FOX News, Liz Trotta, and Rape

Many who watch American politics wonder about the specific nature of right-wing neuroses. That is, while American politics are dysfunctional in general, the various factions are often marked by their own distinctive strangeness.

For instance, the world of FOX News, often derided by liberal critics as "The Bubble", or "the echo chamber", in which facts and reality have no bearing on perception or comprehension.

FOX News contributor Liz Trotta finds herself at the center of an outcry this week after her comments about sexual assault in the military:


But while all of this is going on, just a few weeks ago, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta commented on a new Pentagon report on sexual abuse in the military. I think they have actually discovered there is a difference between men and women. And the sexual abuse report says that there has been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact, the whole airing of this issue has never been done by Congress, it's strictly been a question of pressure from the feminist.

(qtd. in Newbold (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201202120002))

Reactions of disbelief and even outrage are focusing on the question, "Now, what did they expect?" The criticism is that Trotta seems to be implying that women who sign up for military service should expect to be sexually assaulted. This, however, is not a direct interpretation; rather, it seems more of a necessary corollary.

The context is that Trotta opened with a consideration of women in combat roles, and then points out that the Secretary of Defense and Pentagon are reacting to the latest numbers to emerge from the armed services. When Trotta asks what "they" expect, she seems to be referring more directly to Panetta and the Pentagon brass.

But this is insufficient to clear up the questions, or sweep the apparent scandal under the rug. Trotta continued to explain her argument:


Let me just read something to you from McClatchy Newspapers about how much this position on extreme feminism is costing us. "The budget for the Defense Department's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office leapt from $5 million in fiscal 2005 to more than $23 million in fiscal 2010. Total Defense Department spending on sexual assault prevention and related efforts now exceeds $113 million annually." That's from McClatchy Newspapers.

So, you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much.

Naturally, some might think that Trotta is complaining that the Department of Defense is spending too much on rape. But FOX host Eric Shawn made the obvious point that "many would say that [servicewomen] need to be protected, and there are these sexual programs, abuse programs, are necessary".

Trotta mocked the point: "That's funny, I thought the mission of the Army, and the Navy, and four services was to defend and protect us, not the people who were fighting the war."

By which time it ought to be clear what Trotta is on about: The problem is not that our military servicepeople commit violent sex crimes; the problem is that women are in the services.

American women considering military service should remember that this is the freedom they are aiming to defend. Being raped, according to Liz Trotta, is simply part of a woman's obligation in the United States military.
____________________

Notes:

Newbold, Andy. "Fox's Liz Trotta On Sexual Assault In Military: 'What Did They Expect? These People Are In Close Contact'". County Fair. February 12, 2012. MediaMatters.org. February 14, 2012. http://mediamatters.org/blog/201202120002

It's actually a good point. Men in combat are usually deprived of sex, and it's a real problem. Armies in the past including our own, have provided prostitutes (men and women). When there are readily available women in the military in close quarters, I fear more sexual assaults will tend to occur. It's not that anyone should be absolved of this crime, but it isn't entirely unexpected.

Reactions of disbelief and even outrage are focusing on the question, "Now, what did they expect?" The criticism is that Trotta seems to be implying that women who sign up for military service should expect to be sexually assaulted. This, however, is not a direct interpretation; rather, it seems more of a necessary corollary.

It also has the benefit of being factually true. Last I checked, statistics indicate that a clear majority of females in the US military are sexually assaulted or raped during their service. So, yes, from a purely actuarial standpoint, any female entering the US military should expect to be sexually assaulted. The ones who are not so assaulted are the exceptions.



So, you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much.

Raped "too much?" One wonders at what, exactly, is the "right" amount of rape. It seems clearly implied by the quote that a non-zero number of rapes would still fall short of "too much."

It also has the benefit of being factually true. Last I checked, statistics indicate that a clear majority of females in the US military are sexually assaulted or raped during their service. So, yes, from a purely actuarial standpoint, any female entering the US military should expect to be sexually assaulted. The ones who are not so assaulted are the exceptions.



Raped "too much?" One wonders at what, exactly, is the "right" amount of rape. It seems clearly implied by the quote that a non-zero number of rapes would still fall short of "too much."


It's actually a good point. Men in combat are usually deprived of sex, and it's a real problem. Armies in the past including our own, have provided prostitutes (men and women). When there are readily available women in the military in close quarters, I fear more sexual assaults will tend to occur. It's not that anyone should be absolved of this crime, but it isn't entirely unexpected.

Before you toute this as a conquense of women in the millatry look at the army which has (I belive) the higest rate of females in the world, the IDF. I just did a search for rape satistics in the IDF and I actually couldnt find ANYTHING. Furthermore its ridiculas to assume that because someone doesnt have women around they will comit rape.

The IDF is hardly ever sent far from Israel, as far as I know.

The IDF is hardly ever sent far from Israel, as far as I know.

That would be pretty far down on the list of topically-relevant differences between the IDF and the US military, if you ask me.

The IDF is a conscript force that includes a very large number of women, and treats them as equals of men. This alone is markedly different from the US military, which is a volunteer force that includes only a small minority of women which it regards as officially lesser than men. Apparently just over 50% of IDF officers are female, so the prospects for a hypermacho rape culture getting traction there are resultantly thin.

Women and men are not definite concepts, as any person born intersex can tell you. If a women has the strength and bravado of a marine, why can't she be a marine? True such logic would mean far less women could be marines then men, but it would also mean that more women could be fighter pilots then men.

Rape happens, heck men get raped all the time in the military and grossly underreport it. I don't see why it can't be reported and protected against, even if one is a women. If they are arguing that women waste military resources in our voluntary army then I guess we should have fewer soldiers and recall the draft to make up the loss of kicking out all the women.

That would be pretty far down on the list of topically-relevant differences between the IDF and the US military, if you ask me.

The IDF is a conscript force that includes a very large number of women, and treats them as equals of men. This alone is markedly different from the US military, which is a volunteer force that includes only a small minority of women which it regards as officially lesser than men. Apparently just over 50% of IDF officers are female, so the prospects for a hypermacho rape culture getting traction there are resultantly thin.

And I bet those IDF women carry pistols all the time.

Rape Machines



If they are arguing that women waste military resources in our voluntary army then I guess we should have fewer soldiers and recall the draft to make up the loss of kicking out all the women.

I think of Kiley and the baby water buffalo in O'Brien's The Things They Carried. You know, the whole, nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nineteen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSGvqjVHik8) thing.

But, such as it is, it seems Trotta is arguing that men are rape machines, and women ought to already know that, so the only solution is to keep women out of combat roles, or, perhaps, the military itself.

At the same time, though, it's only a more severe version of Rick Santorum's argument that women should stay out of combat because American servicemen are incapable of doing their jobs properly when women are around.

I'm rarely one to hop on the masculinist bandwagon, but come on. To the other, I'm not a soldier. Maybe the rape-machine gene operates in tandem with the soldier gene. But, still, it seems that at some point, someone on the liberal side of the aisle ought to say, "You know, when we want to bring troops home, or not send them abroad at all, we're accused of hating the troops. When we want to acknowledge and investigate crimes committed by people wearing our service uniforms, we're accused of hating the troops. But you Republicans are showing your love for the troops by arguing that men wearing the colors are rape machines who can't do their jobs correctly if a woman is around. What the hell is that?"

Head, meet desk.

Republicans, tell us what you really think.

Well if they are rape machines then why not a medicated army? Just pump them with Depo-Provera, we can add in Amphetamines and a little PCP so that they turn into sexless killing machines, which I think is their function, right?

Well if they are rape machines then why not a medicated army? Just pump them with Depo-Provera, we can add in Amphetamines and a little PCP so that they turn into sexless killing machines, which I think is their function, right?

You put them on PCP and you might as well just carpet bomb a country because there would be less innocent killed and "Friendly fire" incidence. You ever seen anyone on PCP? You think they can make good decisions? like that the target is a PERSON not a tree? or that they are supposed to be shooting the ENERMY not there own solders

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_L1y4XexY16s/SpOboLVWtzI/AAAAAAAAIlE/E1GPl4zAyJs/s400/North-Korean-business-wear03.jpg