military sexual trauma

[2eclipse]

lots of people feel that women should be drafted equally with men.
in some ways i see the fairness of this. of course i am against any draft at all or any war at all for that matter. but i am back-listening to NOW podcasts and i recently listened to the episode about sexual assault in the military and it has changed my mind.
some interesting facts gleaned from the episode:
- after the first gulf war 15 % of women reported being raped in a government study.
- close to 25% reported being sexually assaulted, which lead to committess being established and a lot of rules and policies that apparantly are not enforced at all. One of the things that happened is a process were women can report in a limited capacity, get the help they need, but not initiate investigations and hearings. since then, the number of women reporting sexual assault and seeking treatment has DOUBLED!
- women who report rape or assault are often tormented by the people who are supposed to be helping them as well as people completely uninvolved.
- a low priority is put on keeping women safe. restrictions are placed on perpetrators, but are not enforced.

in my opinion it is a travesty that we are so failing the people who have stepped forward to help. how dare we even think of putting a draft on women when we can't/don't protect them from the other soldiers!
i also have some problems with the program for not addressing male rape. if it is happening with women, odds are it is happening with men too. i would like to know more about that side of things.

Comments

Part 1 (because my response went over the limit)

[keisolo.livejournal.com]

*chuckles dryly*

Meh, that is the question, isn't it? I didn't say I thought equality of draft was a good idea. I said that via rights, privelages, responsibilities, etc... being equal, the draft would have to be so, too. But, both culturally, and politically, that sort of total equality is far off, if it is even possible for it to happen. (I won't digress too far into that particular spinoff rant, as it wanders far from the basic issue here of the draft and of war.)

The question you raise is a good one, and one I wonder if anyone "in power" has truly thought about. Even now, with the tactics being used for recruitment, and the process by which the military begins to bring influence to a younger and younger set of minds, we are coming up short as far as what they need to uphold the current war effort.
The impact hasn't been felt thoroughly enough yet, but eventually, the drain being inflicted by this seemingly unending war, will be felt deeply in the industrial sectors. Hopefully, though it is a cynical hope, once big business starts to feel that drain, some of the currently friendly interests to the war will begin to change their tune.

I feel I must have stated myself badly. I do not believe in war for war's sake. I do not believe in war for the sake of business interests or capitalism or oil. I think Vietnam was a mistake, and not because we lost, but because America, of all nations, should be well aware of what happens when a larger power fights a war on someone else's home ground, when it is not truly a savior to a large enough number of the people whose home ground it is fighting upon. This very nation was founded in the smoke of a war where Americans were the little people whose ground was being fought for.

No matter how many times the Bush Administration tries to make a parallel to WWII for Iraq, the true parallel is Vietnam - and the same mistakes are being made - not on a grander scale, per se, but in a far different time. This means that the reactions to it, and to the cost of it, are different, and in many cases, more extreme. One of the most wonderful and most horrible differences faced in this war, as compared to so many of the others that have been fought in this century is the level of medical care available. The VA has been over-run by a need that far outweighs the resources they have access to. We are far more capable now of keeping our soldiers alive. Which I am glad of. Fewer lives spent, being, of course, more positive, especially in the face of an idiotic war effort. But it wasn't thought of, or planned for, and has become another sticking point for those who oppose this war.

What I do believe in, however, as far as conflicts and violence and war are concerned is that there are some battles that MUST, in all conscience, in all humanity, be fought. WWII was that war. Not all the tactics that were used were right, not all the battles that were chosen were the best - but that was a war to stop genocide and world conquest by a man and a political and pseudo-religious viewpoint that would have destroyed much of what is good in humanity in all the arenas in touched. I, myself, probably would not be alive today if America had not gotten involved in that war, and I am not the only one.

Therefore, while I abhor violence, I abhor the fact that there are times when you must say no - this cannot pass - this cannot be allowed to continue - and defend ideals and beliefs and LIFE with something that is the antithesis to most of that which you defend... I am also very firm in the belief that those times do come.