Women in danger in the military

[Guest_1]

I don't know about you, but I felt sick reading this:

http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008 ... frame=true

Opinion SEARCH




You are here: LAT Home > Opinion > Op-Ed


Opinion
»Sunday Opinion
»Write to Us

Archive:
»Editorials
»Op-Ed
»Letters News

California | Local

National

World

Entertainment

Business

Sports

Campaign '08

Science

Environment

Opinion

Columnists

Print Edition

Readers' Rep

Corrections


Calendarlive

The Guide

The Envelope

Travel

Magazine

Home & Garden

Health

Food

Autos

Books

Image

Arts & Culture

Living Green

Video

Photography

Obituaries

Crossword, Sudoku

Your Scene

Blogs

All Sections


Buy, Sell & More

Jobs

Cars

Real Estate

Apartments

Personals

Deals at Local Stores

Coupons

Newspaper Ads


Place an Ad

In the Newspaper

Online


Settings & Services

Sign In

Register

Personalized News

E-Mail Newsletters

RSS Feeds

Help

Contact Us

L.A. Times Archives

Reprint Requests

Work for Us


Home Delivery

Customer Support

Subscribe

template_bas
template_basRapists in the ranks
template_bas
template_bas
Sexual assaults are frequent, and frequently ignored, in the armed services.
By Jane Harman
March 31, 2008
The stories are shocking in their simplicity and brutality: A female military recruit is pinned down at knifepoint and raped repeatedly in her own barracks. Her attackers hid their faces but she identified them by their uniforms; they were her fellow soldiers. During a routine gynecological exam, a female soldier is attacked and raped by her military physician. Yet another young soldier, still adapting to life in a war zone, is raped by her commanding officer. Afraid for her standing in her unit, she feels she has nowhere to turn.

These are true stories, and, sadly, not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq.

The scope of the problem was brought into acute focus for me during a visit to the West Los Angeles VA Healthcare Center, where I met with female veterans and their doctors. My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41% of female veterans seen at the clinic say they were victims of sexual assault while in the military, and 29% report being raped during their military service. They spoke of their continued terror, feelings of helplessness and the downward spirals many of their lives have since taken.

Numbers reported by the Department of Defense show a sickening pattern. In 2006, 2,947 sexual assaults were reported -- 73% more than in 2004. The DOD's newest report, released this month, indicates that 2,688 reports were made in 2007, but a recent shift from calendar-year reporting to fiscal-year reporting makes comparisons with data from previous years much more difficult.

The Defense Department has made some efforts to manage this epidemic -- most notably in 2005, after the media received anonymous e-mail messages about sexual assaults at the Air Force Academy. The media scrutiny and congressional attention that followed led the DOD to create the Sexual Assault and Response Office. Since its inception, the office has initiated education and training programs, which have improved the reporting of cases of rapes and other sexual assaults. But more must be done to prevent attacks and to increase accountability.

At the heart of this crisis is an apparent inability or unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks. According to DOD statistics, only 181 out of 2,212 subjects investigated for sexual assault in 2007, including 1,259 reports of rape, were referred to courts-martial, the equivalent of a criminal prosecution in the military. Another 218 were handled via nonpunitive administrative action or discharge, and 201 subjects were disciplined through "nonjudicial punishment," which means they may have been confined to quarters, assigned extra duty or received a similar slap on the wrist. In nearly half of the cases investigated, the chain of command took no action; more than a third of the time, that was because of "insufficient evidence."

This is in stark contrast to the civilian trend of prosecuting sexual assault. In California, for example, 44% of reported rapes result in arrests, and 64% of those who are arrested are prosecuted, according to the California Department of Justice.

The DOD must close this gap and remove the obstacles to effective investigation and prosecution. Failure to do so produces two harmful consequences: It deters victims from reporting, and it fails to deter offenders. The absence of rigorous prosecution perpetuates a culture tolerant of sexual assault -- an attitude that says "boys will be boys."

I have raised the issue with Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Although I believe that he is concerned, thus far, the military's response has been underwhelming -- and the apparent lack of urgency is inexcusable.

Congress is not doing much better. Although these sexual assault statistics are readily available, our oversight has failed to come to grips with the magnitude of the crisis. The abhorrent and graphic nature of the reports may make people uncomfortable, but that is no excuse for inaction. Congressional hearings are urgently needed to highlight the failure of existing policies. Most of our servicewomen and men are patriotic, courageous and hardworking people who embody the best of what it means to be an American. The failure to address military sexual assault runs counter to those ideals and shames us all.

Jane Harman (D-Venice) chairs the House Homeland Security subcommittee on intelligence.

[gMoney]

That's just really disgusting. I really wish I had more to say about that.

[pips]

I was somewhat considering joining the Air Force until my mom told me stuff like that and that my cousin was raped while she was in the armed forces. Not cool.

[Blue_turnip]

That sucks.

[Switch Kicker]

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about this statement.

"not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

It's a realistic issue, but no more than common rape cases in the civilian world. Stupid people do stupid shit, and you're not going to be able to prevent it all the time, the woman needs to "man" up and go to the proper authorities. It doesn't stop because the woman doesn't have to the courage to stand up for herself when she's not actually in danger, and when that's the case, then that woman shouldn't have even signed up for the service.

Please keep in mind, that I'm not blaming the woman for it happening to her, or anything like that, I'm blaming the woman for not helping bring those men to justice.

I think this is a disgusting, yet, pointless article. It's not going to help anything.

[Guest_1]

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about this statement.

"not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

It's a realistic issue, but no more than common rape cases in the civilian world.

1 out of every 6 American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).

http://www.rainn.org/get-information/st ... lt-victims

So, you're clearly wrong Fred.

The scope of the problem was brought into acute focus for me during a visit to the West Los Angeles VA Healthcare Center, where I met with female veterans and their doctors. My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41% of female veterans seen at the clinic say they were victims of sexual assault while in the military, and 29% report being raped during their military service. They spoke of their continued terror, feelings of helplessness and the downward spirals many of their lives have since taken.

Please respond in the future with facts and sensitivity.

[Switch Kicker]

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about this statement.

"not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

It's a realistic issue, but no more than common rape cases in the civilian world.

1 out of every 6 American women have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).

http://www.rainn.org/get-information/st ... lt-victims

So, you're clearly wrong Fred.

The scope of the problem was brought into acute focus for me during a visit to the West Los Angeles VA Healthcare Center, where I met with female veterans and their doctors. My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41% of female veterans seen at the clinic say they were victims of sexual assault while in the military, and 29% report being raped during their military service. They spoke of their continued terror, feelings of helplessness and the downward spirals many of their lives have since taken.

Please respond in the future with facts and sensitivity.

Let me rephrase. It's not any bigger of a problem than rape cases in the civilian world, in my opinion. I feel that rape in the civilian world is far more dangerous than in the military, you are in much greater danger when dealing with someone that can easily kill you and simply disappear from that area and never be caught. That can't happen so easily in the military, at least not full timers.

If a female soldier was killed, they'd be reported missing the very next morning, if not within a few hours. And military law enforcement would be all over that like white on rice.

I think you're more likely to be killed as a civilian, than as a soldier during rape or attempted rape.

And, as I said before, if a woman is in the military, she should have the brains and gut to know that nothing can happen to her for turning in those other soldiers, and it's foolish to think otherwise. There are so many ways to do this even if your attacker is your commanding officer. The Chaplain, military law enforcement, or you can simply just go over your CO's head in the chain of command. I forget where, but you can also report it online for fuck's sake... I sympathize, really, I do, but seriously, they should do something about and it and quit being a victim. We don't need paranoid people like that on the battle field.

The title shouldn't be, "Women in danger in the military." It should just be "Women in danger." Because being raped has nothing to do with the military at all. Women are targets for being raped no matter where you go in the world. Rape will never stop in the civilian world, and it will never stop in the military world, because people in general are fucking evil. It's a risk you have to live with just like having to live with the risk of getting AIDs, something that is within a human's ability to prevent, but happens anyway. It sucks, but that's life, either learn to deal with it or get bent.

And sensitivity is pointless in this discussion unless attempting to comfort a victim. Sensitivity would only lead me to say, "Aww, that's sad, someone should do something." And that would be it.

[Rieferman]

oh god, I must be bored if I'm letting myself post.

switchkicker wrote:

And, as I said before, if a woman is in the military, she should have the brains and gut to know that nothing can happen to her for turning in those other soldiers

Article states:

At the heart of this crisis is an apparent inability or unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks. According to DOD statistics, only 181 out of 2,212 subjects investigated for sexual assault in 2007, including 1,259 reports of rape, were referred to courts-martial, the equivalent of a criminal prosecution in the military. Another 218 were handled via nonpunitive administrative action or discharge, and 201 subjects were disciplined through "nonjudicial punishment," which means they may have been confined to quarters, assigned extra duty or received a similar slap on the wrist. In nearly half of the cases investigated, the chain of command took no action; more than a third of the time, that was because of "insufficient evidence."

Ummmmm, seems like they have the "guts" to report, just nothing is happening.

Side note: Having known people hurt by rape, my opinion is that there's no position on this topic other than "Rape is bullshit, the woman is never ever ever wrong when it comes to rape, and if you feel otherwise you're a complete shit head". And I'm usually more open minded to counter-arguments, but not in this case. In other words, I think you should shut up.

[Switch Kicker]

oh god, I must be bored if I'm letting myself post.

switchkicker wrote:

And, as I said before, if a woman is in the military, she should have the brains and gut to know that nothing can happen to her for turning in those other soldiers

Article states:

At the heart of this crisis is an apparent inability or unwillingness to prosecute rapists in the ranks. According to DOD statistics, only 181 out of 2,212 subjects investigated for sexual assault in 2007, including 1,259 reports of rape, were referred to courts-martial, the equivalent of a criminal prosecution in the military. Another 218 were handled via nonpunitive administrative action or discharge, and 201 subjects were disciplined through "nonjudicial punishment," which means they may have been confined to quarters, assigned extra duty or received a similar slap on the wrist. In nearly half of the cases investigated, the chain of command took no action; more than a third of the time, that was because of "insufficient evidence."

Ummmmm, seems like they have the "guts" to report, just nothing is happening.

Side note: Having known people hurt by rape, my opinion is that there's no position on this topic other than "Rape is bullshit, the woman is never ever ever wrong when it comes to rape, and if you feel otherwise you're a complete shit head". And I'm usually more open minded to counter-arguments, but not in this case. In other words, I think you should shut up.

That quote didn't do anything for your arguement. There are massive holes in that report. It's very biased, and one main part that gives that away is that it put quotation marks around "insufficient evidence." Insufficient evidence, is insufficient evidence. You can't wait a couple days and then report an attack, you need to report it immediately, and, like I said, these women should have the brains and the gut to do that, and if they don't, then they shouldn't even be in teh military in the first place. And if you're reading skills are sooo shitty... to teh point where you actually think that I'm blaming the woman for her attack, then that's your own problem.

These attacks shoudln't happen, just like all attacks shouldn't happen, but these women, in particular, should be smarter about how they're handling themselves after an attack.

If I had witnessed such an attack, and thenw as threatened, lethally, not to say a word of it to anyone, even if it was my CO, you can be damned sure I'd be calling someone up as soon as I possibly could. And there's no reason these women shouldn't be doing the same for themselves.

And don't talk to me as if I'm some idiot that doesn't know what the true circumstances of these attacks really are. I have one EXTREMELY close friend that was raped less than 10 feet away from her passed out brother. I'm not going to say anything else other than that I have heard grusome details about it from her, and that I'm the only one that knows about it besides her. I have great amounts of hate for people that do this shit, but I am also still angry, to this very day, at her, for not doing something about it. I don't voice it or show it in anyway, because that would not help anything at all, ever, seeing as it's been nearly 8 years, but that doesn't stop me from being angry about it.

[BainbridgeShred]

I read this week that women are the happiest sub-group in the military. Minority women even more so, whereas white males are the least happy group to be in the military. It was hypothesized that it is the merit based command heirarchy that creates a more level society than the civic or private world or whatever you want to say.

[Frank_Sinatra]

Is the title supposed to be some kind of joke? I don't like jokes.

Read: http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/s ... onthebase/

On one hand we've got sources (a VA report, statistics from RAINN) saying around 30 % of women in the military reported sexual assault, compared to about 17 % for civilian women. And, using elementary math skills, we can see that women are in greater danger of sexual assault in the military than in civilian life. Congratulations on passing the fifth grade.

And in the other corner...

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about [women in the military being more likely to be raped].

Very confidently put, I assume that confidence comes from some hard evidence?

It's not any bigger of a problem than rape cases in the civilian world, in my opinion. I feel that rape in the civilian world is far more dangerous than in the military[...]

I think you're more likely to be killed as a civilian, than as a soldier during rape or attempted rape.

Well played.

Round 2. We have a retired colonel and a senior Congresswoman who sits on various military & intel committees. And according to both sources, the military as an institution isn't investigating these crimes or taking them seriously.

Kinda convincing, honestly. What say you?

the woman needs to "man" up

Word. I can't tell you how many times I've thought the same thing, bro. Women need to be more like men. They should also be unopposed to wearing fake mustaches, hardhats, taping their boobs down, and performing anal sex on me using life like strap ons. Added benefit: when women are men, women won't be raped any more!

It doesn't stop because the woman doesn't have to the courage to stand up for herself when she's not actually in danger, and when that's the case, then that woman shouldn't have even signed up for the service.

Important points:

Rape = not actual danger.
Women are crazy! Am I right fellas?

Now, when you start a sentence with "It doesn't stop because the woman" it sure seems like you're blaming the woman. Are you?

[...]I'm not blaming the woman for it happening to her, or anything like that, I'm blaming the woman for not helping bring those men to justice.

Thanks for clearing that up. I really want to learn this skill of yours, Switch, so I thought I'd try out a few of my own:

"Slavery would've ended earlier if there had been a higher cost to owning slaves. Large slave revolts would have increased the cost. But there was never a full scale slave revolt in the South. I'm not blaming the slaves, I'm just saying they could've stood up for themselves a little more."

"I'm not blaming the Jews for heading an international financial conspiracy, I'm blaming the Jews for not effectively dispelling any notions that they are heading an international financial conspiracy."

"Those last couple abortions I paid for really put a dent in my wallet. If only those women would have made sure I was actually wearing a condom instead of taking me at my word... Not that I'm blaming them! But a little bit of initiative would've saved us all some time and money."

I'm such a fucking amateur compared to you...

But I've learned the concept - blaming someone for something, then saying your not blaming them, cancels everything out. If that fails, try personal attacks on a person's literacy.

Wait, didn't our sources say that reported rapes weren't being prosecuted? Doesn't that kinda tear apart that "women aren't reporting rapes" argument? Well, I'm inclined to believe anything that Switch says on the subject, so I'm going to see what he has to say about our sources.

There are massive holes in that report.

Wow, you've made such a bold statement on the methodology of a report that I must conclude that you are an expert on the subject. So the report is biased you say? If only a layman like me knew how biased it was...

It's very biased

Thanks! But how would I know that it is very biased rather than somewhat biased, or not biased at all?

and one main part that gives that away is that it put quotation marks around "insufficient evidence." Insufficient evidence, is insufficient evidence.

Ahh, of course. When a primary source is quoted by a secondary source, the stylistic choices of the secondary source do have an effect on the truth value of the primary source.

Glad that's out of the way - now we can get to the real point of this thread: a handful of men playing the "I'm closer to a rape victim than you are/I know more rape victims than you" game. My starting bid, oh, let's say five.

[Switch Kicker]

Is the title supposed to be some kind of joke? I don't like jokes.

Read: http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/s ... onthebase/

On one hand we've got sources (a VA report, statistics from RAINN) saying around 30 % of women in the military reported sexual assault, compared to about 17 % for civilian women. And, using elementary math skills, we can see that women are in greater danger of sexual assault in the military than in civilian life. Congratulations on passing the fifth grade.

And in the other corner...

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about [women in the military being more likely to be raped].

Very confidently put, I assume that confidence comes from some hard evidence?

It's not any bigger of a problem than rape cases in the civilian world, in my opinion. I feel that rape in the civilian world is far more dangerous than in the military[...]

I think you're more likely to be killed as a civilian, than as a soldier during rape or attempted rape.

Well played.

Round 2. We have a retired colonel and a senior Congresswoman who sits on various military & intel committees. And according to both sources, the military as an institution isn't investigating these crimes or taking them seriously.

Kinda convincing, honestly. What say you?

the woman needs to "man" up

Word. I can't tell you how many times I've thought the same thing, bro. Women need to be more like men. They should also be unopposed to wearing fake mustaches, hardhats, taping their boobs down, and performing anal sex on me using life like strap ons. Added benefit: when women are men, women won't be raped any more!

It doesn't stop because the woman doesn't have to the courage to stand up for herself when she's not actually in danger, and when that's the case, then that woman shouldn't have even signed up for the service.

Important points:

Rape = not actual danger.
Women are crazy! Am I right fellas?

Now, when you start a sentence with "It doesn't stop because the woman" it sure seems like you're blaming the woman. Are you?

[...]I'm not blaming the woman for it happening to her, or anything like that, I'm blaming the woman for not helping bring those men to justice.

Thanks for clearing that up. I really want to learn this skill of yours, Switch, so I thought I'd try out a few of my own:

"Slavery would've ended earlier if there had been a higher cost to owning slaves. Large slave revolts would have increased the cost. But there was never a full scale slave revolt in the South. I'm not blaming the slaves, I'm just saying they could've stood up for themselves a little more."

"I'm not blaming the Jews for heading an international financial conspiracy, I'm blaming the Jews for not effectively dispelling any notions that they are heading an international financial conspiracy."

"Those last couple abortions I paid for really put a dent in my wallet. If only those women would have made sure I was actually wearing a condom instead of taking me at my word... Not that I'm blaming them! But a little bit of initiative would've saved us all some time and money."

I'm such a fucking amateur compared to you...

But I've learned the concept - blaming someone for something, then saying your not blaming them, cancels everything out. If that fails, try personal attacks on a person's literacy.

Wait, didn't our sources say that reported rapes weren't being prosecuted? Doesn't that kinda tear apart that "women aren't reporting rapes" argument? Well, I'm inclined to believe anything that Switch says on the subject, so I'm going to see what he has to say about our sources.

There are massive holes in that report.

Wow, you've made such a bold statement on the methodology of a report that I must conclude that you are an expert on the subject. So the report is biased you say? If only a layman like me knew how biased it was...

It's very biased

Thanks! But how would I know that it is very biased rather than somewhat biased, or not biased at all?

and one main part that gives that away is that it put quotation marks around "insufficient evidence." Insufficient evidence, is insufficient evidence.

Ahh, of course. When a primary source is quoted by a secondary source, the stylistic choices of the secondary source do have an effect on the truth value of the primary source.

Glad that's out of the way - now we can get to the real point of this thread: a handful of men playing the "I'm closer to a rape victim than you are/I know more rape victims than you" game. My starting bid, oh, let's say five.

Nice use of manipulation. My words have a meaning (one you clearly missed), and you just spent that past few days twisting it. Congrats.

I unfortunately don't have anything more to say on the subject. Your entire post was manipulative and flat out fucking stupid (considering that you took clear points and made them sound like they were something they clearly are not). There are better things you could've done with that excessive amount of time.

[Frank_Sinatra]

That took me all of 20 minutes on a day at work when I had nothing better to do.

Just learn to admit when you don't know something.

[Switch Kicker]

That took me all of 20 minutes on a day at work when I had nothing better to do.

Just learn to admit when you don't know something.

I can and do admit when I don't know something. However a very large portion of this entire topic is based off of ideas of what's wrong and what's right and who's to blame for what. There is not solid right or wrong for a large portion of this topic.

Please, list off some things that I'm factually wrong about, and I'll either admit I'm wrong about them, or I'll give you some proof that I'm right about whatever it may be that I'm supposedly wrong about.

[Frank_Sinatra]

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about this statement.

"not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

It's a realistic issue, but no more than common rape cases in the civilian world.

WRANG. You stated, unequivocally, that rape in the military was no more common than in the civilian world.

And then you didn't just admit you were wrong, you "rephrased" to some kind of convoluted argument about rape being less fatal in the military, therefore equivalent to the problem in the civilian world. You also offered no facts to back up this claim. Also, its not really rephrasing, its offering a completely different line of reasoning.

By the way, your definition of opinion is screwy. You don't get to just spout off a bunch of made up facts and then say "well, in my opinion..." In my opinion, you are an eight foot tall venus flytrap. Hey, can't be wrong, its an opinion!

Yes, there are areas where acceptance of competing ideas will be largely subjective. However, not all ideas have equal merit when weighed against the available facts. There are different opinions about the age of the earth, for instance, but clearly some of those opinions are contra-factual. Stop hiding behind some degree of subjectivity in a discussion, and stop making shit up and then pretending its your "opinion" rather than a bunch of made up shit.

[Switch Kicker]

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about this statement.

"not isolated incidents. Women serving in the U.S. military are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy fire in Iraq."

It's a realistic issue, but no more than common rape cases in the civilian world.

WRANG. You stated, unequivocally, that rape in the military was no more common than in the civilian world.

And then you didn't just admit you were wrong, you "rephrased" to some kind of convoluted argument about rape being less fatal in the military, therefore equivalent to the problem in the civilian world. You also offered no facts to back up this claim. Also, its not really rephrasing, its offering a completely different line of reasoning.

By the way, your definition of opinion is screwy. You don't get to just spout off a bunch of made up facts and then say "well, in my opinion..." In my opinion, you are an eight foot tall venus flytrap. Hey, can't be wrong, its an opinion!

Yes, there are areas where acceptance of competing ideas will be largely subjective. However, not all ideas have equal merit when weighed against the available facts. There are different opinions about the age of the earth, for instance, but clearly some of those opinions are contra-factual. Stop hiding behind some degree of subjectivity in a discussion, and stop making shit up and then pretending its your "opinion" rather than a bunch of made up shit.

You can't directly compare percentages and figures between the military world to the civilian world. For one.

For two, those claims were based off of my own understandings and knowledge. Gained through methods other than reading an innaccurate book presented through a perspective other than my own, therefore one I can not trust, or through biased reports throwing out meaningless statistics. After gaining my knowledge, I made those claims using common fucking sense.

Read up on the UCMJ, and then go watch some full time soldiers on a base, and see just how much it's enforced. Can't get away with anything. And you think someone's going to be murdered and get away with it? No fucking thankyou.

[Frank_Sinatra]

Whenever I think you might come around to something sensible you just dig yourself deeper.

Go read up on statistical methods and then come back here and tell me that you can't directly compare data between two different populations.

I love how you just dismiss anything that doesn't conform to what you already think as biased or flawed. On what basis are you claiming bias? Because it doesn't fit into the anecdotal "evidence" you've gathered as an 18 year old enrolled in some kind of military academy?

There is an article about a family who found out their daughter was murdered and have found no additional detail about any investigation taking place. Multiple sources corroborate the story. It fits within a larger pattern that can be observed using a legitimate method, as well as the experiences of multiple military families, activist groups, and even a retired colonel.

But I guess they all must be wrong, because you say so. Everything is subjective! No reports of a world beyond my eyesight can be taken seriously. China is full of dragons! Fuck anyone who says they've been to China and seen zero dragons. Tree roots are actually large earthworms! Damn those biased botanists who disagree.

Ok, I'm not trying to be a dick here, I'm going to give you some honest advice that I think will benefit you: you seem to really enjoy the sensation of knowing about things. So my suggestion would be to actually learn something. About anything. And then stop pretending you know things that you don't know. Stop being intellectually lazy, stop thinking that deflecting a criticism of your argument is the same thing as being right. Stop learning how to bullshit your way through arguments without knowing a fucking thing about what's being discussed. Its not a good life skill.

[Switch Kicker]

"Because it doesn't fit into the anecdotal "evidence" you've gathered as an 18 year old enrolled in some kind of military academy?"

What? lol.

"There is an article about a family who found out their daughter was murdered and have found no additional detail about any investigation taking place."

There is no way in hell an investigation wouldn't be going on. If anything, the investigation is being kept quiet untill they find something out. It'd be ridiculously foolish to not investigate, on a publicity level.

"But I guess they all must be wrong, because you say so."

I said nothing in relation to such a story.

"China is full of dragons! Fuck anyone who says they've been to China and seen zero dragons. Tree roots are actually large earthworms!"

That was over the top.

"you seem to really enjoy the sensation of knowing about things"

I do.

"So my suggestion would be to actually learn something"

I do.

"And then stop pretending you know things that you don't know."

Anything and everything I've said in this topic is either true, or something I greatly believe to be true. I don't pretend to know things.

"Stop being intellectually lazy"

You know nothing of my intelect based off the bullshit I post on this site. And I am most definitely not lazy about it.

"stop thinking that deflecting a criticism of your argument is the same thing as being right."

But it doesn't make me wrong.

"Stop learning how to bullshit your way through arguments without knowing a fucking thing about what's being discussed. Its not a good life skill."

I don't consider random discussion on a footbag forum to be a life skill. I consider it to be a time killer. I do not have to be wrong or right on this forum, and I can present my opinions, views, and beliefs when/how/where I like on this forum. I do not converse over this stupid topic of rape in the military as a fucking stupid and pathetic attempt to find a way to end it beacuse it's going to happen no matter what, there is nothing you can ever do about it. Rape, murder, and disease is a part of life. Learn to fucking live with it or eat shit and die.

And I hope there is NEVER a cure for any major disease or infection. We have a population problem as it is. We don't need to be saving more lives than we already are. AIDs, use a condom. Cancer... natural selection, tough shit mate, heart attack, eat less mcdonald's fat ass. A large number of illnesses and disease and infections are avoidable. Murder and rape is not, and it never will be untill the entire world is under 100% survalience. (Yeah, I can't spell that word.) Talking about it isn't going to change anything. And getting angry that someone is insensitive to the subject is wasted energy.

However. Murder victims, can't exactly help put their attackers behind bars. Rape victims can. If it's such a big fuckin' deal, do something about it, either help others help you, or piss off.

"Ok, I'm not trying to be a dick here"

Orly?

Is the title supposed to be some kind of joke? I don't like jokes.

Read: http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/s ... onthebase/

On one hand we've got sources (a VA report, statistics from RAINN) saying around 30 % of women in the military reported sexual assault, compared to about 17 % for civilian women. And, using elementary math skills, we can see that women are in greater danger of sexual assault in the military than in civilian life. Congratulations on passing the fifth grade.

And in the other corner...

Though it does happen, there is absolutely nothing true about [women in the military being more likely to be raped].

Very confidently put, I assume that confidence comes from some hard evidence?

It's not any bigger of a problem than rape cases in the civilian world, in my opinion. I feel that rape in the civilian world is far more dangerous than in the military[...]

I think you're more likely to be killed as a civilian, than as a soldier during rape or attempted rape.

Well played.

Round 2. We have a retired colonel and a senior Congresswoman who sits on various military & intel committees. And according to both sources, the military as an institution isn't investigating these crimes or taking them seriously.

Kinda convincing, honestly. What say you?

the woman needs to "man" up

Word. I can't tell you how many times I've thought the same thing, bro. Women need to be more like men. They should also be unopposed to wearing fake mustaches, hardhats, taping their boobs down, and performing anal sex on me using life like strap ons. Added benefit: when women are men, women won't be raped any more!

It doesn't stop because the woman doesn't have to the courage to stand up for herself when she's not actually in danger, and when that's the case, then that woman shouldn't have even signed up for the service.

Important points:

Rape = not actual danger.
Women are crazy! Am I right fellas?

Now, when you start a sentence with "It doesn't stop because the woman" it sure seems like you're blaming the woman. Are you?

[...]I'm not blaming the woman for it happening to her, or anything like that, I'm blaming the woman for not helping bring those men to justice.

Thanks for clearing that up. I really want to learn this skill of yours, Switch, so I thought I'd try out a few of my own:

"Slavery would've ended earlier if there had been a higher cost to owning slaves. Large slave revolts would have increased the cost. But there was never a full scale slave revolt in the South. I'm not blaming the slaves, I'm just saying they could've stood up for themselves a little more."

"I'm not blaming the Jews for heading an international financial conspiracy, I'm blaming the Jews for not effectively dispelling any notions that they are heading an international financial conspiracy."

"Those last couple abortions I paid for really put a dent in my wallet. If only those women would have made sure I was actually wearing a condom instead of taking me at my word... Not that I'm blaming them! But a little bit of initiative would've saved us all some time and money."

I'm such a fucking amateur compared to you...

But I've learned the concept - blaming someone for something, then saying your not blaming them, cancels everything out. If that fails, try personal attacks on a person's literacy.

Wait, didn't our sources say that reported rapes weren't being prosecuted? Doesn't that kinda tear apart that "women aren't reporting rapes" argument? Well, I'm inclined to believe anything that Switch says on the subject, so I'm going to see what he has to say about our sources.

There are massive holes in that report.

Wow, you've made such a bold statement on the methodology of a report that I must conclude that you are an expert on the subject. So the report is biased you say? If only a layman like me knew how biased it was...

It's very biased

Thanks! But how would I know that it is very biased rather than somewhat biased, or not biased at all?

and one main part that gives that away is that it put quotation marks around "insufficient evidence." Insufficient evidence, is insufficient evidence.

Ahh, of course. When a primary source is quoted by a secondary source, the stylistic choices of the secondary source do have an effect on the truth value of the primary source.

Glad that's out of the way - now we can get to the real point of this thread: a handful of men playing the "I'm closer to a rape victim than you are/I know more rape victims than you" game. My starting bid, oh, let's say five.

I'm sure there's an ass ton of "technicality" and shit that Jeremy would just "get off on" by filling it in for me with a witty sarcastic annoying tone, but I simply just don't care enough to fill in the rest of the bullshit. Either you get it, or you don't, and if you don't, and if you don't like it, that's your problem, not mine. I'm not here to baby step you through my perspectives. There IS an ignore button you know.

[habitat]

tl;dr

The women are just asking for it. As long as they shout "Surprise!" before, it negates the illegality. Even god thought rape was ok.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

* 28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

* 29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.