By Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D., and Thomas R. Hampson
Navy Petty Officer 3rd Class Brian Lewis and several military female victims testified to harrowing sexual abuse at a U.S. Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, March 13, 2013. Lewis stated he “was raped by a senior petty officer … told by a commander not to report it, and later was diagnosed with a personality disorder and discharged.”
Lewis says, “As I demonstrated, men are a majority of the victims in the military. DoD’s infamous ‘Ask her when she’s sober’ marginalizes male survivors and sends a message that men cannot be raped and therefore are not real survivors.”
Why is the best-kept military secret that most soldierly sexual assaults are now definitively homo, not heterosexual, male-on-male sexual exploitation?
The corporate dictionary definition of “sexual assault” is “to knowingly cause another person to engage in an unwanted sexual act by force or threat; ‘most states have replaced the common law definition of rape with statutes defining sexual assault.’” [Dictionary.com, WordNet® 3.0. Princeton University]
While men are statistically more loathe to report their sexual victimization than are women, 10,700 male soldiers, sailors and airmen in 2010 actually reported their sexual assaults. What this means is not totally clear, since men are cannot technically be raped, despite the term being regularly used in the recent hearings on the matter.
The Washington Times reported “The Defense Department estimates 19,000 sexual assaults occur each year, but only 17 percent are ever reported. In 2010 … 8,600 victims [who reported were female, an incredible 4 percent of the women in the military that year], and 10,700 victims were male, reported the Service Woman’s Action Network.”
The rape rate of our dedicated servicewomen is documented as unparalleled in our nation’s history and demands candid politically incorrect discussion. This column, however, focuses on the male-on-male sexual assault Mr. Lewis called rape; more accurately defined as forcible sodomy, that is “oral or anal copulation.”
Most likely, the definition of rape was expanded in the hearings to include the use of objects and unwanted masturbation, or other sexual invasion. Whatever definition of homosexual sexual assault is used, the numbers are shocking.
With 1,219,510 men serving in 2010, if only 17 percent of all male “rape” victims reported, does this mean, based on the aforementioned figure of 10,700 victims, that 62,941 military men were sexually assaulted by other men that year?
Does this mean “only” 5.16 percent of our bravest and best male servicemen were sexually violated by other lust-dominance-driven servicemen in 2010? Did some kind of sick form of hazing play a role?
Were these damning data widely known and debated in the public forum, the legislatures and the courts before the ban on homosexuality was lifted in 2011?
If not, why not? Precisely when did this traumatic rate of military sodomite abuse begin? Did it begin increasing when the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was implemented?
Does it coincide with the appearance of hazing by sodomy in high schools across the country in the last 10 years or so? Is the Boy Scouts board aware of the military homosexual abuser data as they debate their gay Scout ban?
Indeed, whether or not such outrageous male sexual assault estimates are 10,700 or 62,941, these crimes would be traumatizing to their victims and their colleagues, and could be a significant cause for the massive increase in military suicides – and revengeful violence.
A Center for Deployment Psychology (CDP) report notes that, “Historically the suicide rates have been lower in the military than those rates found in the general population.”
In an attempt to understand why recent “military suicide rates have been increasing and surpassing the rates for society at large,” the CDP authors wonder if the “continued wars in Iraq and Afghanistan” may account for the increase.
However, the hard data confirm “rape victims are prone to suicide,” although continued deployment would logically exacerbate such depression and despair.
Forcible sodomy of men and rape of women is certainly causally connected to completed and attempted suicides.
Yet, despite the high rates of male and female rape and forcible sodomy, the CDP report dodges the prominent role of both sexual abuse and pornography – that is, how-to sex abuse manuals and videos – in fueling the lust and contempt that spawns both offender sexual abuse and victim suicidal ideation.
Alcohol/drugs, fed and encouraged by pornography, often direct users to penetrate any available proximate object, indifferent to age, gender or political persuasion.
True, “The military is 85 percent men and 15 percent women.” Still, according to the Naval Personnel Command (2012 Sexual Assault Awareness Month Training Guide), “about 56 percent of estimated sexual assaults in our military are men, and 44 percent are women.”
The politically correct Naval report ignores the Big Porn Elephant in the room as normalizing the rapes of women and the homosexist assaults on fellow servicemen.
While “heterosexual” pornography has commonly been used to arouse and then seduce “straights” into homosexual sex, “gay” pornography is widely available in mainstream homosexist publications like The Advocate Classified.
And, buff, “straight” military men are regularly depicted there as preferred, sexual targets.
Begun in 1976, The Advocate, our oldest and largest homosexist publication, always carried pornographic ads and films, but in 1992 shifted these to a separate Advocate Classifieds and later to the Internet.
Now (May 7) comes the Military Times reporting that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered inspection of all military offices and workplaces worldwide to root out any “materials that create a degrading or offensive work environment.”
Last year Air Force officers searched “troops’ desks and cubicles in search of photos, calendars, magazines, screen-savers, computer files and other items that might be considered degrading toward women.”
There was no mention of confiscating pornographic items degrading toward men.
The cleanup is a long time a comin’. In 1998 the U.S. Supreme Court upheld The Military Honor & Decency Act partly due to “the special circumstances of the military environment, in which the appearance of professionalism and proper conduct is critical.”
On July 1, Frank Rush, acting assistant secretary of defense for force management, signed DoD Instruction 4105.70, banning “Sale or Rental of Sexually Explicit Material on DoD Property.”
“We need a cultural change where every service member is treated with dignity and respect,” said Secretary Hagel, announcing new initiatives to prevent sexual assault.
“Hagel also unveiled the Defense Department’s annual report on sexual assault, which estimates that about 26,000 troops experienced some form of “unwanted sexual contact” during the past year. That’s roughly one in every 50 troops in the active-duty force.
But, if 10,700 men and 8,600 women reported the euphemized “unwanted sexual contact” – and if only 17 percent of victims report, how does this reduce to 26,000 military victims?
The official reports seem contradictory.
Secretary Hagel wants to eliminate pornography to “really drive the cultural change.” Of course, we can have no honorable or trustworthy military until all vestiges of pornography – from cartoons to Internet adverts, videos, films, calendars and phones, and the rapists and sodomites it trains and justifies – are excised from military service, from the Pentagon elites to the privates under them.
Now, does this mean the elite 5,200 child pornography users at the Pentagon will finally be arrested and tried? For, indeed there are “charms By which the property of youth and maidhood May be abused.”
Thomas R. Hampson, a licensed Illinois private investigator, is founder of the Truth Alliance Foundation.