To quote from a prior post, “Let me start off by saying the views I express here are my own, not those of the U.S. Army.” Porphy snail-mailed the following from South Carolina just before starting Basic two weeks ago. I’m back home trying to post it – something he didn’t coach me on before departing. Wish me luck. -- M.

“ . . . I can tell already that there is going to be a downside to integrated-gender Basic Training, compared to the first time I went through Basic [1987]. Even at AIT last time around, the company was of mixed gender and classes were mixed, but platoons were either male or female. The significance is that you do everything by platoon – stay in the same barracks, go to chow at the same time and sit together (more or less), etc. In Basic Training this time around the platoons will be of mixed gender but, obviously, facilities will not be shared by all members of the platoon. Males and females aren’t going to be sleeping together, naturally. This cuts into the camaraderie and platoons are going to be divided into halves.

There’s also another consequence, as a response to politically-imposed gender integration. The Army essentially created two types of Basic Training. All people going into the combat arms go one place for Basic, non-combat arms to somewhere else. At least that’s how it seems to be – all the people I talked to at MEPS who were in a combat arm, that is in MOSs not open to women, were going to Benning. No one I’ve talked to here is in a combat arm.

At Leonard Wood in ’87, we were all mixed together for Basic, combat and non-combat alike. This gave us a chance to meet the kind of people we would be supporting in the field, and they, vice-versa, a chance to meet the folks supporting them. Also, it made for a common initial training experience. Why is that important?

The Army’s always been somewhat divided, with competition among Arms, and the combat branches seeing themselves set apart from the rest. This creation of two types of Basic training can only contribute to that. I get the sense that, while it’s not going to be easy per se, it’s not going to be as ‘tough’ as the Basic Training the combat arms folks are going through – but that even if it actually is, the recruits at Benning will never believe it was as hard for us. It’s not a shared experience so naturally they’ll think they went through a tougher regimen, even if that’s not the case. In the Army culture, that’s important.

It seems more and more like there are two Armies – not because the non-combat arms don’t face danger (In Iraq they’re often targeted by the enemy.) but because of things like this, that only enhance already-existing tendencies.

And it’s not that women in the Army is a bad idea, and of course once we get to our permanent duty stations we’ll all be working together, mixed gender. So folks might think we should be from the start. But Basic Training is different, set apart for a reason, and always leaves one of the most lasting impressions on people performing military service. Maybe there are upsides that I’m not seeing yet, but the downsides seem pernicious.”