Added: Cathrine Fallon - Date: 31.03.2022 03:44 - Views: 15216 - Clicks: 9074
The genealogy of sexual violence in war, inter-war and post-war periods can only be understood through an analysis of the relationship between gender, violence and sexuality. Armed conflicts function as a kind of magnifying glass, making visible definitions of sexual identity constructed through the legitimization of violence. Wartime crimes of sexual violence, viewed until now as limit phenomena characteristic of a state of exception, thus point to regularities whose form and function may vary but whose reference points are rooted in the social expression of power.
Human beings are never obliged to act violently, but can always do so; they are never obliged to kill, but can always do so — individually or collectively, together or separately; in all situations, fighting or partying; in different states of mind, enraged, without rage, willingly, unwillingly, screaming or in silence the silence of death and with all imaginable purposes — any person can do it.
In this article, I shall try to demonstrate that a similarly unequivocal unanimity is difficult to achieve in the case of sexual violence. The genesis and specificities of the theoretical approach to the subject of violence, especially in sociology, are themselves explicit subjects for debate in the Institute, as a perusal of our journal, Mittelweg 36will show. In the context of these debates, the aim is increasingly to analyse the extent to which certain concrete forms of violence manifest a hierarchy of masculinity and femininity through action.
Sexual identity constructs are defined essentially through the body. Although it is clearly unsatisfactory to consider the body as a historically immutable and self-evident entity, and although discourse analysis may prove useful in deconstructing bodily constructs in order to overcome restrictive preconceptions, it is nevertheless necessary to simultaneously understand and thematize the factual existence of the body and the respective perception of pain within a particular historical and cultural environment of life and experience.
Therefore, as Popitz states, there is power to injure on one side, and a vulnerability to injury on the other. The attribution of a gender identity to these positions the man with the power to wound and the woman vulnerable to be wounded is well known, and all too often considered an anthropological constant derived from the assumed particularities of biological sex.
I expressly mention these somewhat obvious commonplaces because, strangely enough, theory has often overlooked them. He is on top of me and with this he annihilates me. However, as in the past, it continues to come up against the persistent subconscious idea that rape and sexual violence are ambivalent acts, in which the aggressor-victim positions are ambiguous.
Blood runs, sperm is spilt, and tears are wept, not only of pain, but also of shame. The rapist himself — to the extent that he uses his body, or more precisely, his penis — cannot avoid feeling sexual excitement, even if violence, rather than sexual pleasure, motivates the act. Suk describes how she was treated by Officer Nakamora:.
Nakamora took out his penis and he undressed me and I was so afraid. He forced me to lie on the floor and injured me with his bayonet and I bled. He took off my pants and raped me until I bled. Every night we pray for war. Five, six, seven, eight. We should not assume that recruits take this view of war literally.
However, these and other similar examples from military jargon undermine the argument that the association of sexual pleasure and pleasure in inflicting violence is only generated through brutalization during the course of warfare. Porter, a companion, beats his victim unconscious in order to get what he wants. Then, he helps her to dress, gives her some money and asks where the nearest phone booth is as he has to find his way back to Kingsclere.
These soldiers have not been brutalized by combat; they are young men serving in supply units. This is what is in fact found in both civilian and military scenarios. Although sexual violence increases substantially in war and has specific functions in that context, it brings with it premises that have arisen in peacetime or rather, in periods between warsand is not exhausted after the war.
I sent the others away — she tried to get away by way of the toilets. Seeing her like that heightened my sexual arousal. I undressed her, she was naked and I raped her brutally, beat her with my rifle. However, we need to analyse more closely the extent to which the fear felt by the aggressor fear of losing control, of losing his life in combat is in turn actively discharged in the form of aggression, particularly against women.
I will return to this question later. She was crying. I think, she was a virgin. We pulled her pants down and put a gun to her head. Guys were standing over her with rifles, while I was screwing her. So a guy just put a rifle on her head and pulled a trigger just to put her out of the picture.
She was disgusting, full of sperm. More research is required to understand the extent to which these situations should be considered the consequence of crimes practised in wars or as an autonomous phenomenon. This member of the peacekeeping forces has clearly no problem confessing to satisfying a sexual desire of this type, and is only concerned with how to avoid being punished for his act.
He seems to have found the solution: killing the victim, the witness to the crime. The idea that he has of himself as peacekeeper does not seem to have been shaken by this incident.
The association between sexuality and violence in war is by no means taboo, as is frequently claimed; on the contrary, in war propaganda or in subtexts such as war narratives, it is explicitly present as a natural consequence of the state of exception that is war, or as collateral damage.
At the same time, it nevertheless seems to have escaped public and theoretical debate. They would undressed a man, line the rest of us [men] up and make us perform oral sex on him, another prisoner.
Askin, If any prisoner had an erection, his penis was cut off. Behind the pretext of wanting to protect victims from renewed exposure, women are still secretly being blamed for being sexual subjects that transgress their boundaries and before whom men are helpless. s by victims show how important it is for them that their social environment recognises as an injustice what happened to them as subjects including the humiliationand to know whether it attributes this to the aggressor or stigmatizes the victim as a shamed and dishonoured object.
Louise du Toit argues:. I believe we need to critically interrogate these feelings rather than simply affirm them. Rape victims much more than other victims say of car crashes resist the associations of powerlessness tied up with the term "victim" because powerlessness lies at the heart of the humiliation and injury of rape.
It is thus important to address the root of the problem women's lack of political subjectivity and agency rather than be satisfied with superficial linguistic changes. One does not become a survivor by denying the extent to which one has been a victim. In fact, such a stoic denial of victimhood with its emphasis on the victim's agency and resilience may well inadvertently prevent thorough investigations such as the one undertaken here into the ways in which wider societal beliefs endorse a rapist ethic.
However, in war, where masculinity is constructed most sharply and its characteristics are most in demand, the construction of masculinity is also shown to be particularly fragile. The combatant, who is required to kill and therefore granted the disposition to do so power of aggressionalso has to come to terms with his own vulnerability, with the possibility of being killed.
Another variant consists of escaping subjugation through the violation of an opposite. Occasional voluntary individual acts, which are always predictable and can be counted on from the outset, are in principle punished. Indeed, they may be opposed in the most grotesque fashion, as in the case quoted by Johanna Bourke regarding the My Lai massacre of 16 Marchwhen women were raped and killed in the most cruel manner:.
However, Lieutenant [William L. He recalled that at one stage during the bloody morning, he came across Dennis Conti forcing a young mother to give him oral sex. Rape: In Vietnam it's a very common thing. So why was I being saintly about it? Because: if a GI is getting a blow job, he isn't doing his job. He isn't destroying communism Our mission in My Lai wasn't perverted, though. It was simply 'Go and destroy it'. He isn't combat-effective. What was expected of him was that he should use his capacity for sexual violence in a way that was combat-effective. This emerges in a particularly clear manner in asymmetrical wars.
The classic distinction between the home front and the war front has become obsolete: the constellations of belligerent powers and theatres of war have altered. It is therefore necessary to analyse the consequences of these changes for the form of bellic violence in discussion here. And to deal with frictions or get around them, it is necessary to know them. General Patton, mentioned above, tried hard to fulfil precisely this requirement.
A glance at military training practices shows how these instruments are radically determined by conceptions of sexual identity. Frank J. The slang of both the soldiers and their military instructors is riddled with sexism. It is clear that a real hatred of women could be constructed from this, a hatred that is unlikely to be manifested in combat situations alone. The feeling of being in the hands of an impersonal machine of destruction and powerless on the battlefield, and the awareness that you might die at any moment [makes] soldiers turn into themselves in an existential way. The certainty of being part of a group and of being able to count on your companions may not be able to eliminate this experience of atomization, though it may compensate for it a little.
The need to be a man is part of what is most commonly expected from a soldier. It corresponds to social conceptions of the army as an agency of socialization, it is inscribed as a subtext in military training programmes, and also forms a central part of the code of conduct of primary groups.
These are constituted not only as communities of protection and solidarity, but also as egalitarian leagues of men, which produce cohesion through the devaluation of supposedly feminine characteristics and exteriorise homoerotic libido by transforming it into aggression. However, as some examples show, it occurs on a regular basis. In the spring ofthe New York Times reported that male prisoners detained by Russian troops in a camp in Grozny, Chechenia, heard the screams of men being raped by their captors.
It was also reported that the aggressors gave female names to their victims after the rape Lilly, They [the Serbian soldiers] took us outside, and one by one, they beat us and pulled teeth… They tortured us in all possible ways. They would take two brothers … and force them to have sexual intercourse We would hear through the gates how they ordered men to molest or rape one another. Testimony quoted in Askin, They declared that they had been anally penetrated or that iron bars had been inserted into them.
By denying their own sexual subjugation to male brutality, they form a brotherhood with rapists that conspires against their own wives, mothers and daughters. Sexual violence does not occur without social objectives and patterns, or in a social vacuum. It has specific meanings for the enemies, the victims and the aggressors, respectively.
However, it is precisely this that makes them a target for aggression. They symbolize the territory that has to be defended, and whose profanation is particularly humiliating. However, violence perpetrated on female subjects is omitted from the narrative of war. Thus, the reports of mass rapes in Belgium during the First World War, which so shocked public opinion, thematized not so much the suffering of women as the humiliation of the nation by brutalized enemies, with clear propaganda intentions on both sides.
Thus, a soldier that had visited Dachau before an act of rape argued that a woman being undressed by three Americans was nothing compared to what had happened in the concentration camp Lilly, The sexual crimes committed in this scenario, as occasional and individual acts, had no military meaning and contravened the rules; as such, they were indeed punished ibidem : Nevertheless, these attempts at disciplinary control are not comforting, as they are not directed strictly and systematically against the practice of sexual violence.
The Kommandant strode ahead in his stiff breeches and pounding boots. Instinctively, I followed, my head cast down, my eyes on the graveled road.Women wanting Serbia sex
email: [email protected] - phone:(904) 290-6185 x 5000
Reproductive rights and the state in Serbia and Croatia