisdell-Black is a woman while Boykin is male. Their different perceptions of soldiers and gender are influenced by factors that have dictated their

Johann-Reichart 5

individual lives. Through fighting wars in different eras and being opposite genders, each has defined gender and each genders capabilities through the scope of their experiences. These two individuals exemplify the notion that America rides the fence on its messages about gender. Both Blaisdell-Black and Boykin are considered American Heroes for their service during wartime, yet both relay starkly different messages. What gives hope to Obamas agenda, as Ratcliffe acknowledges, is that gender is a trope within language and because language changes over time, the term gender has a history, and will have a history that continues to evolve, (Ratcliffe 10). Most notably, this evolution can be seen in the evolving ways women have been serving during wartime. Lt. Col. Albert Lagore, an executive officer in the Marquette Naval ROTC program cites the unprecedented roles women have occupied in the past decade on military missions as a sign that removing the ban will be a positive and natural step for the military to take, (Kurtyka 8). Instead of looking at gender as a whole and depicting women as domestic bound, supporters of removing the ban point to highly skilled, strong, and courageous women whose service in the military is critical to success, (Kurtyka 8). Thus, women are not all the same and have different capabilities, like men. Some men have the best capabilities to be the stay at home parent, whereas some women have the best physicality and intellect to serve on the frontlines in battle. The point of lifting the ban is not to open a flood gate that allows each and every woman to serve in combat; rather, it is to allow the women with the potential of a combat soldier to apply. Additionally, the future of cultural logics in regards to gender has hope for greater equality because of the logic of postmodern commonalities and differences, (Ratcliffe 11). That being, events throughout the course of individuals lives will have far greater influence than just gender alone. Further, socializing factors will shape the image of gender as time evolves. We can

Johann-Reichart 6

see this evident if we view a woman born in 1915, such as my grandmother, with a woman born in 1990, like myself. My grandmother was born five years before women were even allowed to vote, whereas I grew up with the idea that a woman voting was just as commonsense as a man voting. To argue against the suffragist movement in todays age would be deemed sexist, amidst similar arguments being the crux for why women shouldnt serve in combat. Senator Carl Levin reiterates this notion by stating the integration of women in combat zones reflects the reality of 21st century military operations, (Alexander, U.S. to lift ban). As women continue to excel in their military units it is a natural progression to formally introduce women in combat zones. To ignore this progression, former Marine captain and head of the Service Womens Action Network, Anu Bhagwati warns of women believing their careers will be stunted by combat exclusion (Alexander, U.S. to lift ban). Bhagwati sees Obamas desire to lift the ban as a historic moment that is necessary to keep a unified and strong military. Thus, the evolution of how we define gender and its relation to war is ever-changing and we can see a similar case of genders definition evolving in the suffragist movement. Women, regardless of strides made, are still thought differently than men. Although women can be as strong, infertile, and fearless as men the social script isnt completely sold. Fortunately, as history evolves the cultural logics of gender will evolve as well. For my generation, we are not the children of the G.I. Joe; rather, we are the children of Mulan and Xena the Warrior Princess. However, we are also the children who owned Barbie Dolls and idolize Miss America. We are told we can be President, yet we lack any real world examples. Thus, there remains a conflict in determining what, if any, expectations should exist for gender. Obamas State of the Union address acknowledges the differences among genders, and within

Johann-Reichart 7

one gender, arguing that there is no difference great enough to prohibit a woman or man from achieving their dream.

Johann-Reichart 8

Work Cited Alexander, David. U.S. to lift ban on women in front-line combat jobs. Business and Financial aaaaaaaaNews. Reuters. 24 Jan. 2013. Web. 20 Feb. 2013. Barber, Matt. Women in Combat: Notably Moronic. Pulling No Punches. Americas aaaaaaaaIndependent News Network. 15 Feb. 2013. Web. 18 Feb. 2013. Boykin, Jerry. Women in combat a dangerous experiment. CNN. 26 Jan. 2013. Web. 18 Feb. aaaaaaaa2013. Clinton, Hillary. Yes, We Can. The Guardian. 7 June 2008. Web. 24 Feb. 2013. Kurtyka, Jason. Women in combat put new face on military rules. The Marquette Tribune: 5 aaaaaaaaFeb. 2013. Print. Nordland, Rod. For Death, Gender Sees No Lines. The New York Times. 21 June 2011. Web. aaaaaaaa24 Feb. 2013. Obama, Barack. State of the Union Address. 2013 State of the Union. The White House. 12 Feb. aaaaaaaa2013. Web. 18 Feb. 2013. Ratcliffe, Krista. Defining Rhetorical Listening. Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, aaaaaaaaWhiteness. SIU Press, 2005. Print. Williams, Alex. Just Wait Until Your Mother Gets Home. The New York Times. 10 August aaaaaaaaa2012. Web. 24 Feb. 2013.