Rape in the U.S. armed forces - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-03-2011, 09:43 PM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 12:24 PM
Rape in the U.S. armed forces

Devastating article about a recent immigrant who was gang-raped by a male group of fellow recruits two weeks into his basic training, after being hounded as a "champagne socialist" and a "commie faggot".

What do you guys think?

Is there something inherent to military culture that promotes this kind of sexual aggression, (beyond the long-held, and desire to cover it up by higher-ups)?

The instances of rape of females in the military has been played off by idiots as "they shouldn't be serving in the first place", but if the statistics for male victims continue to emerge, what to say then?

Also, this little bit is pretty staggering:
Quote:
women in the armed forces are now more likely to be assaulted by a fellow soldier than killed in combat
Full article:
Quote:
The Military's Secret Shame
Jesse Ellison (Newsweek)

When men in the military rape other men in the ranks, no one wants to talk about it. Why the sexual assault of males in the service is finally being confronted.

Greg Jeloudov was 35 and new to America when he decided to join the Army. Like most soldiers, he was driven by both patriotism for his adopted homeland and the pragmatic notion that the military could be a first step in a career that would enable him to provide for his new family. Instead, Jeloudov arrived at Fort Benning, Ga., for basic training in May 2009, in the middle of the economic crisis and rising xenophobia. The soldiers in his unit, responding to his Russian accent and New York City address, called him a “champagne socialist” and a “commie faggot.” He was, he told NEWSWEEK, “in the middle of the viper’s pit.” Less than two weeks after arriving on base, he was gang-raped in the barracks by men who said they were showing him who was in charge of the United States. When he reported the attack to unit commanders, he says they told him, “It must have been your fault. You must have provoked them.”

What happened to Jeloudov is a part of life in the armed forces that hardly anyone talks about: male-on-male sexual assault. In the staunchly traditional military culture, it’s an ugly secret, kept hidden by layers of personal shame and official denial. Last year nearly 50,000 male veterans screened positive for “military sexual trauma” at the Department of Veterans Affairs, up from just over 30,000 in 2003. For the victims, the experience is a special kind of hell—a soldier can’t just quit his job to get away from his abusers. But now, as the Pentagon has begun to acknowledge the rampant problem of sexual violence for both genders, men are coming forward in unprecedented numbers, telling their stories and hoping that speaking up will help them, and others, put their lives back together. “We don’t like to think that our men can be victims,” says Kathleen Chard, chief of the posttraumatic-stress unit at the Cincinnati VA. “We don’t want to think that it could happen to us. If a man standing in front of me who is my size, my skill level, who has been raped—what does that mean about me? I can be raped, too.”

In fact, it is the high victimization rate of female soldiers—women in the armed forces are now more likely to be assaulted by a fellow soldier than killed in combat—that has helped cast light on men assaulting other men. For most of military history, there was neither a system nor language in place to deal with incidents of soldier-on-soldier sexual assault. It wasn’t until 1992 that the Defense Department even acknowledged such incidents as an offense, and initially only female victims were recognized. But last year more than 110 men made confidential reports of sexual assault by other men, nearly three times as many as in 2007. The real number of victims is surely much higher. Even among civilians, sexual assault is a vastly underreported crime. In the military the silence is nearly complete. By the Pentagon’s own estimate, figures for assaults on women likely represent less than 20 percent of actual incidents. Another study released in March found that just one in 15 men in the Air Force would report being sexually assaulted, compared with one in five women.

While many might assume the perpetrators of such assaults are closeted gay soldiers, military experts and outside researchers say assailants usually are heterosexual. Like in prisons and other predominantly male environments, male-on-male assault in the military, experts say, is motivated not by homosexuality, but power, intimidation, and domination. Assault victims, both male and female, are typically young and low-ranking; they are targeted for their vulnerability. Often, in male-on-male cases, assailants go after those they assume are gay, even if they are not. “One of the reasons people commit sexual assault is to put people in their place, to drive them out,” says Mic Hunter, author of Honor Betrayed: Sexual Abuse in America’s Military. “Sexual assault isn’t about sex, it’s about violence.”

According to Hunter and others, the repeal of the military’s policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” might actually help the institution address the issue. Under that rule, being gay meant being fundamentally unfit to serve; it meant you didn’t belong. It also meant that victims were even more reluctant to report their attacks. “I wouldn’t say that the repeal is going to make it safe,” says Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, a think tank on gays in the military. “But male victims will be a little bit less reluctant to report their assaults.” Belkin notes that it’s not just the military that avoids the issue: even gay-rights organizations are wary of it. “We don’t like to talk about it because it makes rape look like a gay issue,” Belkin says. “The military doesn’t want to talk about it because, as embarrassing as male-female rape is, this is even worse. The very fact that there’s male-on-male rape in the military means that there are warriors who aren’t strong enough to fight back.”

Blake Stephens, now 29, joined the Army in January 2001, just seven months after graduating from high school. The verbal and physical attacks started quickly, he says, and came from virtually every level of the chain of command. In one of the worst incidents, a group of men tackled him, shoved a soda bottle into his rectum, and threw him backward off an elevated platform onto the hood of a car. When he reported the incident, Stephens says, his drill sergeant told him, “You’re the problem. You’re the reason this is happening,” and refused to take action. “You just feel trapped,” he says. “They basically tell you you’re going to have to keep working with these people day after day, night after night. You don’t have a choice.” His assailants told him that once deployed to Iraq, they would shoot him in the head. “They told me they were going to have sex with me all the time when we were there,” he says.

Stephens twice attempted suicide. His marriage fell apart. He became paranoid and explosive. In June 2003 his mother wrote a letter to Sen. Barbara Boxer, detailing her son’s “continued humiliation.” “Congressional inquiries have been know [sic] to jeopardize a soldier’s rank and standing,” Boxer’s office responded. “There is no way for our office to administratively protect your son’s military standing once a congressional examination is in progress.” The following August, Stephens was discharged for his “physical condition.”

Fear of a ruined career is a major factor preventing victims from coming forward. In 2010 the Pentagon anonymously surveyed active-duty soldiers who had been sexually assaulted about why they declined to report their attacks. Almost half the responding men said they kept silent because they didn’t want anyone to know, a third said they didn’t think anything would be done, and almost 30 percent said they were afraid of retaliation or reprisals.

In recent years the Pentagon has tried to show that it takes the issue seriously, defining sexual assault in broad terms as a “spectrum of offenses from rape to nonconsensual sodomy to wrongful sexual contact, as well as attempts to commit these offenses.” In 2005 it established a special unit, the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office, and provided training for 1,200 officers to handle incident reports. Yet critics believe that the Pentagon has moved too slowly and that military procedures for prosecuting such crimes are far less effective than civilian laws. In February, Jeloudov and 16 other former and active-duty service members filed a class-action lawsuit against Defense Secretary Robert Gates and his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, charging they “ran institutions in which perpetrators were promoted…and Plaintiffs and other victims were openly subjected to retaliation.”

Because reports of such crimes happen outside the reach of police and are handled by a unit’s commanding officer, according to the Pentagon’s own figures, last year just 15 percent of reported cases were actually prosecuted. “There’s no investigatory training. They don’t tell you to look for evidence,” says Greg Jacob, who retired as a captain after 10 years in the Marines and is now policy director for the Service Women’s Action Network. “Military justice imbued me with the ability to be judge and jury. Honestly, I had no idea what to do.” Commanders often decline to take any action at all. “I have nothing bad to say about the military. There’s sick bastards in all walks of life,” says Michael F. Matthews, who was raped during basic training in 1972 but didn’t tell anyone until 30 years later. “I get angry with the military system sometimes, but I understand it. What happens is on small levels. You take [a complaint] to your commanding officer. He doesn’t want that black eye. He wants the promotion. So he tries to keep it under the carpet.”

But dismissing such brutality can produce more victims. Twenty-two years ago, Jamey Michael Harding, then a baby-faced 17-year-old enlistee, says he was raped repeatedly by a drill sergeant at basic training. He attempted to report his assault, but his complaint was ignored, he says. The sergeant stayed in the armed forces, ultimately retiring as a decorated officer. Almost two decades later, the man whom Harding says raped him was arrested for raping multiple underage cadets at a junior ROTC program. He pleaded guilty to lewd and lascivious acts on a child and is now in prison. Harding, meanwhile, struggles with an array of mental-health issues he says stem from his attacks. “Many men and women will experience symptoms like PTSD or depression after experiencing sexual assault. But the experience seems even more detrimental for men’s mental health,” says Amy Street, a psychologist with the Boston VA hospital who has worked with both male and female survivors. “The way I make sense of that is that women, for better or worse, live their lives with this idea that they might experience sexual assault at some point. There are public models of how to recover from rape. Men don’t have any expectation that this might happen to them. It’s very difficult to figure out how those experiences fit into your sense of self as a man.”

What’s clear is that the Pentagon has only just begun to figure out how to treat men who have been sexually traumatized. Until 2006, sexual assault was classified as a women’s health issue, and even today, Pentagon awareness campaigns target women almost exclusively. Kathleen Chard, the Cincinnati VA psychologist who runs PTSD programs, says that more than 11 percent of the men she works with eventually admit that they were sexually victimized. Nationwide, there are just six programs like hers, and there is a single VA facility, in Bay Pines, Fla., that specifically treats male survivors of sexual trauma. When Matthews finally sought treatment for the PTSD caused by his rape, he says he had to wait six months for a space to open up. “I went to the group and there’s all these guys from the Korean War through Desert Storm,” he recalls. “And you say, ‘Oh, my God.’ ”

Since Matthews served a full 20 years and sustained physical injuries during the course of his service, he receives 100 percent of his disability benefits. The others aren’t so lucky. In order to receive full benefits for mental and physical health issues stemming from sexual assault, veterans must first prove that the assault occurred. Last year the VA loosened its rules pertaining to those who file claims for combat-related PTSD, reducing the burden of proof. But that change did not apply to sexual trauma. In March, Rep. Chellie Pingree, a Maine Democrat, introduced a bill that would make it easier for victims like Blake Stephens to get benefits and medical coverage. “It’s the hardest thing we hear: people who have suffered a sexual trauma and then have to prove it,” she says. “We can’t leave them out there hanging. It’s unconscionable.” Even if the bill passes, it will likely be too late to help Jeloudov, the soldier who was raped in basic training. Shortly after his attack, with his assailants threatening to send him “back to Russia in half,” his commanding officer told him to sign a document stating that he was a practicing homosexual. He was subsequently discharged under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Less than two years later, his wife has left him, he is unemployed, and he is racked by emotional problems. His VA doctors have prescribed him half a dozen psychotropic drugs that target, variously, his PTSD, insomnia, flashbacks, and depression. He receives a fraction of full VA benefits, which helps explain his determination to prove that he was raped. Embroiled in the bureaucracy of the VA system, he easily descends into despair. But he’s insistent on telling his story. “America to me is justice, truth, and fairness,” he says. “Everything that happened there, none of it had to do with any of that.”
__________________

__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-03-2011, 11:52 PM   #2
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
"...The very fact that there’s male-on-male rape in the military means that there are warriors who aren’t strong enough to fight back.”
Assuming he's representing that attitude correctly, it would also go a long way towards explaining the "women shouldn't be serving in the first place" response to male-on-female assaults. I posted an op-ed on male-on-male rape in international human rights law a few weeks back that made a similar point--basically, that framing rape solely in terms of "crimes against women" perversely winds up encouraging a victim-blaming attitude of "this is what happens when people who aren't tough enough to cut it pretend like they are," rather than placing the focus on the criminality of the perpetrator, where it belongs.

As for the "military culture" question, I disagree on the "inherent" part, but for starters these findings would seem to suggest serious inadequacies in establishing an ethos of professionalism in the military. It's never going to be like an office job, but christ, that doesn't justify open season on the one who has an accent, or a baby face, or breasts and a vagina, or is gay, or short, or however the fuck people like this pick their targets.

A quote that still disturbs me from another article I posted, in a thread on rape in the military several years back:
Quote:
"Battle buddy bullshit," said [Carol] García from the Military Police [serving in Iraq]. "I didn't trust anybody in my company after a few months. I saw so many girls get screwed over, the sexual harassment. I didn't trust anybody and I still don't."

If this is a result of the way women are treated in the military, where does it leave them when it comes to battle camaraderie? I asked soldier after soldier this, and they all gave me the same answer: Alone.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2011, 09:11 AM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 11:24 AM
I think it's devastating that we have men like that in our military and that any sort of culture like that exists. It makes me feel ill.

And that the "superiors" have that attitude-what can you even say about that? I think we need to at least attempt to fix the problems in our military before we run around the world trying to fix the injustices in so many other countries. Talk about a moral imperative.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2011, 10:58 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
BluRmGrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leather Heaven
Posts: 7,808
Local Time: 12:24 PM
The comment is stated over & over again, but it's like people don't hear it: Rape - male v. female, male v. male, female v. female, whatever! - isn't about sex. Rape is not about sex. Rape is NOT about sex!! It's about domination & humiliation, which can easily be observed even in friendly circles. (How many times have we all seen that one guy amongst the group of buddies that always gets picked on or pushed around?) I can only imagine how palpable their presence is in the uber-masculine universe of the military. My hope is that one day society will understand rape doesn't just happen to women and gay men - maybe then, any victim, whether civilian or military can tell their story & not be subjected to further humiliation, i.e. a heterosexual soldier being made to sign a declaration that he's homosexual after reporting abuse against him.
__________________
BluRmGrl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 12:57 PM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 11:24 AM
Huffington Post

The House Committee on Rules blocked an amendment from going to vote on Wednesday that would have allowed military rape victims to access abortion care through their government-provided health plans.

Earlier this week, Rep. Susan Davis (D-Calif.) and five other House Democrats submitted an amendment to the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act that would reverse the current policy of denying abortion coverage to military women who are raped and become pregnant during their service. As the bill currently stands, servicewomen have to pay out of pocket for an expensive abortion procedure unless they can prove that their lives are in danger.

By contrast, other federal bans on abortion coverage, including those for Medicaid recipients, federal employees, and women in federal prisons, all include exceptions for victims of rape and incest. The ban on abortion coverage for military rape victims is actually more extreme than the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited federally-funded abortions for the past 30 years except in the cases of rape, incest and life endangerment.

"I think it's outrageous that we have young women who are serving our country and sacrificing their lives, and if they are raped and a pregnancy happens then they cannot utilize federal resources in order to have an abortion," Rep. Davis told HuffPost. "How can we tell a servicewoman that we would provide funding for her if she were sitting in a safe office in Washington, DC, but because she's fighting for our freedom in Afghanistan we tell her no? It's just not acceptable."

Instances of rape in the armed services are alarmingly common: The Pentagon reported more than 3,000 cases in FY 2009, and the Department of Defense estimates that reported incidents only account for a small fraction of the sexual assaults that actually occur.

Davis said it is unclear exactly why the House Committee on Rules, led by Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), decided that the amendment did not deserve to be debated or get a vote.

"I think they just don't want this to come up," she told HuffPost, "so they used a rule to block it."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 01:08 PM   #6
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 10:24 AM
Way to support the troops
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-26-2011, 06:25 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 12:24 PM
Not much in the government is about supporting the troops.
__________________
BonosSaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2011, 10:44 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 12:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonosSaint View Post
Not much in the government is about supporting the troops.
Nah we're just sending in SWAT teams to shoot veterans for suspected pot possession

YouTube - ‪Jose Guerena SWAT Raid Video From Helmet Cam‬‏
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2011, 01:14 PM   #9
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,235
Local Time: 10:24 AM
That story pisses me off so much. The PR guy for the sherriff's office claimed they clearly announced themselves and had sirens blaring. Going by that helmet cam, the sirens lasted all of 5 seconds and there was no knock. And they did not allow medics into the house until a full hour had passed from the shooting. Oh, not to mention they found absolutely nothing drug related inside. Body armor and some weapons. Gee, now why would a Marine vet of 2 tours in Iraq have weapons? Instead the police are now trying to say this guy with absolutely no criminal record was part of a home invasion crew.

Arizona is fucked up.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com