1 Mart 2018 Perşembe

Lesson Two: Why is there pervasive sexual assault in the military? - Alex Dauncey-Elwood

The second lesson you will learn is more difficult to discuss but provides clear connections between the pervasive dismissal of sexual assault accusations in the military and society. Goldstein specifically brought up the various sexual interactions that happen during war-time, some consensual and others not (2001). In civilian society, sexual assault and harassment are not discussed with the openness, trust, and support which are inherent to the dialogue of other subject areas. The veil around the military can be even worse.
An argument that you will hear people bring up against feminism’s focus on sexual assault against women is that men are sexually assaulted as well, so why aren’t feminists focusing their attention on men. You will learn two responses. First, noting the context sexual assault against men is happening in, typically being prisons, or as we have learned, the military, is important in framing the response. Further, it is significant to add that most often it is men also, perpetuating the assault. Second, is that feminists aim to end rape culture through challenging the patriarchy which would be beneficial to all members of society.
In Zarkov’s article, this topic is relevant in highlighting the other reasons for rape to exist in war (2011). It is a form of domination over an ethnic group, and/or a way to humiliate the ‘losing’ people. These are realities of war-time. In second year college you will write a paper about the comfort women Japan institutionalized during the Second World War, where you will come across the notions that war-time rape was an “inevitable concomitant of battle” or a “spoil of war”.  It is not a new concept or a revolutionary idea that rape and sexual assault is imbedded into the very nature of war but yet, still difficult to discuss. Thus feminism. Feminism needs to be a part of war-time analysis not only because we need more women in the military or that women are affected by war zones in a way distinct to men, but because feminism will bring light to the toxic culture that permits rampant sexual assault in and by the military. Feminism offers guidance to reframing war discourse and in turn, society. Back to my original observation, feminism should not be distinct from war discourse, people who study war and military should not be adverse to such an approach. To even further circle this back, to allow people to better engage with feminist war discourse, which is the process of applying a feminist lens to the way society engages and understand war, people need to be socialized and educated to not feel threatened by feminism and recognize the validity feminism research brings to academia.
Tomorrow: Lesson Three - How does war imbed dichotomies?

Hiç yorum yok:

Yorum Gönder