Would the public be more likely to accept women on the front lines if they were all ugly?That is the assumption that one female army colonel seems to be making in a leaked internal email in which she suggests that photos of 'average-looking' and 'ugly' women should be used in PR campaigns to get women into combat roles.Colonel Lynette Arnhart is leading a team of analysts studying how to integrate women into fighting roles in the army and referenced an article featuring the attractive Corporal Kristine Tejada as an example of how pretty girls deployed on duty undermine the army's attempts convince the public.'In general, ugly women are perceived as competent while pretty women are perceived as having used their looks to get ahead,' wrote Col. Lynette Arnhart in the email exchange seen by Politico.The messages were sent to Army spokesmen and women to instruct them how to best talk in public about female roles on the front line.To illustrate her point, Arnhart cited a photo used with an article by Gen. Robert W. Cone in Army Magazine. Cone, the TRADOC commanding general, wrote about Soldier 2020, the Army’s effort to open up all Army jobs to women. Arnhart believes the point of the article failed because of the photo of an attractive female soldier that was used with the article.'There is a general tendency to select nice looking women when we select a photo to go with an article (where the article does not reference a specific person). It might behoove us to select more average looking women for our comms strategy.'For example, the attached article shows a pretty woman, wearing make-up while on deployed duty. Such photos undermine the rest of the message (and may even make people ask if breaking a nail is considered hazardous duty),' Arnhart wrote, according to Politico.Arnhart believes that it is preferable to use pictures of women covered in mud, an image that 'sends a much different message - one of women willing to do the dirty work necessary in order to get the job done.'Arnhart sent her email to originally to two people, including Colonel Christian Kubik, the chief of public affairs for the Army's Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC).He in turn forwarded the email to all the army's public affairs officers who work with TRADOC with the note attached, 'A valuable reminder from the TRADOC experts who are studying gender integration - when public affairs officers choose photos that glamorize women, we undermine our own efforts. 'Please use 'real' photos that are typical, not exceptional.'In a statement, Army spokesman George Wright said the comments 'were an internal email conversation' and 'not an Army position.'Critics jumped on the emails as proof that the army's attitudes towards women in its ranks needs to modernize.Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) tweeted that it was 'another example that @USArmy just doesn’t get it as it debates if pretty girls should be used in pamphlets.'One Army source said to POLITICO, 'It scares me to think that these are people involved in gender integration.'(dailymail.co.uk)ANN.Az