Est. May 2008

22 May, 2013

Sex Assaults In The Military – Who’s Assaulting Whom?

Sally Quinn and Mr. Obama are outrageously outraged at the increase in reported sexual assaults in our military; Mr. Obama even said:
“The bottom line is, I have no tolerance for this,” he said. “If we find out somebody’s engaging in this stuff, they’ve got to be held accountable, prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Period.”
Now, according to Ms Quinn’s article, ‘there were about 26,000 incidents of sexual assault in the military last year? That’s an astounding average of more than 70 per day’.  So, yeah, I’d have to agree that something has to be done about it – who wouldn’t agree?

Of course, that 26,000 number is ‘estimated’ – only around 3000 such assaults were actually reported.

But Ms Quinn – and Mr. Obama, in fact – seem to have left something out which was in the report from the Pentagon they both are referring to:
The Defense Department survey of sexual assault in the military during fiscal 2012 estimated 26,000 assaults took place in the armed forces. Nearly 3,000 of them were formally reported. Just more than 6 percent of women reported being victims of assault and 1.2 percent of men said the same. Given the much larger number of men in the military, those numbers suggest 14,000 of the assaults in the Pentagon study happened to men. (emphasis mine)
Why in the world wouldn’t Ms Quinn and Mr. Obama mention this little tidbit?  Perhaps there’s a smidgeon of an answer to that one in the Washington Times article, particularly a quote from Aaron Belkin of the Palm Center:
… the rise in male-on-male sexual assault does not reflect the increase of homosexuals in the military but, rather, those assaults are ”somewhat similar to prison rape.”
Considering the Palm Center is described as a ‘homosexual activist organization’, perhaps Mr. Belkin is leery of potential accusations that allowing homosexuals in the military to be openly homosexual might be contributing to this increase in sexual assaults.  Perhaps Mr. Belkin is concerned that maybe a portion of these assaults might have been unwanted sexual advances made by a homosexual service member toward a non-homosexual service member.

Good heavens, we wouldn’t want that now, would we?  After all, everybody and his (or her) brother (or sister) assured us that allowing homosexuals in the military to be openly homosexual would have absolutely no effect on anything within the military.  And we wouldn’t want something like this to affect the diversity within the military.

Right?

Because if it came out that someone was 'held accountable, prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged.  Period' because they'd homosexually accosted another member of the military, well...

Certainly, any sexual assault, wherever it occurs, is abhorrent.  But the press and our Commander in Chief ought to have learned by now that ignoring or burying all the facts of the matter is less than helpful, to say the least.

No comments: