The article depicts the peculiar hardships women have to go through at war. Having read the report, it seems to me like women couldn’t spend a day on base without being propositioned by some men or provoked with sexual remarks, causing endless distress. All complaints were useless because they fell on deaf ears. Is this the inevitable consequence of training young men and women to be as aggressive as possible and putting them together in close quarters under stressful circumstances? Does this mean the military is a reflection of our society, where the best and worst is brought out in men? I dare not assume that this is the case. However, I do agree with one particular comment in the article: Women serving in the military isn't the problem (and neither are homosexuals who serve). The problem is adults who can't take responsibility for their poor behavior. To a certain degree, the military is a reflection of society. Afterall, the military is a gathering a civilians, people that come from a civilian life and are as apt to sexually assault or harass someone. Yet, for some reason I am not willing to buy this story entirely. It is hard for me to think that this military command, an institution of high integrity, would tolerate sexual assault or sexual harassment. Are we unfairly besmirching the military? Of particular interest is the case of CPT White. She is a Captain who reported being harassed by a Warrant Officer. Although I have no doubt that women like her can be a subject of sexual assault in the military, there is also a possibility that women recognize and use their sexuality to move to higher ranks. Yet, this side of the story is not frequently heard of either.
In response to the question you previously raised I would have to say no. Training young men and women to be as aggressive as possible and placing them in close proximity to one another does not equate to rape. I think it all boils down to self-control and the morals and values instilled upon them.
ReplyDelete