By Force of Arms: Rape, War, and Military Culture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Duke Law Journal VOLUME 45 FEBRUARY 1996 NUMBER 4 BY FORCE OF ARMS: RAPE, WAR, AND MILITARY CULTURE MADELINE MORRISt TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCrION ............................... 652 I. RAPE BY MILrrARY PERSONNEL ................. 654 A. The Rape Differential .................... 656 1. The Peacetime Study ................. 659 2. The Wartime Study .................. 664 II. THE RAPE DIFFERENTIAL: CAUSES AND CULTURE . 674 A. Causes .. ........................... 674 B. The Rape Differential and Military Culture .... 691 1. Primary Groups .................... 691 2. Primary Groups in Military Organizations . 692 t Copyright © 1996 by Madeline Morris. Professor of Law, Duke University. I am grateful for the contributions of Kate Bartlett, Lawrence Baxter, Brian Belanger, Kenneth Bullock, Paul Carrington, Dennis DeConcini, Cynthia Enloe, Robinson Everett, William Fulton, John Gagnon, Pamela Gann, Tim Gearan, Shannon Geibsler, Andrew Gordon, Frangoise Hampson, Donald Horowitz, Susan Kerner-Hoeg, Benedict Kingsbury, Peter Klopfer, Andrew Koppelman, Paul Kurtz, David Lange, Charlene Lewis, Robert Lifton, Dino Lorenzini, Elizabeth McGoogan, Laura Miller, Mary Newcomer, Jonathan Ocko, Steven Prentice-Dunn, Horace Robertson, Alex Roland, Gladys Rothbell, Sheldon Rothbell, Mady Segal, Scott Silliman, Judith Stiehm, Olga Suhomlinova, Theodore Triebel, Laura Underkuffler, William Van Alstyne, Ronald Vergnoile, Neil Vidmar, Michael Wells, Yoshiaki Yoshimi, Chung-ok Yun, the participants at the April 1994 Colloquium of the Georgia Humanities Center, the participants at the May 27, 1993 meeting of the Feminist Discussion Group of Kyoto, and the participants at the 1993 Rockefeller Foundation Conference on Women and War. For methodological assistance, I am indebted to John Jarvis, Survey Statistician, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and to Kenneth Land, Chair, Department of Sociology, Duke University. As always, I am indebted to Sandi Perkins for her excellent secretarial assis- tance and support. This research was supported in part by the Eugene T. Bost, Jr. Research Professor- ship Fund of the Charles A. Cannon Trust No. Three. 652 DUKE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 45:651 3. Sexual Norms in Primary Groups ........ 698 4. Rape-Conducive Sexual and Gender Attitudes 701 5. Rape-Conducive Sexual Norms in Military Culture ..................... 706 a. Attitudes toward masculinity in military culture ................. 708 b. Attitudes toward sexuality in military culture ................. 710 c. Attitudes toward women in military culture ................. 716 6. Rape-Conducive Sexual Norms and the Psychology of Individual Military Personnel 721 7. Deindividuation Nonns in Primary Groups 725 a. Normative deindividuation in general... 725 b. Normative deindividuation in military organizations.................... 727 III. CHANGES IN THE CONTENT OF MILITARY CULTURE 731 A. The Combat Exclusions .................. 734 B. Accessions Policies ...................... 739 1. Accessing Recruits ................... 739 2. Basic Training ...................... 742 IV. FUNCTIONS OF AND ALTERNATIVES TO A MASCULINIST MILITARY IDENTITY ....................... 747 CONCLUSION .................................. 761 INTRODUCTION Frequently throughout the history of warfare, widespread rape has been associated with war.' It has been alleged in recent years that rape and sexual assault by military personnel in peacetime also constitute problems of substantial magnitude.2 This Article seeks to examine the relationship between sexual assault, combat, and military organizations. Toward that end, the Article first com- pares military rape rates with civilian rates in peace as well as in war. In the light of those crime-rate comparisons, the Article then offers policy analyses and proposals with a view to reducing the incidence of rape by military personnel. 1. See infra note 5. 2. See infra notes 6-10 and accompanying text. 1996] RAPE AND THE MILITARY 653 The research conducted for this Article indicates that the peacetime rates of rape3 by American military personnel4 are actually lower (controlling for age and gender) than civilian rates. However, the data also indicate that peacetime military rape rates are diminished from civilian rates far less than are military rates of other violent crime. A similar phenomenon is also reflected in the wartime data collected: Military rape rates in the combat the- ater studied climbed to several times civilian rates, while military rates of other violent crime were roughly equivalent to civilian rates. Thus, in both the wartime and the peacetime contexts stud- ied, a rape differential exists: The ratio of military rape rates to civilian rape rates is substantially larger than the ratio of military rates to civilian rates of other violent crime. The existence of a military rape differential in war and in peace suggests that it may be possible to reduce military rape rates, perhaps bringing them into line with military rates of other violent crime. This Article considers whether and how such a reduction in military rape rates might be achieved. Part I examines peacetime and wartime data, which both reflect the rape differential. Part II then considers means of reduc- ing military rape rates. It considers possible underlying causes of the rape differential and appropriate responses to those underlying factors. In particular, Section II(B) explores the hypothesis that the rape differential may result in part from certain aspects of military culture: Military organizations are composed of bonded groups of individuals who come to share a set of group norms-a culture. As is discussed, the norms currently prevalent within mili- tary organizations include a configuration of norms regarding mas- culinity, sexuality, and women that have been found to be condu- cive to rape. To the extent that such military cultural factors con- 3. This Article focuses specifically on rape by military personnel. However, research in this field suggests that the causal factors affecting rape share common features with the factors affecting sexual harassment. See, e.g., Carl A. Bartling & Russell Eisenman, Sexual Harassment Proclivities in Men and Women, 31 BULL. OF THE PSYCHONOMIC SOC'Y 189, 191 (1993) (finding common characteristics associated with rape proclivity and sexual harassment proclivity). For that reason, the observations made in this Article are in part applicable to sexual harassment by military personnel. 4. It is anticipated that the patterns of rape incidence identified in the present study may be shared by the military organizations of many nations and cultures. However, because the empirical study reported in this Article is a case study of the American mili- tary only, further empirical work will be required to test the hypothesis that the rape differential described herein is generalizable to other nations and cultures. DUKE LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 45:651 tribute to the military rape differential, changing those normative aspects of military culture may foster a reduction in the incidence of rape by military personnel. Part III attempts to identify policy choices that would facili- tate the contemplated changes in the gender and sexual culture of the military. Contemplating such a fundamental change in military culture gives rise to a critical question: Can the gender and sexual norms of military organizations be changed without reducing mili- tary effectiveness? Or, put differently, are the norms in ques- tion-the gender culture of the military-integrally related to military effectiveness? That question is addressed in Part IV, which explores the functions of the gender culture of the military and considers the implications for military effectiveness of making changes in that culture. In identifying the existence and likely contributing causes of a rape differential within military organiza- tions, the Article points to a set of previously unexamined consid- erations that should be taken into account in shaping military law and policy. I. RAPE BY MILITARY PERSONNEL Rape by military personnel occurs in the two very different contexts of war and peace. It is commonly assumed that the per- vasiveness of rape in war results in some way from the nature of war itself: "War is hell," and one of its concomitants is rape.5 But 5. Certainly, rape in war is pervasive. Perhaps surprisingly, rape victims in war commonly include not only enemy civilians and troops but also allied and national civil- ians and even comrades in arms. The tragedy in the former Yugoslavia provides recent examples of rape in war. See Situation of Human Rights in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia: Report of the Spe- cial Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, U.N. ESCOR, 49th Sess., Annex II, Agenda Item 50, at 63-75, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1993/50 (1993); Roy Gutman, Serbs' Rape of Muslim Women in Bosnia Seen as Tactic of War, HOUSTON CHRON., Aug. 23, 1992, at Al; Carol J. Williams, Balkan War Rape Victims: Traumatized and Ignored, L.A. TIMES, Nov. 30, 1992, at Al. The European Community estimated in its January 8, 1993 Report that 20,000 Muslim women had been raped by Serbian forces. See Jeri Laber, Bosnia: Questions About Rape, N.Y. REV. OF BOOKS, Mar. 25, 1993, at 4; Rape Was Weapon of Serbs, U.N. Says, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 20, 1993, at Al. Such estimates can be subject to considerable inaccuracy, but may nevertheless provide some initial indication of the mag- nitude of the problem. Although Muslims and Croats are also guilty