Citizenship Rites: Feminist Soldiers and Feminist Antimilitarists

Abstract

Since the early 1970s, military service, and particularly combat, has been seen by some feminists as an important bastion of patriarchy. To knock it down would leave the entire edifice of male domination fatally weakened. These “right to fight” feminists have challenged governments and the military establishment to allow women into all areas of combat. The issue is important, they argue, because of the traditional connection between combat and citizenship. On the other side are the feminist antimil itarists, Ilene Rose Feinman among them, who argue that the “military culture [is] opposite to women's culture and feminist goals … they judge the military and militarism as impediments to justice and peace.” Feinman wants to find a way to “separate martial service from first class citizenship rights.” If the military is rendered less important, women who want to serve will find it easier to do so. Feminist antimilitarists and feminist egalitarian militarists (the author's term) carry on their debate well removed from the military camp. Meanwhile, there are women who serve because they love their country or because they are attracted to the thrill of landing a fighter on an aircraft carrier. Or because they need a job. These women seldom express their demands in feminist terms or seek to advance the cause of women. The woman who aspires to an active military career often wants only to change a few of the rules regarding where and in what capacity she might serve.