In this article the authors analyse and extend Segal's theory of factors affecting women's military participation cross-nationally through a literature review on three very different countries, Australia, Mexico and Zimbabwe. These countries differ not only in geographic location, but also in how the dimensions of Segal's theory apply to each. Segal's model focuses on societal and institutional-level variables, in the military, in the culture and in the social structure that affect the degree and nature of women's participation in the armed forces. While the model fits in a general sense, the authors find that other variables need to be added, and existing ones revised. Thus, they propose an expansion of Segal's theory to include additional factors and hypotheses for the relationship between each of these variables and the extent of women's participation in a nation's armed force, using examples from Australia, Mexico and Zimbabwe.

This article explores the discourse and gendered constructions that surrounded the debates on expanding seagoing roles for women in the U.S. Navy between 1978 and 2000. By comparing arguments against the expansion of women's seagoing roles across multiple years, it is possible to assess whether the arguments about women's exclusion have essentially changed. The arguments against expanding women's roles were framed in the context of diminishing military effectiveness based on stereotypical notions of women's capabilities. The arguments in favor of expanding women's roles were also framed within the construct of military effectiveness, with an emphasis on equal citizenship responsibility and democratic values. These results show a consistency of discourse throughout the periods studied.

No abstract

No abstract