This thesis investigates the notions of military masculinities in the gender training of the Nordic Centre of Gender in Military Operations (NCGM). Military masculinities are argued to create problematic gender norms that value men and devalue women. Therefore, there is a need to see if NCGM does reinforce or construct these gender norms into their training. The masculine norms are constructed as a dichotomy to the female norms, giving traits such as men being protectors and women the protected, and men being perpetrators and women being victims. The study is carried out through a qualitative text analysis of publications found on NCGM’s website. The analysis examines the extent of military masculine traits in their publications, and how these traits are depicted. The results show that NCGM is aware of the gender stereotypes of military masculinities, but they still do depict men and women in stereotypical feminine and masculine roles.

In 1997, 70% of British Armed Forces roles were opened to women. Women were still excluded from ground close combat (GCC) roles, where the primary purpose is to close in on and kill the enemy at short range, usually under 30 metres, using weaponry or hand to hand combat. Excluding women from GCC roles in the military was covered under Section 85(4) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. In order to legally retain the exclusion, the European Community Equal Treatment Directive stipulated that a review of the role of women in certain ground close combat environments should be undertaken every eight years. In this study I will be using post-structural policy analysis to examine the ways the 2010 and 2016 reviews on women in ground close combat have constructed gender difference. The findings have shown that cohesion and physical capacity have been deemed essential to combat effectiveness, therefore in this study I argue that the subtexts of these “essential” factors of combat are actively limiting the potential for gender equality in the British Armed Forces.