Male-on-male rape in the military
Newsweek has published an article entitled The Military’s Secret Shame about epidemic-levels of male-on-male rape in the military. Now, I know the military hasn’t changed that much in the nearly two decades since I retired that it’s as common as Newsweek makes it sound;
In the staunchly traditional military culture, it’s an ugly secret, kept hidden by layers of personal shame and official denial. Last year nearly 50,000 male veterans screened positive for “military sexual trauma” at the Department of Veterans Affairs, up from just over 30,000 in 2003.
I don’t doubt that it happens occasionally – we get soldiers from the general society, not from a farm somewhere where they train from birth.
It wasn’t until 1992 that the Defense Department even acknowledged such incidents as an offense, and initially only female victims were recognized. But last year more than 110 men made confidential reports of sexual assault by other men, nearly three times as many as in 2007. The real number of victims is surely much higher. Even among civilians, sexual assault is a vastly underreported crime. In the military the silence is nearly complete. By the Pentagon’s own estimate, figures for assaults on women likely represent less than 20 percent of actual incidents. Another study released in March found that just one in 15 men in the Air Force would report being sexually assaulted, compared with one in five women.
What? Rape wasn’t illegal until 1992? Bullshit. Who do they think they’re talking to? And what are they calling “sexual assault”? Getting kneed in the ‘nads? Or the rapes that they breathlessly recount in the article, the three i read were totally implausible – there would have been ample evidence of the assault which should have triggered an investigation. A drill sergeant who raped a trainee? Really? Drill sergeants get investigated for every word they say – no one would have investigated a rape charge? One guy who was raped with a soda bottle – no physical evidence there, huh?
Of course, Newsweek says that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should improve reports of these crimes.
In my two decades of military service, mostly in the Infantry, the biggest exclusive man club in the Army, I never heard of one incident of same sex rape. Like I said, it probably happens, but it’s impossible that it’s as rampant as Newsweek claims. Of course, hiding behind the lack of victim reports make the story less believable.
Category: Media, Military issues
The 1993 NDAA modified Article 120(a) to make the rape offense gender neutral and remove the spousal exemption, which had precluded men from being charged with rape if the victim was their wife. Prior to this only a woman who was not the man’s wife could be “raped”, as defined by the UCMJ. Prior to this change no man could be raped, only sodomized, and no woman could be a rapist.
More here: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m6052/is_2007_August/ai_n21108188/pg_10/?tag=content;col1
UCMJ definition of sexual assault:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/usc_sec_10_00000920—-000-.html
It must be a very, VERY secret shame, because I certainly never heard anything about it during over a decade of service.
Worst I ever heard of was a wicked vicious ball-tap.
Yeah, repealing DADT will improve reporting, only because there will be more incidents to report.
>Yeah, repealing DADT will improve reporting, only because there will be more incidents to report.
Nope, because the left will never admit “the men” doing the raping are gay– just like pedophiles who target children of the same gender are never considered gay either.
All through the DADT discussion, they argued that gay men could control themselves(even more so than their straight counterparts). That is why they can now bunk with people they might find sexually attracted.
Nope, you will never hear the left argue that the rapist are gay or that it had anything to do with DADT.
Question being:
If one soldier, who is straight, accuses another soldier, who is gay, of sexual assault, does the gay soldier get prosecuted for sexual assault while the straight soldier gets prosecuted for a hate crime?
See I told you they would never admit to “homosexuality” as being an element to the rape.. Directly from the article:
“Like in prisons and other predominantly male environments, male-on-male assault in the military, experts say, is motivated not by homosexuality, but power, intimidation, and domination.”
Yep, guys- you straight military guys are now being compared to the prison population.. UGH.. I hate the media.
Funny, when I was on the tender, the most common type of sexual assault was female-on-female.
Oh, the dirty little secrets the gheys don’t want to talk about…
I dunno. Of the three attacks recounted, the least plausible to me was the one used in the lede. I can’t see a “gang” of fellow soldiers actually collaborating to rape another male soldier, and I really can’t see commanderS (emphasis on the plural) all being so nonchalant about alleged gang rapists in their unit. And how does someone get gang-raped without showing some signs of injury, whether internal or external? I mean, if he reported it, surely he allowed himself to be examined too? I could see Stephens’ story being plausible as hazing gone awry, though either the reporter got something wrong or he’s conflating the details. He joined in January ’01, was assaulted in basic training (per the report to the drill sgt) and his assailants threatened to shoot him when they deployed to Iraq? I mean, I’m not particularly knowledgable about the army, but it seems to me that his basic training would have been long over by the time Iraq was even on the radar. “By the Pentagon’s own estimate, figures for assaults on women likely represent less than 20 percent of actual incidents. Another study released in March found that just one in 15 men in the Air Force would report being sexually assaulted, compared with one in five women.” The problem with this methodology is that it’s based on surveys asking someone to gauge their response to one of the most emotional, violent, violative attacks a person can experience, and I’m skeptical that anyone can really know how they would react to a hypothetical situation, when a victim’s actual reaction is likely highly fact-dependent. “Last year nearly 50,000 male veterans screened positive for “military sexual trauma” at the Department of Veterans Affairs, up from just over 30,000 in 2003” This is a grossly irresponsible, if not intentionally deceitful juxtaposition on the part of the journalist. “Military sexual trauma” according to the VA, includes mere sexual harassment and that is the source of the majority of these positive screenings. The author neglected to mention this fact. (http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/pages/military-sexual-trauma.asp) Maybe that’s indicative of another serious problem, but… Read more »
Another study released in March found that just one in 15 men in the Air Force would report being sexually assaulted
Reminds me of the joke I told my Company Commander in boot the day he asked if any of us had any jokes. I said, “If you woke up one morning in the woods, your hands were tied behind your back, and your asshole was smeared with Vaseline, would you tell anyone?”
Of course, as soon as he said, “FUCK NO!” I gave him the, “Wanna go camping next weekend?” punchline. Dead silence for about 3 seconds and everyone just DIED. For the rest of boot, the other CC would go over to sis company, put an arm around one of the guys, and ask, “Wanna go camping next weekend?”
And to think that joke would end a LOT of careers today.
In 2001, have male-on-male sexual assault, or even just homosexual harassment, was a career ender for the battery commander and First Sergeant.
Lifting DADT increases the ability to report sexual assault because the victims no longer have to fear that reporting will potentially lead to a discharge under DADT. If a straight man is raped and reports its, he can potentially be discharged under DADT, as the one man in story story was. That man was married to a woman. Just as with women, if you are raped some people will just assume you wanted it. Why would men in the military talk openly about sexual assault when there is so much hostility towards the idea that it exists and so many jokes that make it sound like a camping trip gone wrong? I think that kind of joke will be no big deal when rape is treated like a big deal.
Melle128, unless you think all straight men are rapists, your comments makes no sense. The comparison is to men who rape in male environments. The point that you seem to miss is that rape is most often about power and not sexual desire. Rapists in the military are being compared to rapists the prison population. If you think all gay men are the problem then you must also think all straight men are the problem when it comes male on female rape. I tend to think it is a problem of a person being a rapist, but if you think all men (both straight and gay) are rapists by nature we must have a much bigger problem. You should do some research on pedophiles, most are not gay. http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
If we have criminals in the military they should be dealt with so no one can claim the military is full of, or ignores, criminals.
Finally, SOME corroboration of Matthis’ rape story. Only, he didn’t rape innocent civilians in Iraq, he was raping his bunk mates.
That makes sense now…….
>Melle128, unless you think all straight men are rapists, your comments makes no sense.
I don’t think all gay men are a problem anymore than I think all straight men are a problem. Straight men do not currently bunk with those they are sexually attracted to in the military. Therefore, there is automatically a double standard under the repeal of DADT.
My comment makes perfect sense. It is the regarding the inability to call out another “minority” group on any problems they may have in their ranks. Just like “blacks” couldn’t be racists; the narrative is that same gender assualt can’t have anything to do with homosexuality(because we all know that homosexuals are so much more angelic than their straight counterparts.) Rape may be about violence, but most rapists have a type for a reason. These are all things that should have been addressed PRIOR to repealing of DADT.
And I don’t buy that someone was thrown out of the military for reporting a rape of the same gender, since the contact wouldn’t have been consensual. Use some common sense, something else had to have gone on there.
>You should do some research on pedophiles, most are not gay. http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
You do some research. Homosexuality is at best 3 percent of the population, so yes there are MORE straight pedophiles- but not percentage within each communities. Homosexual offenders will molest FIVE times the children their hetereosexual male counterparts do. See Eugene Abel’s work in the field. Also most pedophile list their preference as homosexual or bisexual. But SHHHH we aren’t suppose to say this stuff, because homosexuals are all angels.
Here is an article from Balwin posted in the regent law review.. worth reading..
http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/SexualImmorality/Pedophilia/14_2baldwin.pdf
Like in prisons and other predominantly male environments, male-on-male assault in the military, experts say, is motivated not by homosexuality, but power, intimidation, and domination.
They’re doing it wrong…..you want to intimidate someone you kick their ass, not lick their ass…..sheesh….
I agree with you melle that the story of a hetero, happily married, male on male rape victim, being thrown out of the military for sodomy sounds dodgy at best. Like you I suspect there was a lot more to the story. And I don’t for a moment believe there is any kind of ‘epidemic’ of male on male rape in the service.
I disagree however about supporting the illusion that a male rapist that rapes another male must be, or is likely to be, a homosexual. Sexual predators of that caliber defy standard classification and while it’s ‘comfortable’ for the rank and file to be able to categorize someone that way, research says it’s not accurate. I don’t know if it helps further any understanding of the problem or not, but serial rapists and true sexual predators really don’t have much ‘sexuality’ of any kind that you or I would recognize, it really is almost entirely about ego and power, sex is just a ‘tool’ to be used in the pursuit of what ever their agenda is.
I had to comment on the Newsweek web site. It doesn’t look like to many people are buying it either. Who had time here to rape anybody at boot camp/basic. I’d rather eat and sleep.
#16 OT:
Pure AWESOME !!!!
Glad I’d finished my coffee first!
i’m not sure i believe this. i have been around military a good bit of my life and never heard this before.
i’m not sure if a military man could be raped without retaliation in the worst way.
i can attest that the military men that i was around and am around would pulverize the raper.
I just don’t see military leadership not taking any claim of sexual assualt seriously.
I had one instance of male on male sexual assualt during my 2 years as a Battery Commander. In that case, the Soldier used the open door policy to approach me about the incident. I treated it just like a male on female sexual assualt. I assigned a Sexual Trauma representative for the Soldier, contacted CID and investigated the entire incident.
The sad part was, we were unable to Court Martial the Soldier because the victim refused to testify because he was embarressed. However, I was able to give the accussed a Bad Conduct Chapter for commission of a serious offense.
The ironic part was I had to fight the Soldier’s lawyer for three months over the chapter because they were arguing to give him a DADT Chapter which I flat out refused to agree to becuase it is a general chapter.
>I disagree however about supporting the illusion that a male rapist that rapes another male must be, or is likely to be, a homosexual
And yet, can you find me a case where a homosexual male raped a woman? Rape is about power, but a rapist has a type for a reason.
Melle that article cites Paul Cameron, a well known debunked researcher. The PDF is an opinion piece, not empirical research. For example, it claims gay men are “2% of the population and ten to twenty times more likely to be homosexual than heterosexual” but it DOES NOT CITE where that info is from. It is not an expert publication of scientific studies. Law review articles explore ideas.
People are slow to report rape because of comments like:
i’m not sure i believe this. i have been around military a good bit of my life and never heard this before.
i’m not sure if a military man could be raped without retaliation in the worst way.
i can attest that the military men that i was around and am around would pulverize the raper.
Who had time here to rape anybody at boot camp/basic. I’d rather eat and sleep.
And I don’t buy that someone was thrown out of the military for reporting a rape of the same gender, since the contact wouldn’t have been consensual. Use some common sense, something else had to have gone on there.
Can anyone who believes the stories of male on male rape would elicit mandatory investigations and charges point to the UCMJ article that mandates such action? I just don’t see where that happens. It seems discretionary.
>People are slow to report rape because of comments like:
Yes, because in the real world- the allegations have to be credible- J. I know many a victim who had CREDIBLE allegations of rape that couldn’t go to trial. Most rape victims want to go after the person who raped them. They don’t want to relive it millions of time- They don’t sue people who arent’ responsible, especially if some of them didn’t even report it to begin with.
>The PDF is an opinion piece
Most data about homosexuality these days is- either way(when major pieces are funded by the palm center.
Oh an my research wasn’t from Cameron…
” A study by Abel et al32 of 377 nonincarcerated, non-incest-related pedophiles, whose legal situations had been resolved and who were surveyed using an anonymous self-report questionnaire, found that heterosexual pedophiles on average reported abusing 19.8 children and committing 23.2 acts, whereas homosexual pedophiles had abused 150.2 children and committed 281.7 acts.”
“The percentage of homosexual pedophiles ranges from 9% to 40%, which is approximately 4 to 20 times higher than the rate of adult men attracted to other adult men (using a prevalence rate of adult homosexuality of 2%-4%).5,7,10,19,29,30 ”
http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/content/82/4/457.full
#24 J,
Look under Article 120: Rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct. The new definition took effect in October 2007. It creates 36 offenses.
Military prosecutors generally stack charges, too.
“And yet, can you find me a case where a homosexual male raped a woman?”
In order to do that I need to know what your definition of a homosexual male is. I’m sure I can find instances of men that prefer intercourse with men who have raped a woman, but the point is you’re currently trying to draw a connection between two unrelated patterns of behavior that spring from two unrelated psychological places.
First things first, define homosexuality for me. My understanding is that the most accepted definition is “people who are emotional, physically, and sexually attracted or committed to members of the same sex.” Do we agree on that?
Also, can we agree that rape is not sex and is not a crime of passion?
melle,
Please don’t tell me you just said….major pieces are funded by the palm center.…
Man if that only said fondled instead of funded I would have spewed beer at my monitor!!!
We all know that most women that join the service are the type that will claim a false rape if a guy pisses them off, the faggots..um… I mean Homosexuals will start this trend too on guys that do not want to deal with their gay bullshit. Obama truly screwed up the military here, especially during a time of War.
“We all know that most women that join the service are the type that will claim a false rape if a guy pisses them off, ”
Yeah, that’s not even close to true, and extremely insulting to female service members. It happens I’m sure, but *most* women are not the type to do that.
>Man if that only said fondled instead of funded I would have spewed beer at my monitor!!!
LMAO– They probably are fondled as well as funded knowing the Palm Center.. 😉
>Also, can we agree that rape is not sex and is not a crime of passion?
Yes, and in fact we can agree that I wasn’t “pigeonholing”(Just for you Old Tanker ;)) all homosexuals. I was simply making a point that homosexual is the new minority that you can’t say anything bad about. That when the DADT debate went on there were unrealistic arguments about how “angelic” ALL homosexuals would be. J proved my point in jumping on the pedophile thing. I don’t think rape is sex, but I do think that rapist have a type. And I think homosexuals are just as prone to rape as a heterosexual, especially males.
My definition of homosexuality is a man or women who have sex with the same gender. I know simplistic, but there is.
Unfortunately, if we can’t agree on the definition of homosexuality we don’t have a base from which to have a productive conversation on this topic, it’s just not possible. Not uncommon in today’s day and age when we all seem ‘allowed’ to individually frame the definition of the words and phrases we use. It makes effective communication difficult at best. It was worth a shot though, thanks for answering, I won’t argue.
For the record, I believe that stating rapists have a ‘type’ in an argument about homosexuality is a convenient and simplistic distortion of the actual circumstances surrounding a predator’s psychological reality, understandably making it easier for the ‘lay’ community to digest a behavior that’s impossible for normal everyday people to comprehend but unhelpful in the debate.
I don’t believe the homosexual community is ‘angelic’ any more than I believe it of the hetero community. I do however believe that homosexual behavior touches a nerve in some people that is unwarranted sans all the political baggage attached to the political ‘glbt movement’, and that those people go out of their way to find issue with things where no appreciable issue exists.
Also for the record, I’m perfectly comfortable with jokes leveled against the glbt community, in the same way I’m comfortable with jokes leveled against minorities and religions (I know some good Jesus jokes). But I don’t see any huge problem with trying to civilize the debate a bit either.
Geez. What in the heck are those clowns smoking!!??
> I do however believe that homosexual behavior touches a nerve in some people that is unwarranted sans all the political baggage attached to the political ‘glbt movement’, and that those people go out of their way to find issue with things where no appreciable issue exists.
But that was my original post. The magazine went out of its way to make the homosexual community look solely innocent. Why specifically state that rapes “isn’t homosexuality orientated?” Unless it was a way for the public to think that these weren’t homosexuals-but straights doing the raping. THey also did this to rigorously defend their stance on DADT. It was a way to put a bias in the news article essentially absolving homosexuals from any man on man rape.
I am not talking about “jokes” leveled at a minority. I am talking about the fact that homosexual-orientated sexually assaults and harrassment will go up under the repeal of DADT. Logic dictates this via more people joining, and being less lax on relationship- especially those of the same sex which will be a hot button issue everyone will want to avoid.
The media paper basically said ” these are rapists, but they aren’t homosexuals. The same way the media does that when an actual homosexual molests a child. If the homosexual community cannot be honest about its own issues(much the way the black community and illegitamacy); then they will forever play the victim card.
You don’t agree with me that a homosexual has sex with someone of the same gender?
Jacobite,
>For the record, I believe that stating rapists have a ‘type’ in an argument about homosexuality is a convenient and simplistic distortion of the actual circumstances surrounding a predator’s psychological reality
You make it sound like I am equating this “type” and behavior to every homosexual out there. We aren’t talking about rapist and pedophiles, not normal homosexuals and heterosexuals. But I also think that most rapists prey on those they have access to and feel comfortable with. Hence why most white rapist will prey on white victims etc.
What I find funny in this whole argument is that you all can believe that straight males will epidemically rape other males in the military for violence or dominance– but when this same type of same gender “mating” is shown in the animal kingdom- it called proof of homosexuality.
One more thing Jacobite before I go. I think you are seeing these rapes as “gang rapes.” Most military rapes start out as a seduction, and then become forced(even with males). It is much the way date rape is. Date rapists tend to find their partners attractive. You can read the instances in the Pentagon’s sexual assault from year to year.
A lot of the cases started out ” We got drunk, he started kissing my neck- I refused……..
http://www.sapr.mil/media/pdf/reports/DoD_Fiscal_Year_2010_Annual_Report_on_Sexual_Assault_in_the_Military.pdf
I have argued this one with rabid, angry, homosexual activists before. They will never, EVER, admit that a man who rapes a man is a homosexual, nor that a man who molests little boys is either.
That’s how we get ridiculous statments like Jacobites: “I disagree however about supporting the illusion that a male rapist that rapes another male must be, or is likely to be, a homosexual.”
Jaw-droppingly stupid.
Okay, let’s break it down. Homo=same. Sexual=sex. If you are a homosexual, you have sex with people of the same sex. That’s all it means. If you are holding down a person of the same sex to stick your wee-wee in them, that means you are a homosexual. If you are a child molesting perv and you cruise for little boys at the playground, you are a homosexual (pedophile). If you are a child molesting perv and you cruise for little girls, then you are a heterosexual (pedophile).
I heard stories about lesbians in the shower when I was in the Army. At least one of them couldn’t keep her hands to herself, much to the chagrin of some of the smaller straight girls in her platoon.
The reason men aren’t allowed to shower with women is because the women believe that some of the men might not be able to keep their hands to themselves, or even just their eyes. So why then do we allow homosexuals to shower with people they are attracted to? Oh yes, because they are a special protected class.
The pat answer of the liberals is always, “If you’ve ever been to a health club, you’ve probably showered with a gay person.” That’s not really an answer, just a dodge.
One more thing on this “gay rapists are not gay” meme.
I happen to live in an area that was rocked by the Catholic Church sex scandal. If the scandal was like an earthquake, we were at the epicenter.
As it turned out, one of the bishops who was dragging his feet on defrocking the perverts turned out to also be a child molester himself. He started a relationship with a young teenage altar boy that continued until the altar boy was in college. He even used to make weekend trips to the young man’s dorm.
This poses a problem for the people who try to make the ridiculous assertion that homosexual child molesters are not really gay. If he was simply a child molester when the relationship began, if he was definitelty NOT gay but rather just trying to force his will on someone, then how did he end up gay? Because at the end of the relationship, he was no longer engaged in anything illegal–it was consensual sex between two adult men. He’s still a filthy pervert–all homosexuals are–but he was not doing anything he could be prosecuted for.
So, he started off as a completely heterosexual man who just happened to like little boys. (Huh?) But then one day, presumably the day that his victim passed the legal age of consent, he suddenly became a gay man.
Sheesh!! All this discussion over nothing! Remember, Newsweek (NewSpeak) is one of the most Progressive, Liberal, Leftist-biased ignorant publications on the planet.
I won’t even line the bottom of my birdcage with it.
Instead of focusing on something we should all care about, prosecuting criminals who demean the military, we are discussing if rape is a gay thing. Know what? IT DOESN’T MATTER. A rapist is a criminal, gay or straight, and they should both be punished. I hope people still in the military are evaluating the crime, not a person’s sexuality. The real story in the Newsweek article is the lack of prosecution.
>Instead of focusing on something we should all care about, prosecuting criminals who demean the military, we are discussing if rape is a gay thing. Know what? IT DOESN’T MATTER. A rapist is a criminal, gay or straight, and they should both be punished.
Agreed, I have been reading the Pentagon’s Sexual Harrassment Reports, and they are not tough enough on this issue. Even rape allegations that they found credible- very limited punishment was given to the perp.
“Why specifically state that rapes “isn’t homosexuality orientated?” Because ultimately it isn’t(oriented: positioning with respect to a reference system or determining your bearings physically or intellectually.) Boiling rape down in almost as simplistic terms as you are, only more accurately, rape is a violent physical assault centered on domination of another physically and mentally, with sex being the weapon, not necessarily the goal. Unless it was a way for the public to think that these weren’t homosexuals-but straights doing the raping. Not at all, my point is orientation doesn’t matter. You think I’m trying to make excuses for, or cover for, a specific group of people when I’m not. I’m pointing out that orientation is almost meaningless in the larger debate concerning these predators. And what’s jaw dropping stupid Ben is the over simplification of a complex problem for the sole purpose of furthering your own bias. I’ve never categorically said gay men don’t rape. What I have been saying is that the more important issue, assault, to often gets lost in the political bs surrounding homosexuality. And just as an aside, the Catholic debacle is horrid, nor is the problem only in the Catholic church. I live in central Arizona. The Catholic church has had a couple priests busted here in this state, but there have also been quite a few protestant ministers and youth counselors busted for pedophilia in the last few years. Lets also not forget the FLDS Church out here, they marry off their girls at age 12-14 to old men and call it God’s will. The numbers are staggering, and they’re not a part of the gay vs. straight pedophilia statistics. It’s not that much of a stretch for me to understand how someone so personally vacant that they need to commit themselves to empty rhetoric and the supernatural might also find themselves trying to fill that void in themselves with an illegal relationship. Again, not an excuse for them, just an unbiased observation of a broken belief system that has visited it’s share of suffering on mankind over the centuries while proclaiming to be… Read more »
>I think it’s good that we can agree that the crime, rape, aught to be punished to the full extent and then some,
Of course, and you don’t even want to know how I want to punish pedophiles.
>but sad that some of us would at the same time skip trying to understand the full context of that behavior in order to try and prevent it, in favor of a narrow-minded and inaccurate view.
I still stick to my originally point that the media went on defensive mode about homosexuality and DADT. I have the same problem when they do this with feminism, black people etc.
And repealing DADT will make the problem worsen unless the military puts a handle one. And no “not because of those gheys,” but because most of the assaults happened during drinking and in barracks room. Usually involved one man starting an act while the other was passed out.
You can’t tell me that by allowing and acknowledging homosexuals and then letting them bunk with the gender they desire will make this go away– since any number of ANY population may be rapists. With DADT, there was that threat hanging above them, and there were still rapes. Without it will become date rape central with he said/he said.
And I guess I have a narrow view, but most of the male/male assaults in the reports started with an attempt at seduction that turned into the victim saying no(much like date rape). If you are trying to seduce someone of the same gender to have sex with you- then you are a homosexual or at least bisexual.
I am glad you are not part of “you all.” It irritates me to no end that we take the complex human sex drive that has been years in the making and compare it to instictive animals– but that is just one of my pet peeves.. Others include loud talkers, nazi-feminists etc. 😉
so…for the record, all you military guys, these are isolated incidents right? i mean dude on dude rape is just not common right? im only asking because my brother plans to join the marines in a year. and that whole gang rape thing just left me staring blankly at the screen.
again, newsweek is not a reliable read.
you cannot convince me about military man rape would not bring down the military. military men being raped by men and not retaliating in the worse way? i don’t for one minute buy this.
believe what you want, i for one don’t believe anything from dirty rags like newsweek, ny times, time, ect. they hate our military and try to drag our people through the mud.
i’m with the guy who lines his bird cages with this rag.
Porno, like Jonn I have no doubt it’s happened before, but I never heard of a single incident during my career either. It’s more media selling news print through sensationalism, hardly an epidemic.
I think Scott in #9 makes some real good points as well concerning ‘sexual trauma’.
Porno: I spent four years in the Marine Corps infantry, lived in close quarters with my units the entire time, and I never even heard a rumor of male-on-male sexual assault (and if there is a defining characteristics of the infantry, it’s the speed with which unsubstantiated rumors spread. See “lance corporal underground”). Plenty of simmering jocular homoeroticism (ass slaps, guys showing their junk to other unsuspecting guys, etc.) dumb pranks, and some minor hazing, but it was pretty much all just in fun and if someone expressed a problem with it they were likely left alone.