Honest, paywall-free news is rare. Please support our boldly independent journalism with a donation of any size.
Yet another attempt at addressing the epidemic of military sexual assault just failed in Congress, illustrating the vicious partisan divide on the subject that’s making it nearly impossible to enact needed legislation to protect servicemembers across the United States and abroad. The Pentagon itself, along with numerous third party organizations and government agencies, has identified military sexual assault as a pernicious problem that needs to be addressed with fundamental changes to the reporting and prosecuting process, but attempts by members of Congress like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand to address this problem have run up against brick walls.
The issue has become a hallmark cause for Senator Gillibrand, who wants to take the authority for handling rape cases out of the chain of command and make it the responsibility of outside military prosecutors. She, and many supporters, argue that this would resolve many of the issues that are making it difficult for rape survivors to come forward and receive fair treatment in their cases. Advocates argue that in addition to increasing the chances of seeing a positive outcome in the wake of sexual assault, the legislation will also protect the careers and livelihoods of victims and survivors.
Pentagon estimates suggest that tens of thousands of “unwanted sexual contacts” happen every year in the military, including sexual harassment, assault and rape. More than half of the victims are men. Many male victims of rape in the military are reluctant to speak out because they fear being mocked or stigmatized in addition to facing the litany of problems all sexual assault victims in the military have to weigh before coming forward.
Within the military, the chain of command currently forces victims to go to their superior officers to report sexual harassment or assault—even when those superior officers are themselves rapists, or are friendly with perpetrators of such crimes. Rape victims may be too afraid to come forward in those circumstances, and when they do, they can face retaliation not just from senior officers, but from others of the same rank. Reporters may find themselves driven out of the military or deprived of opportunities for promotion, a career-ruining move that can also feel like a betrayal for those who joined the military out of a genuine love of the armed services and a desire to pursue a lifelong career in the military. Victims may be dealing with post traumatic stress and other psychological strain from the rape itself while being revictimized by a military justice system that isn’t adequate to their needs—and in some cases, some rape victims risk not just their careers but also their lives when they choose to report.
Senator Gillibrand and others want to change the reporting and prosecution structure in cases of military sexual assault to acknowledge that victims need a safer way to report and they need to be assured that prosecutors will take their cases seriously. Under the terms of her proposal, when victims report rapes, outside prosecutors would decide whether the cases should go to court, rather than commanding officers, who might be biased in their assessment of such cases. Yet, Republicans have consistently resisted bills that attempt to push through reforms, and women aren’t afraid to turn on her either.
Opposition to reform on the handling of such cases illustrates that, despite the fact that the issue is a clearly-documented problem for all members of the military, many parties appear reluctant to address it, and believe that the matter should be left to the hands of the military, as has historically been the case with crimes involving servicemembers. This system clearly isn’t working now, and there’s no evidence that it will start to work simply because the Pentagon dreams it so.
Important Message: Please Read
For 25 years, Truthout has survived by publishing impactful investigative journalism and analysis; distributing full editions 365 days a year; and building a community of readers who support us with small, hard-earned donations.
Eighty percent of our $3 million yearly budget comes from small donors alone. Of those, 8,000 readers support us with monthly donations. Back in 2018, when Facebook decided to suppress the circulation of posts made by organizations, thereby cutting readers off from seeing many articles shared by the news organizations they had intentionally decided to follow, Truthout’s total traffic declined by 40 percent, as nearly all of our traffic from that platform disappeared.
Now, Google has recently rolled out its AI search bar, providing AI summaries instead of directing readers to our site. Google Search is our single largest source of traffic; it’s the route by which nearly one third of our readers find us. Much like in 2018, a shocking 40 percent of our Google traffic has disappeared overnight.
It will not be easy for Truthout to shoulder this blow. Nor will it be easy for our peers and collaborators — news sites that depend on traffic and aren’t bankrolled by large corporations.
If you can support Truthout with a donation today, you can help us resist the AI onslaught. Please give today.