Political conflict,policing and the challenges of masculinity

Introduction

With the exception of the work of John Brewer (1991), academic research on women officers in the Royal Ulster Constabulary GC (RUC) is scant. A former RUC Superintendent has written a very useful historical account of women police in Northern Ireland (Cameron, 1993), whilst mention of RUC women appears only briefly in work that is dedicated to a wider analysis of women police in the United Kingdom (Jackson, 2006). This is unfortunate in that women in the RUC had a unique experience because their policing duties were discharged in a deeply divided society wherein there were high levels of political violence and terrorist activity. Essentially, the conflict in Northern Ireland annealed the RUC into a force that was particularly masculine in character. As such, RUC women’s experience is significant because it allows for an examination of the effects of conflict on gender relations. However, although important, the impact of conflict will not form a core part of the analysis. Instead, the article will explore policewomen’s experience of doing police work; second, their views regarding women’s suitability for different policing roles; and lastly, how they coped with the challenges of working in a very masculine and male-dominated occupation (reference will be made to the impact of the conflict on policewomen’s experience where relevant). Given the scholarly neglect of RUC women’s experiences, this article makes an important contribution to the literature on women and policing.

Gendered organisations, policing and masculinity

Joan Acker’s (1990) work on gendered institutions offers a useful theoretical framework for beginning our analysis of the RUC and policewomen’s experiences. She points to how organisations are not structured on a gender-neutral basis but rather operate according to rooted assumptions about gender difference – assumptions that result in forms of female inequality. The RUC (and policing in general) was more openly masculine and structurally gendered in its practices than most other organisations, hence inviting an inquiry into the experiences of its women officers. Acker’s critique of the predominance of male-dominated assumptions is germane to a critical assessment of the gendered patterns of work within the RUC. However, on a cautionary note: a critical approach to gendered work patterns needs to be sensitive to the emphasis placed by RUC managers on operational efficiency and the feasibility of adopting a gender-neutral policy in all aspects of policing. This may be considered a pronounced concern in a society plagued with high levels of political violence, as was the case for the RUC. There were certain aspects of police work where the physical capabilities of an officer could not be divorced from operational needs associated, in particular, with public order situations. Therefore, it is important to bear in mind that certain aspects of policing – especially in a deeply divided society, complicate slightly Acker’s general critique of gendered organisations, and this is a point that will be addressed below.

Although much policing activity does not require the demonstration of, for example, physical strength and officers’ physical prowess might seldom be called upon in the discharging of their duties, the image of policing as a masculine profession is a dominant one. It is a durable image because, as Cara Rabe-Hemp (2008: 252) argues, the ‘occupation of policing is masculine by its nature, as law enforcement is typically associated with aggressive behaviour, physical strength…based on a crime-fighting image of ruggedness, toughness and masculinity.’ The characteristics of a ‘good police officer – fearlessness, heroic demeanour, physical and emotional strength, assertiveness, and intelligence’ are ones associated with masculinity and not femininity (Kurtz, 2008: 220). Women’s lack of upper body strength coupled with male officers’ opinion that female officers do not possess the necessary emotional attributes to cope with police-related stress results in women being considered less capable of satisfying the occupational demands of the job – an opinion which some scholars consider to be reflective of a deep-seated male prejudice learned in childhood but retained in adulthood (Balkin, 1988). Of course, research has found policewomen to be as willing as policemen to use their coercive authority over citizens, whether of a verbal or physical nature (Paoline and Terrill, 2004), but such research findings do not easily penetrate the hard shell of police subculture, therefore facilitating the retention of traditional masculine perceptions of female inadequacy amongst some officers.

The strategies used by women officers in order to cope with a male-dominated environment have been explored by Susan Martin (1980). She pointed to how female officers could adopt an identity either as policewomen or policewomen: the former resulted in women possibly becoming more aggressive, tougher and thus male-like in their attitude as they sought to accentuate their professionalism (as a gender-neutral concept) and de-emphasise their femininity. The policing techniques associated with the policewomen typology suggest that a change in temperament and personality may have taken place since joining the police. Alternatively, women could embrace the policewomen identity and retain their femininity, but this placed them in a subordinate role to their male counterparts and there was another problem: women might appear too weak to do the job. However, irrespective of the strategy favoured, this leaves women in an awkward tangle which Karen Rich (2014: 103) discussed as follows: ‘They may be referred to as “dykes” or “bitches” if they appear masculine, or “pansy police” or “the bunny patrol” if they seem feminine.’ As a consequence, historically women have struggled to be accepted as equals by their male colleagues. This has resulted in them performing gendered policing roles linked to working with women and children as well as performing administrative duties. Before women’s integration, the RUC was no different in this respect. Although women had been employed as ‘Matrons’ within the force, they were not recruited as officers until 1943 and were employed (despite opposition to their recruitment from within the force) to perform those duties of a gendered type referred to above (Cameron, 1993).

However, there has been a legislative dismantling of institutional obstacles to women’s integration into a wider set of policing roles. The United Kingdom’s Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 served to promote equality of opportunity between men and women which affected policing. But, as Margaret Cameron (1993: 98) explains, the Order did not ‘make any great impact overnight within the Royal Ulster Constabulary as many of the changes which it was to bring about had already taken place owing to the situation and circumstances prevailing in Northern Ireland.’ The ‘situation’ and ‘circumstances’ were those of inter-ethnic conflict and sustained terrorist activity. By 1975 the Northern Ireland Troubles had been raging for six years, resulting in much death and destruction of property. The conflict made it necessary to integrate women officers into a wider set of policing roles as male officers were detailed to security-related duties. The wider integration of women constituted an acknowledgement of their utility, but it was limited and did not involve security work as until 1994 it had been RUC policy not to provide policewomen with firearms. However, the basic point needs to be made, viz. perforce of circumstances the pattern of RUC women’s integration was different to that of women in other police forces and as Louise Jackson (2006) comments the change brought about by the Troubles disrupted the specialist work women officers were accustomed to performing.

In the last few decades changes in the philosophy of policing and operational practice has shifted police work away from a crime-fighting model towards one based on community engagement (Brogden and Nijhar, 2005). John Murray (2005) has argued that the shift to community policing constitutes a progressive transition away from a paramilitary style of policing – the kind that facilitates the image of policing as a masculine activity – to a model that emphasises the importance of working in a cooperative way with communities. This development is considered to have favourable outcomes for women officers (Rabe-Hemp, 2008). Susan Miller (1998) suggested that policewomen possess the necessary skills to work effectively with communities. She discussed this in terms of the appropriate use that community policing can make of the ‘feminine voice’ with the value it places on ‘care, connection, empathy, and informality’ (Miller, 1998: 157). Miller did not fail to note the irony in that these values were marginalised according to traditional policing’s ‘masculinist bias’. But these developments, while helpful to women officers, have not meant that they no longer encounter challenges linked to the operation of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ (Rabe-Hemp, 2009). It is argued that male dominance is undergirded by a police subculture which functions to ‘keep women police in subordinate positions’ (Gracia, 2003: 330). Negative attitudes amongst male officers remain a problem which female officers continue to confront and battle against. However, the Northern Ireland conflict prevented RUC women from benefiting from this development in as comprehensive a way as women officers in other British constabularies and forces elsewhere in the world. Community relations work was restricted because of terrorist activity as a number of officers who worked in this field were murdered by terrorists as they were ‘soft’ targets (Trotter, 2010).

Thus, to sum up this section: academic research informs us of the difficulties which women officers encounter in terms of having their work accepted and valued as ‘real’ police work. The policewoman’s role was traditionally confined to working with women and children as well as performing administrative duties. When a wider set of role opportunities became available to women they experienced male resistance, resulting in their integration being thorny and problematic. This was due to male officers’ perception of policing as a masculine form of work and an entrenched prejudice based on what was considered to be the physical and emotional shortcomings of women – weakness and softness were disqualifying characteristics for police work. However, research on policewomen makes clear that they have much to contribute to policing across the gamut of duties and roles. Commentators point out that effective policing transcends the kind of restrictive hyper-masculine definition which elevates aggression and the use of strong-arm tactics. With the rise of community policing the characteristics and values most often associated with women police and which previously had led to their marginalisation are now considered key assets and function to enhance the status of policewomen (but with qualifications in the case of RUC women because of the dangers associated with political violence). So, how did women officers in the RUC experience policing and how did they encounter masculinity? These questions will be addressed below following a brief discussion of how the research material was collected.

Methodology

In 2014, the author conducted a focus group which was attended by six former women officers of the RUC and also a number of individual interviews. The focus group and interviews were arranged by the Northern Ireland Retired Police Officers’ Association (NIRPOA) and were audio recorded. As part of a wider research project, the author has been conducting research with the NIRPOA since 2011 as well as with other RUC organisations, namely the Disabled Police Officers’ Association Northern Ireland, the Wounded Police and Families’ Association, The Royal Ulster Constabulary George Cross Widows’ Association and the Royal Ulster Constabulary George Cross Foundation. The research on women officers’ experiences continued in 2015 when, for logistical reasons, questionnaires were distributed amongst women officers and a total of 15 were completed (the questionnaires allowed for open-ended responses). The use of questionnaires was based on a snowballing effect – officers who attended the focus group recommended participation in the research to their colleagues (as well completing the questionnaire themselves). All participants in the research are female; ranged in rank from Constable to Superintendent; with service records that varied from 19 to 31 years; and are retired from policing. They had experience of working in both rural and urban contexts as well as serving in different stations throughout Northern Ireland – some located in areas where the threat to RUC officers was high. It is important to note that, as a research group, it is difficult to gain access to RUC women (and former RUC officers in general). In this sense, women officers could be described as a ‘hard-to-reach’ population who are ‘hidden away’ (Shaghaghi et al., 2011) but their hiddenness is explicable in terms of the dynamics of political conflict. Women officers, and their male counterparts, took their personal safety very seriously because of the threat of a terrorist attack during the Northern Ireland conflict, which, understandably, has rendered them suspicious of outsiders. Between 1969 and 1998 a total of 302 officers were killed as a result of terrorist attacks (Doherty, 2004). This suspicion is presently fuelled by the threat emanating from republican dissident groups who have murdered police officers, soldiers and prison officers since the signing of the Belfast Agreement in 1998 (BBC, 2016). The author is, therefore, especially grateful to key individuals who, having become involved in the initial stage of the research, encouraged a number of their colleagues to do likewise, thus making possible the empirical work which underpins this article.

Women officers and police work

Women officers are affected by dominant male constructions of police work. Doubts amongst some male officers as to the effectiveness of women to perform the job of police officer were often defended on the grounds that women were not equipped to deal with aggressive and violent situations. The presentation of a particular image of policing as consisting of tackling criminals, making violent arrests, breaking up brawls or being involved in high-speed car chases militated against a fair and balanced assessment of women’s effectiveness. Policing involves such activities – but it does not do so on a daily basis otherwise officers would likely experience higher levels of stress, resulting in burnout (Kurtz, 2008). Of course, as discussed above, deeply divided societies are such that the police may confront more sinister challenges, and the RUC was certainly affected in this way (it was in acknowledgement of the sacrifice made by members of the RUC and their families during the Northern Ireland conflict that the organisation was awarded the George Cross by Queen Elizabeth II in 2000). But although police work can be dangerous and regular incidents of political violence and terrorist activity certainly adds to the danger, it amounts to more than what appears in the dominant masculine image as two respondents pointed out. They stated that, provided women officers receive the same training, they are as capable as men in terms of doing the most regularly occurring police work: ‘the vast majority of the job was in speaking to offenders or witnesses and taking statements and compiling files’ (respondent 1) and ‘With the same training I could do the same job as well as a man. Policing is probably 25 percent knowledge of the law and 75 percent common sense’ (respondent 2).

However, the significance of physicality in police work was also acknowledged and there was an acceptance that this resulted in certain policing roles being gendered. Male officers were considered better suited to deal with a riot situation, which was a common occurrence during the Northern Ireland conflict. In a British setting, riots and violent demonstrations are not unique to Northern Ireland and have occurred elsewhere, being generated by industrial disputes or violent protests involving racial minorities (Gravelle and Rogers, 2011). Yet it is important to note that riots in Northern Ireland often did not arise because, say, of a spilling over of tensions between protesters and the police during a demonstration. Rather, the RUC regularly confronted the challenge of political tensions erupting into large-scale rioting, which threatened officers with serious injury. As well as using the stock and trade of the rioter, namely, bricks, bottles, and petrol bombs, blast bombs were also used to harm members of the security forces. Additionally, terrorists were prepared to use rioters as ‘cover’ for firing at police lines with automatic weapons in an attempt to kill officers. Accordingly, some aspects of rioting in Northern Ireland, then, were notably different to riots in other parts of the UK (and elsewhere) and it is important to bear this in mind when considering the role of women officers in such situations. As such, the following two comments highlight the usefulness of male officers: ‘In public order situations men are obviously bigger; tend to be more aggressive and stronger and hence better at dealing with such a high degree of violence’ (respondent 3) and ‘Where strength – or a show of strength – is required such as a riot situation then I feel that men fill this role better. Women could be seen as a weak link’ (respondent 2). Another respondent referred to women not being as well suited to this kind of police work and pointed to how their presence could actually have made matters more difficult for their male colleagues:

In relation to incidents where physical ability is important i.e. in a riot situation, I was certainly unable to match my male colleagues and was on occasions a liability, as they felt that they had to protect me as well as looking after themselves. (respondent 4)

Beyond the context of a riot, male officers were also considered to be better able to deal with situations which required an individual to be physically restrained: ‘Men had more upper shoulder strength and were therefore more capable of dealing with a fight and making arrests of aggressive prisoners’ (respondent 5) whilst the comments of another officer reflected the same sentiments: ‘Male officers could handle aggressive, abusive male prisoners, or disorderly adults easier than a female officer due to their physical size and strength’ (respondent 6). Undoubtedly, these comments would resonate with policewomen working in politically stable societies who have to deal with aggressive drunk males (and females) caught up in late-night brawls when the bars begin to empty. But, as we have seen, if the physicality of police work is set to the side, then, with the same training, respondents considered themselves the equal of males in doing the job.

Policing and women’s attributes

Whilst respondents acknowledged that male officers had physical attributes which gave them an advantage with regard to performing certain policing roles, they felt, by and large, that policewomen possessed a few qualities of their own. But it is noteworthy that for some officers there were important qualifications to the idea that policewomen possessed qualities that policemen simply did not. As discussed earlier in the article, female officers are considered to have attributes which are beneficial to police work. Some of these attributes are thought to be useful when dealing with offences related to women and children – requiring listening, caring and comforting skills.

When policewomen’s use of listening skills was discussed as a means by which to establish trust with the public, a respondent said: ‘I feel that women officers approach a situation in a different way to men. It is important to listen to a member of the public. The public need to be able to trust police officers and have faith in them’ (respondent 6). A less aggressive demeanour coupled with a particular ability to deal with ‘sensitive topics’ to do with ‘women and children’ were regarded as traits more often associated with female officers: ‘Women officers are usually less aggressive and are better equipped to speak to women and children especially on sensitive topics. Women officers learn to talk their way out of situations whereas aggression only aggravates a problem’ (respondent 1). Women’s effectiveness is to be understood in terms of their less authoritarian and less physically forceful approach to policing.

Differences between male and female officers in terms of the display of empathy were discussed by respondents as an emotional property more often evident in policewomen than policemen. As described by Rafael Moses (1985: 135), empathy is the ‘faculty which enables us to feel with another human being, to cognitively and effectively put ourselves into his or her place, and therefore to become aware of the other’s feelings, needs, and wants.’ While we should not think of police work as akin to a ‘helping profession’ and recognise that police officers are not social workers whose profession causes them to connect in a very empathetic way with their clients, it would appear that empathy is not something that officers ought to consider alien. This is because of a simple fact: how police officers interact with the communities they serve is fundamental to shaping the public’s view of them. Chad Posick, Michael Rocque and Nicole Rafter (2014) suggest that the display of empathy by officers can improve levels of police legitimacy and increase levels of public cooperation, all of which adds to the effectiveness of law enforcement as officers find it easier to do their job. These commentators say that ‘Police can increase positive perceptions by acting empathetically during encounters with citizens’ (Posick et al., 2014: 19). Equally, Scott Wolfe (2011: 68) claims that ‘people are concerned with the quality of interpersonal treatment they receive and make positive procedural judgments of the police when they feel that officers treat people with dignity and respect’ – treatment associated with an empathetic approach. Given that the enhancement of police legitimacy is a core goal of law enforcement agencies because it promotes citizens’ compliance with the law (Tyler, 2004), what our respondents say about empathy in police work is not insignificant. However, there is a dimension to this related to a deeply divided society in that if the police are rejected by a specific community for political and ideological reasons then it is unlikely that the work done by officers will receive a positive evaluation. Due to the absence of political consensus and a lack of widespread cross-community support for policing, the RUC confronted this problem vis-à-vis the nationalist community (also militant elements of the loyalist community during particular periods of the Northern Ireland conflict beginning in the mid-1980s). A respondent said:

I do not think that women have better communication skills; but they do possess more empathy generally than men and can quickly read a situation and in a more penetrating way than men. For example, a man might think that dealing with an hysterical female requires a degree of force when in fact a female police officer would in most cases speak quietly and reassuringly to ease the situation in a family dispute. Women do generally have a softer approach and are less inclined to be confrontational. (respondent 3)

In terms of working with women and children, respondents were of the opinion that this was an area better suited to policewomen. In this sense the responses of RUC women are consistent with scholarly findings which highlight the gendered nature of this type of police work, irrespective of context. However, the next comment made by a senior officer is exposed to the feminist critique that it is the kind of outlook which is responsible for confining women officers to marginal and devalued policing roles: ‘Female officers were exceptional at dealing with children and young people. They had more patience as well as more caring attitudes than men’ (respondent 5), whilst another officer commented: ‘Yes, women have particular attributes such as a maternal instinct and children in trouble will gravitate towards a woman. Therefore they are better skilled in interviewing and statement taking in these matters’ (respondent 2). When ‘dealing with sexual offences where the victims are women and children’ (respondent 1), policewomen were also regarded more able, and this point was echoed as follows: ‘Women officers are more suitable for caring for the victims of sexual crime as they have a gentle understanding in their approach to a female who has been violated and is very nervous and upset’ (respondent 6). In the light of the stress experienced by female victims of sexual crimes, it was thought that a policewoman is more likely to gain the victim’s confidence: ‘in situations such as rape or indecent assault, a female victim may feel more at ease talking to a female officer in detail regarding such incidents. In this regard it definitely would aid the investigation of such offences’ (respondent 10), and this point was emphasised by another respondent:

I felt my female perspective was essential to circumstances. For example, in the very early years of my career I assisted CID [Criminal Investigation Department] in investigating offences against women – primarily rape. There were no separate units for this at this stage (1978) and no specific training. Getting alongside a victim was not difficult for me and an empathetic approach gained confidence. (respondent 11)

The challenges of masculinity in the RUC

Brewer (1991: 241) comments that the ‘extreme Hercules-like masculinity of a Northern Irish police station’ was influenced by two factors: the Northern Irish conflict and a general cultural conservatism which reflected the ‘dominance of two very patriarchal religions (Brewer, 1991: 236). Although this may be an accurate assessment of the factors which in part shaped the masculine and conservative ethos of the RUC, this does not mean that women officers found their work unfulfilling or the problems thrown up by masculinity too burdensome. However, they still had to contend with masculine attitudes and a male-driven occupational culture, as a respondent outlines: ‘During my early service (1977–2006) it was definitely a masculine profession and environment. Women were classed as “lady policemen” – the authorities talked of the “men” when they really meant men and women’ (respondent 7).

Part and parcel of a masculine occupational culture is the exposure of women to the rough and tumble of sexual horseplay by males. Of course, for women who refuse to reciprocate and are unwelcoming of behaviour of this nature, the ‘horseplay’ can be degrading and have intimidating dimensions (Grint, 2005: 232). The sexual objectification of RUC women has been referred to by Brewer (1991: 237), who said that the ‘majority opinion of policewomen among male colleagues is that they are fair game as sex objects’, which results in policewomen having their bodies joked about, being present when sexual jokes are told, and having to resist passes made at them as well as experience sexual harassment in the form of ‘having their waists pinched, arms put around them, comments made as to their appearance, and so on’. But it ought to be stressed that with the exception of one officer, this kind of problem certainly did not figure largely in respondents’ responses and where it did occur it was quite easily dealt with. However, women needed techniques for dealing with problems of this kind. An officer described her experiences and discussed her strategy for dealing with male advances:

As part of the culture of the time, in the 70–80s some of the men thought the policewomen were easy prey for groping hands and this created tensions within a station. However, the women were resourceful e.g. making friends with the ‘offender’s’ wife, so the male officer would soon back off in case his wife got to hear of his behaviour or loudly telling him to ‘back off’ when other officers were around. (respondent 7)

Initiation practices are not uncommon in the armed forces. As the work of Elliot Aronson and Judson Mills (1959) highlights, a process of initiation which is severe rather than mild (and especially if there is no practice of initiation at all) can make membership of a group more attractive, highly valued and develop strong bonds between those initiated. However, sometimes such processes can be debasing and Louis Jackson (2006) refers to an ‘initiation ceremony’ in British constabularies known as ‘station-stamping’. For Jackson, the act was an expression of male dominance and amounted to the normalisation of sexual harassment. She describes what was involved: ‘The ritual involved stamping bare flesh – either the chest or the thigh (above the stocking top) – with one of the rubber document stamps kept at the station’ (2006: 39). This ‘ceremony’ was experienced by many newly passed-out RUC women (but not all, as it was strongly resisted by some) at an early stage during their arrival at a new station. Respondents’ comments reflected different attitudes towards ‘stamping’, with some considering it to be harmless and prank-like whilst others felt threatened by the possibility of it happening to them. A former Superintendent who accepted the ‘ceremony’ in good spirit said:

The fellows would have grabbed you in a horseplay sort of thing and stamp you and there was no harm in it. You got a police stamp every time you came to a new station – they would have just grabbed you and pulled up your shirt and stamped you to say that you’re part of the team…We would have done things on the men. We would have tipped off their hats, you know the fellows, I mean, they became your brothers that’s the way we sort of looked at it, there was never any sexual innuendo about it, it was just horseplay. (respondent 5)

Traditional ideas about RUC women and their appearance as police officers were also observable in women’s uniform. Women were required to wear skirts, and although the RUC was not unique in this respect there were features of the Northern Ireland conflict which rendered the wearing of skirts less than practical. Of course, irrespective of context, the fact that a skirt can restrict policewomen’s mobility while, for example, they are pursuing a suspect can make them appear less competent than their male colleagues. Respondents referred to the problems which their uniform caused whilst on duty and some of its lack of functionality related to conditions caused by the Northern Ireland conflict. A former Inspector outlines the difficulties women encountered:

Female officers had to work very hard to prove that they were just as capable as their male colleagues. There were times when female officers found this difficult…Uniform restricted movement in running and I remember one time having to go out with the army on a VCP [Vehicle Check Point] exercise by helicopter and neither the skirt was suitable to climb in and out of a chinook helicopter, nor were the shoes suitable for landing in a ploughed field. I had to be carried by an army officer on to the road and back again. (respondent 5)

In tandem with a gendered uniform was gendered equipment. Despite the conflict, women RUC officers were not routinely armed whilst on duty. The RUC hierarchy did not alter its view on the arming of women until 1994 – ironically the year of the first IRA ceasefire. This does not mean that women did not know how to handle firearms because they received familiarisation courses in order to make a weapon safe and to identify components of a weapon when involved in house searches or body searches of female suspects. Many women were able to fire weapons, having received informal instruction by their male colleagues in case a terrorist attack left a policeman seriously injured and in need of protection. Yet female officers’ competence with a firearm varied from one officer to the next. However, at the start of their careers many participants were not issued with as much as a baton. Given that most respondents joined the RUC during the 1970s – the most violent decade of the conflict – this is surprising. Yet women were resourceful and made good use of whatever equipment they possessed. Thus in a situation of a brawl or to aid their male colleagues when attempting to restrain a violent male resisting arrest, it was not unusual for policewomen to use the police torch or radio to good combative effect – women were not officially issued with a baton until the extendable version in the mid-1990s. In a masculine environment and despite the conflict in Northern Ireland, weapons were a male preserve. The fact that women were originally not issued with firearms meant that they did not intrude on this male preserve. However, women’s approach to challenging the RUC’s policy on firearms was problematically fragmented, with some women wanting to be armed but others not (the diversity of opinion was reflected amongst participants in the research). This failure of cooperation between women weakened their collective position and fits neatly with Acker’s (1990: 141) point about the problems which emerge from ‘women failing to cooperate with each other’, namely that it is a factor which undermines their critique of gendered institutions generally. But there was other ‘territory’ perceived by policemen to be their preserve and which women could encroach upon. An officer discussed how her competence in driving generated male resentment:

In order to be in specialist units and drive specific vehicles one had to be an advanced driver – Grade 1. I asked and begged my boss at the time ‘please can I do my advanced driving?’ and eventually ‘yes’. I got qualified and so out of the 32 men I worked with I was the only advanced driver and that caused resentment. So when it came to ‘all’ the special jobs with the under-cover army I was the only one selected to drive the vehicles not the men and that played out all over the years of my service. (respondent 12)

Discussion

What are the key findings of this piece of research? Firstly, the topics related to RUC women’s experience of masculinity are those which are applicable to research on the experiences of policewomen irrespective of context. In this sense the experiences of women RUC officers adds an important dimension to the existing literature on policewomen. However, the context itself is significantly different in that, unlike constabularies in the wider United Kingdom and the United States (where considerable work has been done on policewomen’s experiences), Northern Ireland was (and remains) a deeply divided society where police officers faced real danger from terrorist activity.

Second, the research material informs us that RUC women felt they could do police work generally as well as their male colleagues but acknowledged that their lack of physical stature and strength rendered policemen better at performing roles which required these attributes – such as dealing with rioters, coping with males resisting arrest, and breaking up brawls (there was an extension of gendered work in a Northern Ireland context in that because women were not armed until 1994 they could not perform security duties). Hence there was an acceptance of the limitations of female physicality in relation to some police work but respondents did not consider themselves the victims of patriarchal prejudice if they were not detailed to perform duties of a more physical or dangerous kind. This evidence recommends a small qualification to Acker’s (1990) wide-ranging critique of gendered organisations, as physical competence, which was capable of objective assessment, was a factor used by senior police officers in determining the gender make-up of a police unit in certain security contexts – management decision-making was shaped by operational necessity and the feasibility of deploying policewomen for specific duties.

As Brewer (1991) has pointed out, the bulk of everyday police work does not require masculine qualities associated with physical prowess, and this leads us to highlight the third key finding. The majority of officers’ responses suggested that they possessed attributes which enabled them to handle some situations better than their male colleagues whose greater likelihood to respond aggressively to a problem was not always the most productive approach. Women’s lack of physical ability was compensated for by their verbal skills of communication (and less intimidating presence and less aggressive policing style), which were effective in calming a situation and preventing an escalation of violence. It should be noted that respondents’ opinions relate to normal – civilian – aspects of policing rather than the militarised policing response required to tackle the dangers associated with the political conflict in Northern Ireland.

Fourth, the officers’ comments, in the main, also indicated that policewomen are better suited to deal with sexual offences involving women and children, which was the role traditionally performed by women police. As such, RUC women preferred to recognise the gendered nature of certain kinds of police work which they were called upon to deal with more often than their male colleagues. However, there were a few respondents who could recall male colleagues whom they considered the equal of policewomen in dealing with sensitive cases to do with women and children.

The fifth finding draws our attention to the challenges female officers in the RUC confronted. As discussed above, policing is a masculine occupation and this piece of research informs us that the RUC was similar to police forces the world over. Scholarly literature which reflects a feminist perspective suggests that many male officers consider women physically and emotionally unsuitable for police work, and RUC women were undoubtedly affected by similar male attitudes. Accordingly, similar to women who work in other male-dominated jobs, working in the RUC was not unproblematic because, at times, women confronted certain challenges associated with the cruder expression of masculinity – bad and vulgar language, sexual horseplay and advances, informal rituals like ‘stamping’, which for many women was degrading. Yet negative experiences like these need to be placed in context, not least because only two respondents could be considered to have had a poor experience of working in the RUC overall. In contrast, the others were keen to make known their intense satisfaction at their choice of career, despite its dangers. They felt that their work was valued by male colleagues and stressed the high level of camaraderie between officers irrespective of gender. It is likely that conditions of political violence – and a mutually experienced threat from terrorism – contributed to breaking down gender barriers as officers had to rely on each other. Gender squabbles are quickly placed in perspective when confronted with the threat of death or severe injury from terrorist attack. Perhaps, in stable societies dissimilar to Northern Ireland the dismantling of gender barriers is a more difficult task.

Finally, and notwithstanding the masculine context of policing during the Troubles, the research findings indicate that RUC women were able to adapt to their masculine environment in a generally successful way. It should be noted that women who enter a male-dominated occupation like policing are a challenge to men. This is best understood in the context of occupational status and remains a problem for women, regardless of the positive changes which have occurred to tackle discriminatory attitudes and behaviour. Males instinctively protect aspects of their job in order to maintain the strong masculine – and high-status – imagery surrounding police work, as Susan Martin and Nancy Jurik (2007: 70) indicate: ‘Women’s integration challenges men’s use of police work as a means of doing masculinity. Men strengthen their gendered identities…by fostering an image of their jobs as “men’s work”.’ Problematically, the more women demonstrate their capabilities to do a range of duties, the less able are men to flag up policing as a masculine occupation, which for these authors, is unsettling to some policemen who wish the masculine image to remain unchallenged. However, the findings suggest that the respondents’ adaptation to a masculine environment did not quite have the starkness of the two alternatives offered by Karen Rich (2014) mentioned above or that their experiences conform neatly to either of Susan Martin’s (1980) typologies referred to earlier. Instead, all things considered, RUC women appeared able to retain their femininity – resisting becoming more attitudinally and behaviourally male-like – yet continued to be respected by their male colleagues. It might be postulated that the Northern Ireland conflict, which resulted in patterns of female integration earlier than what occurred in other British constabularies and which enabled women to demonstrate their actual worth, created a somewhat different dynamic for the forging of male and female officers’ relations. Arguably, this dynamic helped temper male oppositional attitudes toward female colleagues (while at the same time acknowledging that there existed a dominant masculine atmosphere within the RUC and there were gendered dimensions to certain kinds of police work, especially related to security provision and offences involving women and children). Consequently, the findings recommend a degree of adjustment to the theoretical models presented by these commentators in order to take into account the potential moderating effects of conflict on gender divisions in policing.

Implications and limitations of the research

Since the bulk of terrorist activity has ended and violence of a political nature has decreased considerably since the signing of the Belfast Agreement (1998), this article paves the way for a comparative piece of work on the experiences of female officers in the PSNI. It would be interesting to explore PSNI women’s experience of masculinity and consider if it is significantly similar to, or altogether different from, that of RUC women. A comparative examination of policing roles would be useful in terms of an assessment as to whether certain kinds of police work in the PSNI remain disproportionately gendered, for instance dealing with crimes related to women and children. Certainly, compared to RUC women whose work was affected by a noxious combination of terrorist activity, violent civil unrest and bitter anti-RUC sentiment amongst sections of the nationalist community (and periods of antagonistic sentiment in the loyalist community), female PSNI officers work in a less dangerous and unpleasant policing context.

In terms of the article’s limitations, care needs to be taken when it comes to generalising from the material to the wider female officer experience in the RUC, as only 15 questionnaires were completed. Yet the material offers a unique qualitative insight into these policewomen’s experiences, which in its in-depth character contributes to general scholarly debate and discussion about the challenges that women encounter in police work.

Conclusion

This article accounts for the experiences of RUC policewomen and informs us of their encounter with masculinity. It is instructive with regard to women’s attitudes towards gendered aspects of police work and tells us that female officers were able to adapt to the challenges of policing in a deeply divided society. Although the threat of a terrorist attack posed a danger to women officers’ emotional and physical well-being, they were nonetheless prepared to don the uniform and patrol alongside their male colleagues – the decision to do so cost some women their lives, while others suffered serious physical injury and psychological harm.