Former American servicewomen who had to quit the military because the jobs they wanted were not available to them based on their gender expressed cautious enthusiasm this week following the news by defense secretary Ash Carter that all positions within the military would now be opened up to women.
Up until now, ground combat positions have largely been closed off to women, at least officially.
But Maj Mary Hegar, an American combat pilot who served her country for 17 years, said it is a misconception that women have not already been serving in combat or ground combat roles. What has been missing is official recognition and the opportunity to climb up ranks.
“This policy did not keep women out of ground combat, it just denied them promotion, recognition and training,” she said.
Hegar, 39, has suffered from this first-hand.
After her helicopter was shot down during a rescue mission in Afghanistan in 2009 – a rescue mission she completed successfully after returning fire – Hegar suffered from a mild back injury making her no longer eligible to be a pilot.
Because of her coolness under fire – demonstrated “time and time again” – and her experience as a former combat pilot, she thought she would make a perfect special tactics officer, which would have seen her on the ground with infantrymen, coordinating with the air force.
But because the position was not formally open to women, Hegar, who has been awarded a purple heart and the distinguished flying cross with a valor device, was not even allowed the opportunity to demonstrate her qualifications.
“I was denied the opportunity to apply to the only job that I wanted after I was grounded as a pilot.”
Following the realization, Hegar went part-time, and is now a member of the reserves. She is studying for an MBA at the University of Texas with a view to starting her own full-time business.
“I think I want to work for myself,” she said.
Together with three other women who faced similar restrictions, Hegar brought a case against the Department of Defense, which is still pending.
Changes in policy are one thing, but implementation is another, both the plaintiffs and the organizations representing them said.
According to the American Civil Liberties Union (which is representing the women along with a other legal organizations), the policy currently denies 200,000 positions to women, as well as entire career fields.
Women represent 14% of the 1.4 million active military personnel.
When Hegar put her name to the case, she experienced challenges and pushback from mostly older and former members of the military establishment – but not from the peers she had served with.
“Not one person that I came under fire with or served in combat with gave me a hard time at all. Everyone was incredibly supportive. They said, ‘Hell yeah. If I had any concerns, you completely dispelled them when I served with you.’
“That speaks to the validity of the argument,” she added.
Beyond redressing unfair discrimination, a will to attract and retain the best candidates for specific jobs should be the primary reason the military should implement the policy change, she said.
On top of which, the failure to recognize that skill and gender do not go hand-in-hand has lost the military some of its best, Hegar said.
Capt Zoe Bedell, who served as an officer for four years in the US marines, said she left the military was because she had been severely limited in her career options.
Despite being at the very top of her class during marine officer training, Bedell, now 30, and a co-plaintiff in the Hegar-named case, was not able to compete for a combat arms military occupational specialty.
Taking the closest thing she could get to being in the actual on-the-ground infantry, she headed one of the famed female engagement teams in Afghanistan, leading more than 40 female marines in engaging Afghan communities, serving alongside infantrymen and living under the same conditions.
Bedell, who is a Princeton graduate, and is now studying law at Harvard University, said the policy to exclude women from combat “wasn’t reflecting any of the realities on the ground”.
She argued that the policy’s effect did not just exclude people – it also served to “devalue women’s contribution”.
In January 2013, the Department of Defense rescinded a 1994 directive that barred women from ground combat units. But actual change on the ground does not seem to have happened.
“This is a very big victory, a very big step forward, but in no sense is the fight done.
“The most immediate issue here is going to be implementation plans and making sure that those are sensible and fair and not just an attempt to hide non-compliance,” the former marine said.
For Hegar, theirs is the most patriotic of missions.
“I took an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I went to Afghanistan and I defended the constitution against foreign enemies, and while I am home, I still uphold my oath to defend the constitution against domestic enemies and I believe that discrimination – barring people from applying and competing for jobs – is unconstitutional.”
