Double assault: Losing the battle on rape in the military

The highly publicized The Invisible War, a nominee for Best Documentary Feature for the 85th Academy Awards, is making citizens and military personnel alike painfully aware of the extent of male and female sexual assault in all branches of the military. Coincidentally, the release of the documentary, which follows the victims of sexual assault in the military and their pursuit of justice, occurred mere months before the recent announcement lifting the ban on women in combat. Along with Zero Dark Thirty, the film has given renewed attention to the various issues within the military and the controversial way in which the Department of Defense handles them.
Sexual assault scandals, from the Tailhook scandal in 1991 to the Air Force Academy scandal in 2006, have long hampered the reputation of one of the most respected institutions in the country. The documentary claims, using numbers gathered from the U.S. government, that over 20 percent of female veterans have been sexually assaulted while serving their country. With the recent lift of the ban on women in combat arms branches this January, however, a new question on the military’s approach to dealing with such sexual assault issues has been raised: Will the lift of the ban aid or deter past and future victims of assault?
What is it about the military environment that leads to this behavior? The elite and tight knit nature of the institution undoubtedly plays a role. According to Brigadier General Loree Sutton, previously a top psychiatrist in the U.S. Army, such an environment allows the military to become a “prime target-rich environment for a predator.” The Invisible War, however, chillingly reveals that the way in which such cases are handled by the military has provided perpetrators with too high a likelihood of being able to get away with the crime.
Although I was part of the Georgetown ROTC program for a year, the inner workings of the “big” Army seem almost foreign. In the civilian world ,we have the security of having a system of justice, whereas, in the military, victims have to go through the chain of command. This means that the commander, who has no education or training in judicial affairs, is the one responsible for how that investigation proceeds. It doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to understand how this system leads to unfair treatment of victims, often allowing the perpetrators to walk away untouched.
Perhaps it is this difference between civilian and military judicial proceedings that helps explain why the rate of sexual assault is considerably higher in the military than in the civilian world. Most apparent though is how the macho environment, while part of the nature and tradition of the military, presents the danger of building a perception of women being subordinate to men.
Some herald the lifting of the ban as a step forward towards full equality in the military. The irony in these claims is found in the experiences of the sexual assault victims as they battle inequality and disparity when pressing these charges, to the point that their Constitutional rights are being ignored.
I believe the lifting of the ban has the potential to transform this environment. I recognize that it is important to acknowledge that these new roles do present more situations of close proximity and little privacy, which could present more opportunities for sexual assault. Even so, by adding women to the combat force, the military puts women on equal standing with men, allowing them to build a mutual respect based on common experience and allow for the development of a camaraderie in which sexual assault would no longer present as serious a threat.
The military has always been a culture that encourages and embodies masculinity, and as a result women may generally be seen as subordinate to men. One needs only look at a Women’s Army Corp recruitment video from the 1940s and 50s, stressing the value placed on “meticulous grooming and feminine grace,” to see that the military does not have a strong record of encouraging the image of equal standing.
Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, seems to believe so. “The more we can treat people equally, the more likely they are to treat each other equally,” he said during the press conference in which he and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced the lifting of the ban.
Sexual assault will certainly continue to be the demon on the military’s back. However, with the renewed awareness and outcry for change as well as the policy developments that hope to transform the broader mentality of the military, one can hope that the military has proved itself prepared and determined to tackle the enemy within their ranks that is sexual assault.