Date
4-29-2026
Department
College of Arts and Sciences
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy in History (PhD)
Chair
Allen C. York
Keywords
Women in the military, Gender and military service, Cold War, Korean War, Vietnam War, Archival silence, Women's Armed Services Integration Act
Disciplines
History
Recommended Citation
Bouma, Angela, "No Place to Stand: Gender, Discipline, and the Contradictions of Military Womanhood, 1945–1975" (2026). Doctoral Dissertations and Projects. 8185.
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/8185
Abstract
From 1945 to 1975, American servicewomen stood inside an institution that depended on their labor while restricting their place within it. The post World War II military relied on women to sustain administrative, technical, and medical operations across a widening Cold War landscape, yet guarded the authority and recognition attached to combat and command. Women kept global communications running, delivered medical care in field hospitals, and carried out intelligence work that shaped military decisions. However, legal and cultural boundaries limited the reach of such contributions.
The 1948 Women’s Armed Services Integration Act formalized this tension. Regular status came with ceilings on strength, rank, and command that preserved the gender hierarchy at the core of military identity. Public narratives reinforced the same structure. Patriotism was celebrated in controlled images of femininity, while broader acknowledgment of women’s expertise was stifled whenever visibility threatened the established alignment between risk and masculinity. Debates within Congress and the services framed women as essential in moments of need but peripheral to the long arc of institutional development.
Archival records, congressional testimony, recruitment materials, and oral histories reveal a military seeking modernization while protecting long-standing assumptions about gender and authority. Servicewomen navigated careers shaped by discipline, public perception, and policy decisions that often treated their presence as a provisional solution rather than a permanent component of the force. Their experiences show an institution stretched by global commitments but unwilling to extend full membership to the women who helped sustain it.
The pattern that emerges is not one of linear progress but of constrained inclusion shaped by national security priorities and cultural expectations. Women occupied essential roles, yet the boundaries governing their service remained firmly drawn. The result is a history defined by institutional need, gendered limitation, and the ongoing effort to reconcile military professionalism with the place of women within it.
