Comments From My Rape in the Military Blog: Rape Stats are “Pure Propaganda.”
by KayDrah

I'm going to be upfront before I begin this: this is going to be hard for me to
write. As a young woman who went through all the typical traumas and
dramas of growing up in America, I, like many women, have seen and
experienced violence against women. I'll be the first one to admit
that the topic of rape is an emotionally charged one, a subject that
lends itself to flying off the handle, irate reactions and,
sometimes, even tears. Let me also preface this with the admission
that I am not exempt from this.

But I still was not prepared for the backlash of misogynistic comments on my blog
from Wednesday, entitled “1 in 3 Military Women Raped, and
Apparently the Pentagon Doesn't Think It's A Problem
.” The purpose
of my blog was to call attention to both the alarming rate of
reported sexual assault among women in the military, and, more
importantly, the fact that the Pentagon was tasked with the
assignment to name a task force on the issue of rape in the military,
and after 4 years, has yet to do so. It was in no way, shape or form,
intended to blame the troops for this alarming problem.

Most of the comments were positive, expressing the normal reaction of alarm to
the high rate of reported rape, as well as outrage at the Pentagon's
inaction. But then there were some anomalies:

“I served two tours in the US army
and can safely say that this is utter and complete BS.”

“They're armed. And more
independent-minded. And trained. And confident. I wouldn't expect that rates would be higher than in the general
population for these reasons.”

“1 out of 3 is pure propaganda. Pls don't swallow.”

“This can mean anything from a giving someone a hug and the
woman not liking you to rape. God help the ugly guys, I am sure their
sexual assault charges are much higher then they should be.”

“Of course, [her] pathetic methodology does even take into
account false claims and has uses a loose definition of 'date rape' I
am sure.”

Shame on me for assuming that the atrocity of rape is universally
understood, and that to publicly infer that we all should be
suspicious of women who allege rape would be considered taboo in this
day in age. I understand that the statistic of 1 in 3 women reporting
having been sexually assaulted while in the military is daunting and
unbelievable to some. It's shocking, it's outrageous, but it is in no
way made up
.

It is precisely the kind of attitude that would assume that it is common practice for women to falsely allege rape, or the attitude that any statistic that
seems outrageous either must be false or can be rationalized away,
that has allowed the Pentagon to stay inactive on this issue. And,
although the comments have me sidetracked, the fact that in the 4
years since Congress mandated a task force on rape in the military,
the Pentagon has yet to do it, that's
the real outrage here.

The rates are alarming and the Pentagon has yet to act. They've ignored a congressional mandate.
Meanwhile, sexual assault in the military is being reported at an
alarming rate. This deserves some investigation. We have enough
factors endangering our troops as it is, and they don't need another
one that could potentially be prevented or treated with better
sensitivity, if the Pentagon would have the will to do so. That's why
it's important that we get support for this petition, urging the
Pentagon's point person on sexual assault in the military to do what
was mandated: name the task force and call it to order.

Comments

 

Military Sexual Trauma and Statistics

I deal extensively with sexual assault in my book Women in the Line of Fire:  What You Should Know about Women in the Military (Seal Press, 2006).

 

The problem of sexual assault in the military is a real and serious one but it is not helped by conflating 1 in 3 women who use VA services with 1 in 3 of women veterans.  The former group is self-selecting from the larger group.

 

The real scandal is that an enormous number of military units simply do not have problems with sexual assault and the predator's foreplay of harassment because they do not tolerate these behaviors.  I am not talking about sensitivity training as commonly understood.  That would have been useful for the old guys, the Vietnam generation, who had never worked with women professionally and simply did not know how to deal with women in professional situations.  (Of course, they were not a significant part of the problem.)  For young guys, that kind of sensitivity training is dumb, offensive, and useless.  The junior enlisted may be, well, junior enlisted, especially in the infantry, but they know how to treat women.  They have mothers, girlfriends, sisters and female friends.  Anyone of them who doesn’t know how to treat servicewomen—does not want to know. 

 

The only sensitivity training needed is for men, preferably with shaved heads, big biceps and combat decorations, to say Anyone who hurts or disrespects our sisters is not our brother and has no place amongst us.  And for every other serviceman who is tired of servicewomen having to regard sexual harassment and assault as part of the service, or even part of life, to back them up, formally and informally, in word and in deed.  And the Chief of Staff of the Army and the Commandant of the Marine Corps need to summon up the manhood to say publicly what their junior officers and sergeants are making stick at the small unit level.

 

And yes, the combat exclusion rule needs to be dropped.  It has only ever harmed military efficiency, discipline, and cohesion, by stigmatizing women as second-class troops who can’t be counted upon in a fight, alienating the good guys, rendering the women vulnerable to the bad guys, and also making them more likely to be killed by the enemy than able to kill the enemy. 

 

Cheers,

Erin Solaro

 

PS:  The folks who wrote in with some of the more outrageous comments are nothing but apologists for rape.  Hoep you said so.