Back in the days when it was a discussion worth having, some critics of feminizing the US armed services worried that sexual tensions and jealousies might adversely affect unit cohesion. Others worried about privacy in the field, special needs, and the value added from a strictly military perspective. Still others worried – albeit less volubly – about the boys acting badly, far from home. Not all of them having been recruited exclusively from the ranks of the Vienna boy’s choir. Reports of rape and sexual assaults might give the military a massive public relations problem back at home. Which might in turn lead to a typically top-down, massive over-reaction.
By the time Marine Staff Sgt. Jamie Walton went to trial on rape charges, his accuser had changed her story several times.
A military lawyer who evaluated the case told Walton’s commander they didn’t have enough evidence to go to trial on sexual assault charges. The prosecutor even agreed. But the Marines ignored the advice.
“Everyone knew I didn’t rape her,” said Walton, who was acquitted of the charge last year. “But they went ahead with the trial anyway.”
Walton’s questionable prosecution clashes with the public’s perception of a soft-on-rape military. A McClatchy analysis found that the military is prosecuting a growing number of rape and sexual assault allegations, including highly contested cases that would be unlikely to go to trial in many civilian courts.
However, most of the accused aren’t being convicted of serious crimes.
Such results are provoking cynicism within the armed forces that the politics of rape are tainting a military justice system that’s as old as the country itself.
Rape is a horrendously violating crime, and even one instance among and between service members is one instance too many. So called “blue on blue” crimes absolutely give the services a bloody nose. But it’s hard to see how the concept of “justice” is served by prosecuting someone when even the prosecution agrees the evidence is insufficient to support a theory of the crime.
And the bureaucracy that has blossomed to investigate and prosecute alleged assaults comes with a cost of its own:
The budget for the Defense Department’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office leapt from $5 million in fiscal 2005 to more than $23 million in fiscal 2010. Once administered by a civilian with a doctorate in counseling, the office is now overseen by an Air Force major general with a background in security.
Total Defense Department spending on sexual assault prevention and related efforts now exceeds $113 million annually.
Money well-spent if it deters the crime, and punishes criminals. Less well so, if it begets star chambers and budget props for self-licking ice cream cones.
A significant contributing factor, considering the ages of those away from home for the first time?
It’s often the toxic ingredient of a military rape allegation: binge drinking. Many times, the woman knows the man and was drinking alcohol with him. Lots of it.
As a result, she says she doesn’t remember the entire encounter because she was drunk. Sometimes, she’s not even sure herself whether she was sexually assaulted. The man says it was consensual. No other witnesses can say either way.
Determining what happened can be a challenge for the most experienced lawyer, let alone a jury.
Considering the ages involved, and the first-time access to alcohol, I wonder if anyone has done a demographic survey comparing the military age population with that of their college aged cohort, controlling for the disparity in numbers?
It’d be interesting to see whether the military has a problem, or whether society does.
There are profound changes in society and it is part of the issue. True, every generation since Aristotles thinks society is going to Hell-in-a-handbasket due to the way kids behave, but look at the crap the teens and others do on Facebook. It shows a real lack of parenting and/or a I-don’t-give-a-damn attitude was instilled in the last generation by someone.
Add into that the access to online pr0n, violent videos, etc. and the barriers have been placed real low.
This is not just an issue with the military, it goes across society as a whole. Colleges have the same issues and it started with permissive parents who never set rules as these twenty somethings were raised and/or the parents letting them get away with murder as they grew up so they feel there are no barriers.
Either way, it is a terrible situation as the more this happens, it damages lives and our military’s ability to uphold the standards of Honor, Courage & Committment.
A few years back I was accused of sexual assault while on watch. In my case the system worked. I was exonerated and she got the discharge she was looking for. I had a couple of things going for me, I had been on board for a couple of years and had an established reputation within the department while she was new, and there was a witness whose account apparently matched mine. I was, however, aware that the situation could get political very quickly. It was not the best time I ever had on board. I think there’s more than a little selection bias at work here. Cases like mine where someone is falsely accused and nothing happens don’t make the news.
Regarding the role of alcohol I think the Navy could do a lot to reduce problems by changing one word in the liberty policy. Instead of saying liberty for a group expires at the junior member’s time make it the senior member’s time. The current policy encourages senior sailors, who are wiser and more experienced, to group together, forcing the inexperienced sailors to go out drinking together. By changing the system we would encourage junior sailors to find someone more experienced to go out on town with, someone who is more likely to say punching that a foreign national in the head or going back to that guy’s hotel room are bad ideas.
Fortunately, my time at sea was over by the time that women were integrated into ships and seagoing squadrons. I can say that arriving at the truth in a “he said, she said” situation was one of my hardest problems as a CO of a shore station. Fortunately, in my two years as CO, I never had to deal with a rape or serious sexual assault.
“Fortunately”…… WELL SAID
Considering the standards that colleges use to define sexual assault (read man always at fault), I don’t think an accurate compairison could be made.
What is going on at the senior ranks to justify having a Major General in charge of this office? The budget is no where near large enough in DoD terms to justify it.
How could anyone have possibly predicted that the military “rape prevention” depts would achieve a life of their own looking for un-PC dragons to slay? Anyone wanting to view the likely course of further events involving feminist victimology and bogus statistics should read Heather McDonald’s expose of the malignant creature known as the college campus “date-rape” industry in her article in the 2008 Winter City Journal entitled: “The Campus Rape Myth” @ http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html
Interesting read Virgil. Of course you could always Google “campus rules”. This is a website that pays for videos of sex parties in campus dorms. The funny thing is the majority of them are made by women.
Those poor girls are forced to objectify themselves for money and to appease their rapist “boyfriends,” Jim. Remember, women don’t enjoy sex with men because it is all rape.
Or something like that.
On a lighter subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjPmmCtHmfE&feature=player_embedded#!
Only thing is that I think they got the USAF song wrong.
Right. I bet you believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny.
But of course! Doesn’t everyone?
And the check is in the mail (or is that the Czech is in the male???), he won’t *** in your mouth, and will respect you in the morning.
…Joe you forgot my favorite from the way back when I drove jalopies…”My other car is a Mercedes”. Best
I think this issue has far more to do with the Army’s “dry” policy in OIF/OEF than the risk of offending the locals.
Lose the agroids and get these guys? Upgrade!
http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2011/11/29/my-advice-stop-nagging-and-treat-husbands-with-respect/
Never having been a fan on women on ships, I can accept that the problem exists. And, that removing the females from the equation will solve the problem. [Okay, the gay stuff will have to be handled differently...]
What I do see is that military spending is going to get slashed big time with huge cuts in all sorts of essential programs.
Women at sea is a marginally effective luxury we can no longer afford, merely to support the political correctness agenda. Don’t spend another dime altering submarines to accommodate females.
And, as a bonus, I see a USAF Major General billet and a whole bunch of staff puke billets and $23 million that can be put int he “cut now!” pile.
I doubt if the “leadership” would take such a course, but it is something that would help mitigate the forthcoming decimation of our Navy.
I love ya, Lex, but you gotta do something about that kool-aid habit.
As I have always, always maintained, W.I.T.S. is extremely problematic. OK, if they serve as REMF’S in support slots not so bad but in FOL’s no way Jose!!!!!!!! Been there, Done that and Seen the results. Cam Rahn Bay, cira 1971, lots of nurses on base and every man a DAWG, like studs following the scent of a bitch in heat. Nurses would be invited for drinks at the 20th SOS pilots barracks-bar and every male to a one would be jostling and elbowing to get closer and have a go at snuggling up. While there were never any open hostilities, the presence of females always caused much stress and contention among the troops.
So some one please tell me how the Navy would be better with females on subs or in combat roles???? How has females aboard ship worked out?????
For the record, I think that sexual assaults on women in the service is more of a problem for women than of them. Rape is not inevitable. The issues I was trying to highlight were the prosecution of cases despite the evidentiary record, in alleged assaults that would never be prosecuted in civilian courts, and the fact that boozing youngsters sometimes make mistakes they later regret.
As a PFC in college, I can state that universities are going insane with sexual assault concerns as well. The various “Take Back the Night” marches instill a degree of paranoia among the females attracted to those things and they are not above making up stories just to fit in. Countless resources are made available to anybody who cries “sexual assault”.
Despite that, the only cases that have become public are one guy on a bike groping female students and an incident off-campus where a student was groped by a non-student. Most females are decent enough not to make false allegations despite the crowd of people eagerly awaiting one. I suspect the Midwestern focus on emotional stability might be part of it.
I suspect the willingness of women to get drunk is new. In a more traditional society like a certain Balkan country, women weren’t supposed to get drunk. In college, the unspoken assumption is that you go to parties to get drunk and do something sexual. The alcohol is to build up courage and to provide an excuse afterwards. Administration scrutiny restrains the frats from crossing a number of lines but house parties are free to be as chaotic and sexual as they want.
Side note: In all the sexual harassment briefs I’ve gotten, not one of them actual defines sexual harassment and would give the legal basis for prosecution.
“Hi, Ivan, this is (insert girl’s name here). Thanks for the date last night, I had a wonderful time. I’ll let you know in a few days whether or not to charge you with a felony. Bye!”
Legal standards for prosecution are far higher than university standards. A student can get accused, have no way to respond, and be kicked out without recourse to the court system because the university hearing is “administrative” and not supposedly a court.
Oddly enough, black males tend to be disproportionately accused of sexual offenses by white women. Didn’t the NAACP used to have a campaign on behalf of Black males unjustly accused of rape or sexual assault?
@ Ivan0026…The reason none of the briefs can give you a precise definition of sexual harassment is that it all depends on the accusers perception of if they were harassed. Seriously. There is a whole spectrum that includes “operating in a hostile environment”
This is different than assault which has to include touching.
I ended up training myself to see little green blurs called “soldiers” and all the soldiers were the same except some of them had higher pitched and squeaky voices. It kept me out of a lot of trouble.
It’s sexual harassment if you just say “Good morning” and she doesn’t fancy you. If she does fancy you, patting her ass and making lewd remarks just makes her ‘gina tingle.
An O-3 that I knew showed my class the SNL skit on sexual harassment and you. As vague as University policies are, the Army and Navy policies include a requirement that the offended party HAS TO try to resolve the situation at the lowest level before escalating it. That part never makes it into briefs. People assume the policies are far more restrictive than they are and that results in unnecessary suffering and distrust of command.
My Drill Sargents always talked about everybody being Army green. As a light green soldier, the only difference is that I need to put more sunscreen on. They were also careful to tell us that away from the SSG who gave the diversity brief.
Heh. I would like to find Lex’s post about that young female officer, whose uniform fit her _very_ well, who came into his office to ask a favor. As I recall, he was quite careful to leave the door open.
Yes sir. Count me as a cynic wrt women, PC penile hunting squads and the less than honest cries of assault in the Fleet. I have seen more false accusations than real ones. I have, however, seen domestic violence issues. The fact that the SAVI industry wrings their collective hands every time the sexual assault stats shows a decline in numbers of assaults tells me an awful lot. Their claim that the women are just TOO afraid to report it being the issue shows the industry for what it is. Mortgages must be paid, budgets must be parsed, etc.
Military courts martial boards are inherently more biased than civilian trials for politicized type of crime (contrary to the general public’s view). The reasons: 1) No concensus is needed for verdict, only majority vote. 2) There’s a hierachy structure in place, and minions will often defer to their superior’s judgement, especially when their job/life in general could be impacted by dissent the near or longterm future, this is a more compelling concern than the guy on the stand who is usually a subordinate that they don’t know anyway. 3) The superior officer in the room doesn’t want his/her career impacted by the perception that his/her base doesn’t take rape charges seriously and/or doesn’t punish to the full extent of the law.
Due to the above reasons, frat boys at college are in a much much better position to avoid a rape charge at a drunken party than an 18 year old airman basic. I think, rather than sensitivity training, they should really really drill this reality into the heads of young men who enlist.