The Invisible War -- Film Review
The Invisible War
Directed
by Kirby Dick
The
Invisible War presents one aspect of a deep seated problem in
American society. It is limited in scope
and thus shortsighted in its understanding of the problem and in its vision for
what to do about it. The film is entitled The Invisible War. Maybe it
seems invisible to the filmmakers, who are just waking up to it, but this war
has been going on in American society for at least 150 years. The military has had some insulation from it
until the recent infusion of women into its ranks starting in the 1970s, but
the problems which the film oversimplifies have been raging on an
interpersonal, social, and legal level for many decades.
The film details stories of perhaps a dozen women who were
raped or sexually assaulted during their military service by fellow soldiers. I liked the way the film started out
interviewing each woman and asking why she chose to enter the military. The responses glowed with idealism, pride,
patriotism, and the desire to continue family traditions. It represented the myth, the illusion of the
military, which is probably widespread in American society, particularly among
those from military backgrounds. It
perfectly set up the shattering of those illusions by the realities the women
found once they were enrolled in the service.
The film captures very well a disconnect between expectations and
reality in the minds of many women entering the military. The root problem here -- which the film is oblivious to -- is the official suppression of male sexuality that has been steadily intensifying in American culture since the mid-1800s. The military, however, being predominantly male and being socially segregated from the civilian society, has been able to sidestep the brunt of this official persecutory stance toward men and their lust, creating an insulated domain where male sexuality has been much freer and much more tolerated than anywhere else in American society. However, since 1973, when conscription ended, the number of women in the military has steadily increased from 2% to 14% today, and the percentage of commissioned officers has risen from 4% to 16%. Nearly a third of the women serving in the U.S. military are black, compared with only 16% of the males. Active duty women are less likely than active duty men to be married (46% to 58%). Nearly half of all married military women have married a fellow military man, while only 7% of married military men wed military women. 12% of military women are single mothers. 37% of active duty women are in the Army, 31% are in the Air Force, 25% are in the Navy, and only 7% are in the Marine Corps.1
With the increase in the number of women in the military,
the number of sexual assaults has climbed steadily. In 2010 over 3000 sexual assaults were
reported to military authorities.2 The
reported assaults are assumed to be only a small percentage of the actual
number. So the problem is clearly
pervasive and reflects the culture and mentality within the military all up and
down the ranks. The film grossly oversimplifies
the problem by reducing it to "predator" versus
"prey." If we can just get rid
of those damn predators everything will be good. Right now the procedural system within the
military protects the predators and doesn't root them out, so we have to fix that. It's myopic and misguided.
The
lawsuit filed by Kori Cioca and 27 other current and former female soldiers
against Donald Rumsfeld and Robert Gates was dismissed by U.S. District Court
Judge Liam O'Grady on December 9, 2011. He
states in his opinion:
I think the judge correctly grasps the problem that cases
like these represent, and it also points to the imbalance in this film's
portrayal of the issue. The suit is an
attack, not specifically on the individuals who committed the rapes, but on the
entire sexual culture of the military and the authority structure that protects
it. It is true that the atmosphere of
the military fosters sexual assault against women within the ranks. The film documents that very clearly. The suit (and this film) ask that we change
that culture to accommodate women who are not prepared to participate in its
rambunctious sexuality.
The military does not want to
deal with this. They want to sweep it
under the rug, ignore it, pretend that it doesn't exist, and punish anyone who
tries to remind them differently. It is
understandable. It is potentially highly
disruptive and would destroy the hypermasculine fighting culture that currently
exists. If "sexual predators"
were rooted out and sexual harassment strictly sanctioned, the result would be
a very different military than the one we now have. Whether it would be as effective in battle, I
cannot say. Warfare is changing,
becoming more technological, less "labor intensive." Perhaps the need for aggressive, combative men
and a cohesive male culture within the military is becoming obsolete. If the kind of change that these women want
were implemented, many excellent fighting soldiers would be dismissed or thrown
in jail. The film tells us at the end
that some of the rapists were promoted to high ranks after the rape charges
were made against them. One was awarded
"Airman of the Year." These
are highly capable fighting men. It
would be a shame to waste them over a sex charge. This is the military's instinct. But the country is not under military threat
right now. We don't really need a
military that can fight. So perhaps we
can afford this self savaging over sex. But
the military is resisting it, and, I am inclined to think, rightly. There are few frank descriptions of the sexual culture within the military. Whenever it does emerge, as in the recent Secret Service scandal, the public reaction is shock and outrage. But the military is not shocked. What the military values is discretion, not sexual purity. Those that are being punished today are being punished because they got caught up in a public scandal that embarrasses the military, not because the military objects to men fraternizing with prostitutes. The culture of the military is at once highly sexualized and severely repressive -- very American, and a formula for denial and hypocrisy. This film only shows the denial and hypocrisy. It does not show the reality of the military's volatile sexual atmosphere in which women have to live and function. This is a culture with deep historical roots created by men for men, and it is resistant to the presence of women, if not downright hostile. The 3000 or so sexual assaults that get reported every year are only the tip of the iceberg. Many men join the military precisely because it is a predominantly male environment that is highly masculinized. It allows them to avoid the difficulties of relating to women in their personal lives.
"Every kid goes into the military for his own
reasons. A lot of kids join just to get
away from home, to try and better themselves in some way, or escape from some
bad situation. But every kid who joins the military joins in part to
fulfill an image. The Marine Corps is
the one branch that really markets itself for that. There's a whole machismo thing. The idea of proving or sanctifying your
manliness by joining the Marines".4
"I think from the
beginning there's a different temperament for someone who becomes a
Marine. They know what they're getting
into. Very often the Marines that come
in our doors are among the most insecure people, and they are seeking the
security they have not found in their families.
Very often Marines are the worse of the worst. After other service branches started
demanding that you be a high school graduate the Marine Corps for years went on
accepting people who were not. The
Marines in one sense have lower standards on that end of it; they are willing
to take someone who is perhaps a little bit more of a derelict, but who wants the
sense of pride and wants the title United States Marine."5
"Like so many other young military men I interviewed,
when asked why he had joined the service Anthony first told me that it was for
money for schooling and other practical reasons. Only later did he confess that he had another
reason for enlisting: to bolster his image of himself as a man. He imagined that by becoming a sailor he
could masculinize himself. Little did he
know what other possibilities for gender and sex image enhancement lay in store
for him."6
"The intimate buddy relationships men form in barracks,
aboard ship, and most especially in combat [are] often described as being a
love greater than between a man and a woman."7
"Navy initiation rituals involve cross-dressing,
spanking, simulated oral and anal sex, simulated ejaculation, nipple piercing,
and anal penetration with objects or fingers."8 "It's kind of hysterical whenever you hear the military talk about morality and maintaining a standard, especially when they talk about gays being promiscuous. Well, I'll tell you. Everyone from the captain on down, on most ships, is going out when they get into port to carry on and get laid. And it's well known. . . . The Navy is an organization of whoremongers and other types of deviants."9
This echoes a comment
by Philip Van Buskirk in the nineteenth century:
"There is no school of vice comparable to the
Navy. Certainly ninety percent of the
white boys in the Navy of this day … are, to an extent that would make you shudder,
blasphemers and sodomites."10
and Winston Churchill's remark about the British Navy:
"Don’t talk to me about tradition. Tradition in the British Navy is nothing but
rum, sodomy, and the lash."11
"After we left Desert Storm we went to the
Philippines. I went out with a couple of
my friends to these bars. Oh God, it was
so gross. These women were grabbing you
as soon as you walked in the door, grabbing your crotch, grabbing your butt,
telling you, "Let's go to the room and fuck." "No thanks." All these married guys. It didn't matter. They just go in there, get a girl and leave,
come back, go get another girl. I guess
it was ten dollars to get laid. These
guys had been out to sea for four months so all of them were horny as
hell. But every port is like that. As soon as you get to the port all the guys
just go crazy."12
A former Marine Corp chaplain told Zeeland
"One of the things that threw me for a loop when I
first saw field training is how they're taught to field clean. Many of the DI's make them stand naked and
shave each other's faces. Their
reasoning is you can't shave your own face in the mirror in the field. And if there's anything more homoerotic than
that, I don't know what is -- two hundred naked Marines standing face to face
shaving each other. Some of them will be
beginning to get hard-ons or get hard-ons, much to their embarrassment."13
"Marines are all the time jerking off in front of each other. They'll just stand there and do it. And jerk each other off, too. That's very, very common from what I've seen."14
Van Buskirk also observed that seafarers considered mutual
masturbation an innocent practice and it seems to have been pervasive, if not
universal on nineteenth century sailing ships.15
The fact of the matter is that the military makes no
provision for the sexual needs of its soldiers.
It is left to each individual to deal with as a private matter and
military does not care to know about it.
"Don't ask, don't tell" is the classic military stance on
sex. From the top brass all the way down
the chain of command, they just don't want to deal with this matter and the officers
interviewed in The Invisible War
represent this very plainly.
The military is fundamentally a
fighting force. It's expertise is killing
people and destroying things. It is
hierarchical and authoritarian in structure.
Its culture is hypermasculine, aggressive, arrogant and
masochistic. Military boot camp has
traditionally been a brutal rite of passage for males. Young recruits are subjected to all manner of
abusive treatment to prove their "toughness," and thus fitness for
duty as a soldier and for manhood.16
The military culture seems to treat the rape of female soldiers as an
extension of this kind of initiation rite.
The Invisible War documents
the pervasive expectation that female soldiers should bear up and not complain
about sexual assaults. If they do, it's
a sign that they are not fit to be soldiers.
The victims are punished severely for making a fuss. This happened in every case the film depicted. The women claim to be violated, but they, too,
violated the military's code of a model soldier who keeps her mouth shut and
deals with her own problems. If you're a
female and you want to serve in an army of men, you must be prepared to have your
body violated, and you must bear that violation as a badge of toughness that
proves your fitness to serve and deal with whatever severity may come to
you. These women wanted to serve under
civilian rules, and they were roughly expunged.
What the film fails to do is to take the military values and its culture
on its own terms. They want the military
to look and behave like civilian society.
But military organizations are very different from democratic societies
with civil liberties and courts.
The film fails to understand that this problem goes beyond just
getting rid of some bad guys. This a
collision of cultures, of which most people in civilian society, unless they
have been in the military, have no awareness.
In civilian society victims are rewarded with sympathy, compassion,
support, and money. But the military
despises victims. This is evident from
the way the women who appeared in this film were treated. It amounts to callous contempt. In civilian society rape is a heinous
crime. In the military it is a minor
infraction, if it is an infraction at all.
What should be done? The
film advocates prosecuting rape in the military as is done in civilian society. This will require creating an adjunct
judicial system for the military that will have independence from the normal
military chain of command. I don't see
how this can be done consistent with maintaining the authority structure of the
military. If this is carried out, the
military will become a different kind of institution from what it is now. I expect the military will fiercely resist
this. But with greater numbers of women
entering the military and less need for male savagery and aggression, it may
eventually be forced upon it. Women
should be told when they enter the military the military culture is highly
sexual and they will be expected to participate in it. Part of bonding with fellow soldiers, male
and female, is sexual. If they fail to
do so, they may be coerced. That is, in
fact, the reality that they face, so why not be frank with them about it? Most of the ex-military women in the film offered
similar admonishments. One young woman
interviewed in the film, after being raped, called her father (a military man)
and tearfully told him that she was no longer a virgin. The man tearfully recounted the story for the
film (in his military uniform) and related that he told his daughter,
"You're still a virgin. Because it
was not your choice."
Characteristically military:
denial. In my opinion a woman who
wants to remain a virgin should not join the U.S. military. Legalizing commercial sex and relaxing
restrictive rules about fraternizing among troops might ease some of the
tension, but it might not address this problem of assault and rape of women,
because these crimes usually occur between people who are living in close
quarters and know each other. Greater segregation
of women from men both in living space and in gender roles would likely be
effective, but it would not be politically correct.
The film is well made and will certainly arouse sympathy for
the victims of rape among the civilians who see it, and will undoubtedly
mobilize pressure on the military for greater policing. I think, however, in our current
contradictory and convoluted American sexual culture, this problem is going to
be endemic in the military as long as the move toward integrating greater
numbers women into the service continues.
Seen at the San Francisco International Film Festival on April 23, 2012,
Sundance Kabuki Cinema, San Francisco, which, incidentally, is one of the most
congenial public movie theaters in the country.
Notes
1.
Patten, Eileen and Parker, Kim (2011)
Women in the U.S. Military: Growing Share, Distinctive Profile. Pew Research Center
2. Kime,
Patricia (2011) Troops Sexual Assault
Lawsuit Dismissed. Army Times. December 13,
2011. The film also reports these
numbers culled from U.S. government sources.
3. O'Grady, Liam; U.S. District Judge. Cioca v. Rumsfeld. December
9, 2011 Alexandria , VA
4. Zeeland, Steven
(1995) Sailors and Sexual Identity:
Crossing the Line Between "Straight" and "Gay" in
the U.S. Navy. New York: Harrington Park Press/ Haworth. p. 63.
5. Zeeland, p. 250
6. Zeeland, p. 18
7. Zeeland, p. 5
8. Zeeland, p. 5
9. Zeeland, p. 71
10. Burg, B. R. (1994) An
American Seafarer in the Age of Sail: The Erotic Diaries of Philip C. Van
Buskirk 1851-1870. New Haven and
London: Yale University Press.
p. xi.
11. Benemann, William (2006) Male-Male
Intimacy in Early America: Beyond
Romantic Friendships. New York: Haworth Press. p. 57.
12. Zeeland, p. 241
13. Zeeland, p. 250-51
14. Zeeland, p. 251
15. Burg, 1994, p. 91
16. Stephanie
Gutmann (2000) The Kinder,
Gentler Military: Can America's Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars
(Lisa Drew Books) New
York: Scribner. See
Chapter 2.