Why Can’t the Military Solve Its Sex Problem?

Senator McCain & General Dempsey

Despite a professed zero tolerance policy, top military leaders admitted before Senate Armed Services Committee questioners earlier this week that they have been largely ineffective in curbing the atrocious raft of sexual assault and violence within their ranks. They said they would do better, as they have a number of times before, but balked at a bill that would remove commanders from overseeing and being able to affect major cases within their chains of command in favor of uniformed prosecutors.

Well, they’d better do something.

Several excuses were given for the epidemic such as the “distraction” of 12 years of war and the simple fact that there are now more women in the armed forces. Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia tried to suggest, simply, that boys will be boys.

“If we’re going to have women in combat, I think the potential for the issue to increase is going to become even greater,” Mr. Chambliss opined. “Gee wiz, the hormone level created by nature sets in place the possibility for these types of things to occur.”

Sorry, Senator, but that argument, put forth as early as the Navy’s Tailhook scandal in 1991, just doesn’t cut it. We neither tolerate nor chalk up sexual assault to raging hormones in any other sphere of life. We investigate it, we prosecute it, and we try to punish it appropriately.

Nor do we accept the notion that because young men are thrown together with women in the crucible of combat does this behavior become more understandable. First of all, the vast majority of sexual assaults in the military are not related to combat proximity or stress. Second, in many cities in the United States, male and female police officers are subjected to more daily stress and violence than the average soldier sees in a combat zone. This is true of every other high-stress arena in which men and women operate together.

And we don’t explain away sexual assaults in that setting. We are rightly enraged when we see a high school teacher or college professor “falling” for the charms of one of his female students, so come on!

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, admitted, “I took my eye off the ball a bit in the commands I had. When you tie it all together, I wouldn’t say that we’ve been inactive, but we’ve been less active that we probably need to be.”

The military chiefs can talk about chain of command all they want, but the simple fact is that, with their admittedly huge  burdens, they just haven’t made the curbing of sexual assault within their ranks a priority.

If Senator John McCain, Republican Senator from Arizona and a certified war hero, is so appalled by the situation that he said he could not, in good conscience, recommend a military career to a woman, you know we have trouble.

“I cannot overstate my disgust and disappointment over continued reports of sexual misconduct in our military. We’ve been talking about the issue for years, and talk is insufficient.”

McCain, the son and grandson of admirals, does not accept any of the military leadership’s excuses, citing the equally great problem with racism when he served.

“We addressed the issue, and now I believe the military is our most effective equal opportunity employer. We must do that in the case of this crisis that we’re facing now.”

Take it from Senator McCain, generals and admirals. You’d better get on with it before someone else does.

•