Women in the Themiclesian military

There is a long history of women in the Themiclesian military, though females have been the minority and the discriminated sex in many perspectives before recent decades, through assumptions, measures, or attitudes. Efforts have made to correct discrimination, though success has not been universal, and there remain considerable and institutional sources of prejudice and other obstacles against women.

Philology

The Shinasthana word nja′ (女) is generally translated as "woman" or "female" in this article, such as most ancient and modern scholars do. In Mengja, it is a logographic character, depicting a human indicated with developed breasts, seated and with arms folded before the midsection. While pre-modern Themiclesians had a predominantly-binary understanding of sex, intersex people were historically known, and they were described as both male and female. Themiclesians also did not analyze sex separately from gender, believing for the most part that biological sex determined gender roles. In this tradition authors have written of spinning and weaving as "woman's work", using the same word that described women through the biological feature of breasts, though there is little evidence of any scholarship that discussed the relationship between biological sex and gender roles. However, the latter is also complicated by social class, and particularly in the upper class they were often deliberately broken for various reasons.

Pre-modern history

During most periods, Themiclesian men were as a rule required to render both military and labour service (役) to the state. By definition, women are not obliged to perform either, but during desperate episodes, particularly sieges, women have been armed en masse and sent into actual battle. Whatever the results of such actions, women were excluded from ordinary military activity, since such marshalling of women was considered extraordinary and not to be a norm. In the gender-binary view of the world, men also worked the land and paid agricultural, while women tended to silkworms, spinning, weaving, and thereby contributed to the state in fabrics; there was a dichotomy between males and females in terms of their duties towards the state and daily routines.

While women did not particpate in combat regularly, they played an indispensible role for the upkeep of husbands or other male members of the family in military service. Early Themiclesian militiamen were responsible for their own food and clothing, receiving only weapons and armour from the state. As it was not ergonomic to carry off-seasonal clothing or more than three months' grains, militiamen often wrote home asking cloth, food, or cash be sent to their garrisons. These were collected by the local magistrate and conveyed by the state to their recipients' positions. Excavated letters on bamboo slips demonstrate that militiamen often wrote in entreating terms asking for surprising sums of money and quantities of goods. One letter dating to the 2nd c. showed female literacy in Themiclesian peasantry, scolding her husband who "asks that I be not promiscuous with other men, yet is promiscuous with the fruits of my labour with merchants and gamblers" (乃令我勿與人通 / 亦以朕功通于賈).

As Themiclesian power expanded in the 5th and 6th c., regional minorities often entered into peaceful relationships with Themiclesia, pledging troops to defend a certain area or to respond to the court's summonses. Depending on the specific culture, these units may have had women in their ranks, though evidence is sparse. Judging, however, that their leaders frequently were military commanders themselves, it is not inconceivable that some such units may have been commanded by women as well.

Naval forces are frequently treated as a distinct subject in military historiography, as they had few connections with terrestrial ones. The early maritime culture was highly superstitious and, for unclear reasons, deeply prejudiced against women. There was a near-societal agreement that women should not sail abroad, even in non-military contexts; this was justified through mythical and cultic reasoning, that women imperiled ships at sea. These early maritime cults were also implicated in human sacrifices for favourable winds or clearing of the skies, ostensibly for celestial navigation. Starting in the 7th century, such superstitions began to abate, though sailors were, like militiamen, almost universally male. Females sailing abroad gained acceptance when women started to stand in for their fathers or husbands, when the family had no adult males; however, females were still regarded as the infirm sex, and women sailing abroad were exceptional.

Amgonst the social and political elite, women had military capacity in several contexts. The close guard of the empress, the Middle Gentlemen-at-Arms (中郎中, trjung-rang-trjung), were female or predominantly-female. This institution was an imitation, on the grounds of ritualistic parity, of the Gentlemen-at-Arms that served as the Emperor's close guard. Like it, the Middle Gentlemen were the daughters of the social, political, and educated elite, serving the empress-consort as part of the mechanism of aristocratic reproduction. At any rate, the male Gentlemen-at-Arms were bodyguards in name only, and martial skills were considered a liability at best, and a marker of shame, for its connotation with commoners, at worst. Within the Middle Gentlemen-at-Arms, there also existed a female body analogous to the Gallery Cavalry; these women, though likewise guards in name only, were mounted and armed.

Modern history

19th and early 20th centuries

Though an exhaustive Themiclesian will reveal women participating in various capacities in Themiclesia's military, in a broad sense, females were not included in the formal military hierarchy, with limited exceptions as above stated. Interest in Casaterran schools of thought, starting in the 18th c., have not made a significant impact on the situation of women in military functions, remaining restricted to economic, ceremonial, or political roles. The Army Academy was founded in 1813 and was the epicentre for the study and dissemination of Casaterran military and other forms of thought, and in over 100 years, not a single dissertation was made for the role of women in the forces, or even more broadly in the defence of the nation.

The first official roles for women in the forces were in the Central Convalescence Department and Royal Signals Corps, in the early 1900s. Participation of women in nursing and secretarial roles, in civil society, is believed to have occasioned this change. The Navy, however, retained an all-male convalescence service and only employed females as typists. In either case, upwards mobility for women in these roles is limited. The Royal Signals Corps, which ran the telegraph system, appointed male supervisors for what is effectively an all-female workforce. The Convalescence Department permitted women to rise to the rank of chief nurse, which was compared to a lieutenant-colonel; however, male nurses were still promoted more frequnetly than female ones, despite comparable academic training and service records. The first female officers were commissioned in 1913. Surprisingly, this did not require parliamentary legislation; women's groups were intrigued by this and started studying legislation, coming eventually to the conclusion that women could legally serve in a number of positions, even high-ranking ones. They were, accordingly, prohibited from doing so by only social reluctance and entrenched prejudices, not actual laws. Others disputed this reading of laws, believing that early legislators simply implied male service, without stating it positively.

When the Themiclesian Air Force was founded in 1918, the constitution defined the TAF to consist of males under service. However, the Themiclesian Air Force Regiment did employ females as nurses, though this was never contested for legality at court.

Pan-Septentrion War

The watershed for female participation in the forces came during the Pan-Septentrion War. The most notable instance is in the Battle of ′Drjang-′an in 1940, when the magistrate of the city placed about 1,000 women, who worked as nurses or typists for the Consolidated Army, under arms and ordered them to engage the Menghean forces hoping to capture the city. They successfully held the enemy at bay, though the city was eventually captured. The affair was widely reported in the press, the women lauded as the "lady saviours" and "heroic women of ′Drjang-′an". The War Secretary summoned a representative panel of the unit after it was dissolved and awarded them a cash purse of €50 (approx. Int'l $14,000 in 2019) each for "exceeding all expectations for even the bravest men." Feminist historians have viewed this event with some reservation, noting that the unit was dissolved after the siege had been lifted, and the prejudices against females implied by the War Secretary. For the remainder of the war, there have been no record of women engaged in combat, though their presences has expanded beyond convalescence and secretaryships. At this time, the Consolidated Army did not formally distinguish between combat and non-combat roles, and the ability of females to move beteen services was erratic.

Tro v. Infantry Militia of ′jong

In January 1950, Julia Tro registered herself at the Infantry Militia of ′jong (邕材官, ′jong-dze-kwal) and was turned away. The Marshal of ′jong (邕尉, ′jong-′judh) reported this to the War Ministry, which sided with the Marshal. While Tro had other career plans, the Themiclesian Women's Federation contacted her and obtained her permission to represent her right to enlist, as well as to prosecute the Infantry Militia of ′jong for breach of statute. The matter was litigated before the Supreme Court in 1950, barristers Ree, Ree, and Ree representing the plaintiff, and the Attorney-general for ′jong representing the defence. The plaintiffs obtained a judgment in her favour, but the Marshal was not convicted of breach of statute. The defence argued that, under normal circumstances, there is no history of female service in the Infantry Militia, and the marshalling had been an extraordinary, i.e. could not be cited as precedent. The plaintiffs said that women's ability to serve was intrinsic and did not depend on circumstances. "Surely the demands on a foot militiaman is the same in peace as in war, and in an easy war as as a gruelling war," the plaintiff's counsel argued.

The Supreme Court, led by Nem CJ., accepted the plaintiff's arguments. He reasoned that turning Tro away now would be a breach of its own precedents for no legitimate reason, further reprimanding the Marshal adding that "if a woman is capable of serving in a militia at war, then surely she may serve in a militia at peace." Tro was enlisted in Jan. 1951 in the Infantry Militia. This judgment for Tro was a landmark, in that it permitted female enlistment in any military unit 1) where it is not statutorily barred and 2) had at least one female who served in it, during its entire history. However, the prosecution for breach of statute was argued next before the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the judgment of the Supreme Court and acquitted the Marshal.

Military reaction and delays

The subsequent decades after Tro v. Infantry Militia of ′jong are characterized by military reaction and resistance, which generally fell into three phases, according to historians. Typically, military units first adopt the excuse that females would be inconvenienced because there were no female lavatories and other amenities that males enjoy. When this excuse is proffered, there is generally a directive for them to rectify it. Despite various devices to delay this, at some point the facilities would be complete, or the leadership of the unit would be exposed for incompetence. After the facilities are complete, the unit may choose to adopt strict entry standards that did not exist before the Pan-Septentrion War, such as running times, picking up weights, or even ability to hold breath under water. In some cases, these were applied solely to female entrants, on the assumption that males were capable of them. After these measures are declared unlawful, women were subject to a great variety of iniquitous treatment that made them appear less competent on paper, allowing the male leadership to argue for a suspension of female enlistment, for a false correlation of females to unsatisfactory performance. This would again be contested at court, and a victory for the damnified would either provoke the government to dismiss the officer(s) responsible for the prejudiced treatment or to order a promotion for her. Structural sexism in the military remained endemic, and even this progression was not complete until the early 90s for many units. Concerted efforts to address sexism were first instituted in the 70s, even though the legal devices which enabled female enlistment had existed since 1950.

Necessary preparations

The Supreme Court's judgment for Tro shocked the Consolidated Army Board. Some members of the Board were skeptical, firstly, about the general application of the judgment and reasoned that it only applied to the Infantry Militia of ′jong. Records show that the Consolidated Army's legal department quickly undeceived the Board, noting that even if they refused to apply the new ruling universally, lawsuits will be encouraged at all localities; as a judgment of a high court, it would be accepted by courts across the country. General application, therefore, would only be a matter of time, unless the Borad came up with "a legitimate reason" to exclude females, and such a reason had to be found in statute.

On Feb. 18, 1951, the Themiclesian Marines declared that they intended to follow Tro v. Infantry Militia of ′jong, "fully to respect the judgment of a high court and the intrinsic ability of women to serve with and as one of us." Allegedly, this is because the incumbent captain-general believed that if the Consolidated Army's legal department could not prevent this judgment, their defeat at the same would be a foregone conclusion: there were two female marines who served around 1410. They promised that women would be allowed to enlist as early as 1954, when "necessary procedures are to be complete." However, the Consolidated Army Board decided that since the Marines were taking three years to make necessary preparations, they should be allowed to take at least six, on the grounds that the Consolidated Army is larger. With this as a defensive device, the Board issued directives to the militias to block female enlistment to all units part of regular formations, with the excuse that "necessary arrangements" have not yet been completed; similar directives were issued to professional support departments. As the recruiting authority of the militias, prefectural marshals were advised to place a moratorium on female enlistments to militia units, though the Board could not compel them to do this. Der, the president of the Women's Federation, pointed out in 1953 that "necessary procedures were not necessary for women who fought at ′Drjang-′an in 1940."

Physical testing

As 1954 approached for the Marines, conservative elements planned to slow female entry. Arguing that females were of a frailer constitution, a physical testing scheme was imposed on female recruits but not males, so that only the physically fit were selected. Over 90% of recruits met those standards, which surprised the leadership. Two months later, a new testing scheme was imposed, and those who passed the first were ordered to attempt the new scheme, which only 50% did pass. In 1955, the Marine Corps were brought to court to question the motivation behind the "change in testing schemes." The officer representing them refused to answer on grounds of national security, for which he was imprisoned for a year for contempt of court. Tup J. stated, "peine fort et dure was invented for people like you." After a writ of suspension, the Marine Corps answered in 1957 that a change in equipment had occurred, which required better physical standards than the first scheme provided. They gave a before-and-after exhibit of the newer and heavier set of equipment soldiers were expected to carry. The plaintiffs not able to summon witnesses to testify to the contrary, judgment led by Nem CJ. was for the Marines. This case was often cited as a miscarriage of justice prior to the introduction of judicial discovery, where the plaintiff did not know enough about the defendant's internal structure to summon good witnesses. This remained a problem in suits against the forces regarding sexual equality, where hierarchies are so expansive that key witnesses can easily stay hidden.

This entire affair had been a prolonged embarrassment for the entire military, since their motives are well-understood amongst the public. The idea that some exceptional requirement or unusual combination of eqiupment may be beyond the physical capabilities of the average female was repeatedly asserted at court to defend physical performance standards, with uneven results. Conservative justices normally allowed this argument, "not because it is just, but because the contrary is not unlawful." However, in 1963, the Consolidated Army Board was brought to court facing a private prosecution for waste of public money. Admitting the argument was "highly unorthodox", the plaintiffs argued that if all soldiers had the same need to carry an unusually heavy backpack, then the physical testing should be imposed on all soldiers, rather than females alone; to do so would be unmotivated and thus a waste of public money. The Consolidated Army's counsels recapitulated the 1957 judgment that imposing special testing, prior to enlistment, was not prohibited by statute, and good cause alone, rather than proof, was required. The court isolated two questions in this case: whether "the average woman" is a relevant comparison, and whether it was lawful to impose physical tests selectively. In 1958, the Supreme Court led by Tup CJ. decided it was not lawful for the Board to impose physical tests only on females, since it had no good reason to believe "the average man" is capable of the physical feats. In 1959, a similar judgment was had against the Marine Corps, at the Exchequer.

Meanwhile, the Air Force declined to impose quantified physical performance standards (such as running time, etc.) but relied on non-quantifiable observations in the aviation department. Since such comments ("showed a good sense of balance", "dealt with interference deftly", "artistically negotiated the challenges", etc.) are not measurable, the courts were more willing to accept the judgments of Air Force accessors.

See also

• Themiclesia