I present here a comparative study of male soldiers' attitudes toward female service members in Norway and the US, based on interviews with 34 enlisted men in the Norwegian Air Force and the US Air National Guard. In the analysis, the soldiers' views and explanations are related to broader national cultures, where Ann Swidler's tool-kit theory and Michèle Lamont's framework of national cultural repertoires inform the work. The study finds that the male soldiers did not approach the issue of gender integration in the military in a unified manner and their views on their own military involvement also revealed significant national variation. Four cultural repertoires are identified used by the men to argue for the role of women in the Armed Forces, as well as their own motivation for serving. A commitment repertoire was used by the American participants to express why they signed up for service; the Norwegian men, however, utilized a life-chance opportunity repertoire to convey an individualistic motivation for joining the military. An equality repertoire was drawn upon in both countries to articulate general support for women in the ranks and, although there was substantial agreement among the men in regards to the benefits of serving alongside women, the Norwegians relied more on an equal treatment repertoire, arguing that all members of the force should be subject to the same treatment. The American respondents, on the other hand, were more inclined to use an equal opportunity repertoire, focusing on securing equality of opportunity for female service members. A meritocratic repertoire was employed to argue for inclusion on individual grounds and while participants in both countries argued for the importance of looking at skills rather than gender background, the repertoire was more forcefully employed in the American context. Through a gender conservative repertoire the men expressed perceptions reflecting a more traditional gender pattern, which included notions of appropriate soldier-roles women should fill. There were, overall, notable national differences in the manner and degree to which the repertoires were used and the meaning participants attached to them. This I trace back to broader differences between the Norwegian and American national cultures and how the two contexts make different cultural resources available to the men.