HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » VA finds sexual assaults ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:15 AM

VA finds sexual assaults more common in war zones

Source: USA Today

About half of women sent to Iraq or Afghanistan report being sexually harassed, and nearly one in four say they were sexually assaulted, according to new research by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The study based on anonymous surveys of female servicemembers who deployed to war suggest a far higher prevalence of sexual misconduct against women in war zones than is reflected by complaints gathered by the various service branches.

In February, more than 20,000 women were serving in Afghanistan. In the preceding year, only 115 reports were filed alleging sexual assault, according to the Pentagon.

The findings show that there are traumatic strains beyond combat when troops go to war, said Amy Street, a lead researcher, clinical psychologist and a deputy director at one of VA's National Centers for PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorders) in Boston.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/26/va-finds-sexual-assaults-more-common-in-war-zones/1793253/

12 replies, 1845 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply VA finds sexual assaults more common in war zones (Original post)
Redfairen Dec 2012 OP
madokie Dec 2012 #1
Coyotl Dec 2012 #2
cosmicone Dec 2012 #3
WestCoastLib Dec 2012 #4
yardwork Dec 2012 #6
WestCoastLib Dec 2012 #7
lunatica Dec 2012 #8
WestCoastLib Dec 2012 #11
ReRe Dec 2012 #5
crim son Dec 2012 #10
lovuian Dec 2012 #12
happyslug Dec 2012 #9

Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:19 AM

1. I'm not surprised

I'm not sure who to blame except it damn sure isn't the women who should be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:46 AM

2. This tells us a lot about men who joins the military!!

Not exactly the civil segment of society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:20 AM

3. If they assault their own with such frequency

can you even imagine what they must do to the foreign women in occupied territories?

There is a report of a rape by US servicemen in the Philippines and Okinawa almost every month and it is sick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:40 AM

4. Rape has always been among the spoils of war

I don't even see why a study needed to be done. The nature of war has not changed just because the technology is better now.

"To the victor go the spoils". The spoils of war have included raping and pillaging for the entirety of human history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WestCoastLib (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 12:23 PM

6. This article is talking about female service members being raped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 12:47 PM

7. I know

Doesn't change the point.

Women hanging around soldiers have always been raped. It's deep within the nature of war. This isn't in the least meant to be an excuse for the men, it's just another factor in a long line of them on why war is terrible. War is a shitty deal all around. Sending people off to die is a crap proposition and among the "benefits" of going off to war has always been having your way with women while you are likely going off to die.

It's deep in the collective psyche of the warrior and it's not an easy thing to get rid of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WestCoastLib (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:21 PM

8. That is bullshit

Most soldiers don't rape anyone during war. That myth you're pushing is just that. A myth. Maybe in the days of Genghis Khan it was a fact, but then maybe he promoted it.

But in modern warfare it just isn't so. Tell me how the soldiers fighting WW I or WW II raped the conquered.

Bull shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:46 AM

5. Duh.....

....Yeah. Mental giants in the Dept of Va Affairs says. And not only for enlisted soldiers but also for the women in the country we invaded! And think of the rapes that aren't recorded.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ReRe (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:28 PM

10. I'm betting those not recorded

exceed in numbers those that are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crim son (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 04:27 PM

12. Agreed this has been going on for a very long time

It is the reason women should not be on the front lines because their safety from their own troops can not be assured

We couldn't even guarantee their safety here in America
what makes anybody can guarantee it in a war zone
The past history shows that we can't.....it is all documented and then there is those that haven't been documented

the Air Force Academy
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/video/more-rape-charges-at-the-air-force-academy/1369042310001

and Lackland Air Force Base
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/21/us/lackland-air-force-base-instructor-guilty-of-sex-assaults.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

With the Suicide Rates up in the services .....something is very fundamentally wrong
programming is breaking down

We have waterboarded our own troops since Rumsfeld and I don't know if it goes back farther
I know of a man who admitted to me he was waterboarded by his own US commanders
They ordered it so he would be able to resist torture by the enemy

What he learned in the excercise was every man can be broken.......but I don't think that was really the objective
It is brain programming

I appeal to those who read this STOP WATERBOARDING OUR OWN TROOPS!
It is going to BACKFIRE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Redfairen (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:22 PM

9. The most violent of Societies, also tend to isolate woman from men the most

One of the problems of the Middle East, is the borders are not really fixed. Historically the three big powers (Iran, Egypt and Asia Minor) jockey with each other and the groups in between the three main powers. This leads to almost constant warfare, this is compounded by the fact much of the area is pasture, to dry for farming, but wet enough to graze sheep on. One of the characteristics of herding societies is extreme violence, for unlike farming societies, if you do NOT respond instantly to a threat, you will lose your herd (On the other hand Farming community know you have to wait for the crop to ripen and then haul the food out, that takes time, thus farming communities can afford to wait for assistance).

Notice, while farming communities can be as violent as herding societies, the speed of the violence is different. Farmer wait for the crop to be in, then go to war, come back to harvest the crop, then go back to war (or if to wet wait till spring). The above takes time, along with getting the transport together to haul the food around. This delay permits people to take their disputes to a central person (i.e. a judge) who decides the disputes one way or another, and due to the need to maintain a community the Judge's Decision, even if disliked, are obeyed.

Herding Societies are a different matter. If a herd is attacked, the herders must fight OR lose the herd. The herd, being mobile, is easy for a hostile group to take. There is rarely any time to seek assistance (and if any can be provided, it is expected). Thus violence tends to be the norm, even more then in Hunter-Gathering societies.

Side note: One of the problems with the US, is that after about 1695, the Frontier had become dominated by Scots and Scot-Irish groups. The Scots tended to be former highlanders, who prior to the 1700s were cattle herders (Scots and Sheep is a product of the depopulation of the Highlands starting in the late 1600s). Once kicked out of the Highlands (More by their clan chiefs, who were bought off by the simple fact sheep were more valuable to England then Cattle and people, thus the Clan Chiefs removed the people and their cattle and replaced them with Sheep), these highlanders brought with them their tradition of herding, including a high level of violence.

In the 1500s and 1600s, some Highland Scots, but mostly low land Scots, were settle in Ireland as Settlers. While they tended to be Farmers more then Herders, they were in conflict with the native born Catholic Irish. This tended to produce violence between the two groups. After 1690s these Protestant Irish (Scot-Irish, or simply called Irish before the Irish famine sent Catholic Irish to the US) while Protestant were NOT Church of England (Technically Called the "Church of Ireland" in Ireland) and thus came under many of the same laws as the Catholic Irish (religious services were banned, if one son converted to the Church of Ireland, that son inherited everything on the death of his father, if no son converted, the property was divided equally among the sons and other similar laws) and in response, due to the fact these Scot-Irish tended to have more money, migrated to America and then intermarried with the Scots from the Highlands.

I bring up these two groups, for it is from these two groups the America Tendency to violence developed from (Compounded by the need for violence to keep slaves in their place, during the time period when slavery was legal in the US). I point out that they tended to be more herders then farmers AND faced hostile enemies for centuries and their culture reflect those tendency to violence.

Back to the main Subject, violence and women status in a society.

One of the characteristics of the Irish is a tendency to "protect" their women. This is also characteristics of the people of the Middle East, another area of almost constant violence over the last several centuries (and in the Middle East last few Millenia). Why this need to "protect", for acts of violence, leads to other acts of violence, including rape. Thus a violence society also tends to have high rates of rape.

In the military, during peace time, they is little actually violence. Training is most dull repetition. Combat is another situation, mostly boredom, interrupted by seconds of sheer terror. Being on guard for violence from the "Enemy" (Whoever that may be) takes away from training, thus Combat beings a decline in the effectiveness of any combat unit. On the other hand, being on edge is a constant tension, such tensions must be "Released" and force sexual assault is one way for a man to relieve that tension.

Now, I am NOT saying most men will rape women in combat, the evidence is the opposite (most men do NOT) but the stress of combat can lead to the withdraw in inhibitions. In olden times, the ancients seems to have known this and thus is violence societies (especially heading ones) tend to insulate their women to protect them from the men. Notice the protection is NOT from most men, but those men who lose self control, but combat brings out such lost of control. This study just confirms these ancient traditions, don't leave women around men who have been in combat, keep them apart even if that means during times of peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread