What is the reason for sadistic hazing and sexual abuse in the military?
Is it that the end of the Cold War has deprived young military trainees of a real enemy and so they are turning on each other? Or is there some basic need among Marines, soldiers and sailors to attack someone physically less powerful or lower in rank?And what is the point? Obviously, it's not a show of strength. When the victims are younger, more inexperienced or smaller, it is more a show of cowardice. I simply don't understand the thrill an upperclassman at the formerly all-male Citadel could feel in terrorizing female cadets that they both outrank and outweigh.
It proves nothing except that muscle overrides gray matter among too many Citadel cadets.
I believe it has more to do with male hormones than some feeling of bravado instilled in military recruits to prepare them for combat. You just don't hear much about sorority sisters beating pins into each other or lighting the clothes of pledges on fire.
Of course, the majority of servicemen are never involved in such incidents. The majority of men are caring, compassionate, reasonable people.
Still, call me sexist, but, whether it's instilled by parental prodding at a young age or caused by glands, aggression seems to be gender-related for the minority of males who get out of control. And it has something to do with proving superiority and a men's club mentality. The Citadel is a good example.
Many cadets and even administrators at the all-male school held onto the idea that allowing women to enroll would somehow diminish its high standards even after a federal court ruled the state-supported institution had no right to tack a "boys only" label on the door.
And now, a dozen upperclass cadets are in trouble for the mistreatment of two of the Citadel's first female cadets. One girl has reported she was kicked, hit and shoved while being forced to stand in a closet, and both said their clothing was lit on fire.
A couple of more recent twists have thickened the plot. After the two female cadets left the school and reported the incidents of hazing, the school's interim president suggested that the two women might have been drummed out of the military school earlier had he not been "committed to getting them through their first year."
In other words, the temporary president tried to put the blame for the problem at the feet of the two women and excuse the school and the male cadets. The message was that somehow the women must have deserved this. Amazing. He went so far as to hint the two had "disciplinary problems" but could only think of one: They violated school policy by cutting their hair extremely short.
Incredibly, he actually said, "I saw this as a lapse of discipline." Somehow, such a horrific discipline lapse as a short haircut - at a school that demands male cadets shave their heads - can justify such things as lighting someone's clothing on fire?
In time-honored military style, the men at the school stuck together - against two women they all obviously saw as the enemy. The president said, as the investigation was getting under way, ". . . The male cadets are going to deny a lot of these things. I think the male cadets are also going to have witnesses who are going to justify their denials."
Nothing like a truly objective review of the problem.
This week the school announced that one male cadet has been expelled, one restricted to campus for the rest of the semester and made to march 120 hours and eight others given lesser punishments. Three others who were implicated have already left school.
It seems the denials and witnesses the president expected failed to sufficiently blame the women for their own problems. The FBI and state investigators are continuing to look into the incidents to determine if criminal charges are also possible.
Ironically, the school president now says, "I hope what we teach them (the punished cadets) is what we failed to teach them last time." What he failed to teach them was that school administrators would not support inhumane treatment among cadets at the school. Instead, he taught them to first try to blame the victim once you are caught and then try to minimize the crime.
It's ironic that these young men apparently believe that their sadistic behavior could somehow improve the image of the school they say they're trying to protect by keeping women out. Somehow, they think it's preferable to act like animals than to share space with female humans.
There are some who find some incomprehensible enjoyment in terrorizing someone who is weaker or not in a position to defend themselves. When such behavior within its own ranks is not thoroughly and immediately expurgated, is it any surprise when the military has to deal with soldiers or Marines who rape and assault civilians and female trainees and officers who embarrass the service with their conduct?
It's time military men who have the "males only" mind-set begin to accept the inevitable: Women will be working, fighting and learning alongside them because they are qualified to do the job, and our country needs their talents and skills. We need a few good men - and a few good women.
Deseret News editorial writer Marilyn Karras may be reached by e-mail at karras@desnews.com