The band of brothers myth is an enticing and destructive story. The romantic tale of men uniting to promote freedom, defend their nation, protect the weak, and enhance security is intoxicating. It is no wonder that countless war movies reproduce this myth. Watching men form bonds, make sacrifices for one another, and overcome extreme odds in defending their comrades and the nation makes for fantastic entertainment. However, these stories of war and soldiers must not be treated as accurate depictions of the “real” wars and violence being waged across the globe today. This leads to the destructive potential of the band of brothers myth. It is destructive in that it projects an idealistic image of war, “real” soldiers, combat operations, and the role of violence in achieving political objectives.

The band of brothers myth is so powerful that it influences military policy and shapes public perceptions of and emotional responses to war. Women have been excluded from combat within the US military largely because of this story. They have also been excluded because of a widely accepted set of emotional responses that loosely declare “women just don't belong.” Imagine – a mythical story and gut reactions have been the accepted foundation of a major military policy that impacts military operations and women's career opportunities.

Reviewing the main arguments used to keep women from combat roles, it becomes clear that these debates have little to do with research, national security, or women's capabilities. Fears that menstruating women will attract sharks, claims that lesbians make the best soldiers because they don't fraternize and attract men, and conclusions that God would not have wanted women to serve in combat are simply ludicrous. Yet such arguments are regularly expressed by policy makers, military leaders, and the public. Moreover, such ridiculous claims are linked, or harnessed, to seemingly more objective claims about women's physical or social inability to serve in combat roles.