There are many things I don’t understand in the world, from
rap music to poison ivy. One of them is the human ability to separate
one’s actions today from what one expects or needs tomorrow. The issue that brings this split to mind is
sexual assault in the military. It's a subject that has been in the news a lot lately, from The
New York Times to The
Wall Street Journal, from Congressional
hearings to Fox
News.
 |
| The Joint Chiefs of Staff and their military legal counsels during a
Senate Armed Services Committee hearing regarding sexual assaults in the military Photo by Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images |
This post isn’t about how serious the issue is (we know it’s
serious) or whether addressing charges of sexual assault remains within the
chain of command. It isn’t about whether
women should serve in combat —or in the military at all.
It’s about the split that goes on in the mind of the rapist.
When a man rapes a woman, he commits an act of violence
against her. It’s an assault worse than
fighting or mayhem because it creates strong (possibly overwhelming) feelings
of violation, humiliation, anger, and hatred in the victim. As Sen. Claire McCaskill impatiently explained to the military
brass in a recent hearing, “it's ridiculous to treat criminal sexual assault
like it's an H.R. problem rather than a criminal matter.” It’s not about sex, it’s about violence.
 |
| Sen. Claire McCaskill Explains the Difference Between Sex and Violence to the Joint Chiefs of Staff |
A rape and its consequences to the victim do not, to say the
least, strengthen unit cohesion. The
concept of unit
cohesion is of much concern in the military. A rape not only erodes that cohesion, it creates
great division within a unit.
Now the same man who has raped a woman will go into a field
of battle expecting the other members of his unit to protect him as he protects them. “I’ve got your back,” or “Watch
my six.” Even if you have never served, you’ve heard these terms on TV and in
the movies. You know that they mean
members of the team are necessarily and importantly watching out for one
another.
The wars we have been fighting in the Middle East are very
different from what battle was like in WWI and WWII. There are no front lines anymore and combat is all around you. The enemy does not wear a uniform or fight in
formation. He often looks just like a
civilian and even children may wield weapons or set up IEDs. That means a soldier faces attack from any
and all directions as well as at any time. Here, more than ever, he needs someone to cover his back.
This is where the split happens.
 |
| Who's Got Your Back? |
If you raped that soldier the day before, the
week before, or last month, she just might be thinking of you today as her
enemy more than as a valued member of the team.
She might be wondering if you
plan to do it again or if you have your skeezy eye on any of her friends. She might hate you as her “enemy within” more
than she hates the enemy without. She
might be looking at you with revenge in mind rather than backup.
Wouldn’t your shoulder blades tingle just a little knowing
that the woman you raped is standing behind you armed with a fully-loaded,
battle-ready weapon? Wouldn’t you wonder
whether friendly fire
is always accidental or unintentional? Wouldn’t
you be concerned that she doesn’t actually have to fire her weapon; all she
needs to do when she sees the enemy targeting you is . . . nothing?
We’re learning that female service members are often afraid
to report that they have been raped due to fears
of retaliation and the sure knowledge that the “old boy network” of senior
officers will protect their attacker.
The U.S. Congress just closed ranks against. Sen. McCaskill to protect the mostly male
chain of command from losing its power to do just that. The military
justice system appears to be broken in a way that denies a victim any
hope. Is a rapist’s confidence in such
protection so high that he can create an enemy inside his own unit with
impunity?
 |
| Breaking the Silence |
Many victims stay silent out of fear that their careers will
be destroyed if they report a rape. But
does that silence work when a rapist’s victim carries a weapon every day? If legal channels are closed and justice is
denied, what other options does that leave a victim who is armed and enraged?
I don’t know. But I
wonder. Why doesn’t he?
No comments:
Post a Comment