Rape as a weapon of war

I don't see it as a choice as much as a removal of inhibition.
And it says what we already fear, that beneath a thin, easily discarded veneer of civility many, many men are animals.

I have been disturbed by the number of people who are genuinely shocked that rape is occurring in a war situation.

War = weapons + rape.

It's rare for it not to occur in war, to the point where I'd assume any war which is declared not to have rape used is full of victims who are too ashamed to talk about it. The only thing that varies is the amount of rape, amount of mass rape/rape camps, and the extent to which men and children of both sexes are raped.

We had rape camps in Europe just 30 years ago. Very sadly, it's nothing new but we prefer to pretend it is rather than examine what it is about men that makes them feel it's acceptable if they can't be caught.

I don't blame people for being shocked though when the media is reporting it as though it's the first time ever in order to sensationalise it. It's despicable, irresponsible reporting.

I spoke to a male friend about this and asked if he thought all men had the capacity to act like this when given the "correct" psychological context, if you get me. He (a gay man, if it's relevant) thought about it said yes. Obviously he's just one person and that's his opinion but it made me feel incredibly sad.
I (a woman) simply cannot understand the psychology behind this kind of rape.

Its always been a war tactic, designed to humilate and break morale. They already have dehumanised the opposing side, otherwise they wouldnt be able to shoot/fight them.

Rape as a weapon of war, has always been used against the other since history began. Sadly, it’s nothing new and horrifically it’s one of the first things to occur when a war starts.

Honestly as time goes on, I am starting to believe that it's the natural state of the majority of men and we just slap a veneer of civilisation on it.

The usual rules have been suspended- you must kill other people, Adrenalin is constant, fear, revulsion have been over ridden.

Take away the moral framework.

There are
no repercussions,
no justice,
never going to meet your victim or her relatives socially,
no disapproval,
no sanctions,
no need to look your family in the eye for a few months.

All bets are off about how people behave in that situation.

As Soviet forces invaded eastern Germany in Ww2 rape was endemic. As a way to show power, humiliate the defeated, and because they could.in a number of African wars in recent times. In Cologne and other western countries at new tear and as part of the jihad against the west.
Humiliate the enemy's women, make them unattractive to their men, and if they get pregnant "one more for the revolution".

Vile sickening and abhorrent.

It's not just rape that happens in war, there are many forms of torture where innocent victims are brutalised, and it would be unusual if rape were not used as a means of torture in this situation. Gaining a military advantage, or even killing people unnecessarily, does not seem to be enough. I won't repeat examples here, but I'm sure many of you have read the reports coming out of Ukraine.

Given the nature of war I'm saddened but not surprised by any of this.

I too am shocked.
I want to know how a man can get an erection and pleasure from rape especially when people are resisting.
Also why does it occur on a mass scale and so early on in wars?

Are the commanded to do it?

It makes me think that most men would rape a woman if there were no punishment.

What does that say about men?

I read a book about the Long March (Mao China) and women joined because they were told it was discouraged in Mao's army. That seems to have been the case. So when the culture is not to, they don't (as much). Which means the culture in most armies is one of rape.

The Russians have always been famous for being particularly brutal for rape in war. And their culture currently allows quite horrifying levels of violence towards Russian women so other women will be even less worthy of empathy and compassion.

I think it's BOTH a weapon AND something a significant proportion of men do when all typical mores are removed. Fucking depressing. Especially since this isn't a years long occupation. It's been a month.

Not sure if the links will work in here but I found both of these interesting. The first is particularly comprehensive.

www.hrw.org/legacy/women/docs/rapeinwar.htm

womensmediacenter.com/women-under-siege/why-soldiers-rapeand-when-they-dontin-diagrams

I'm sickened that this happens but not shocked at all. These men are pumped up to kill - the ultimate dehumanisation. They are killing other men so it's no surprise that they can rape women with impunity. But, as @Jobseeker19 said above - that they can get an erection is something I can't begin to comprehend. But then men in society generally can get erections to rape without being pumped up to kill - although some do that too.

I'm old and I remember the Iraqi's invading Kuwait but you never heard of rape in that war and I always wondered why Was it because they were muslim and therefore more respectful of muslim women in Kuwait?

Women were too frightened to admit it had happened, for fear of being blamed and ostracised.

But if the women don't admit it happens then how do we know it does?

All rules go out of the window when there is a violent, heinous and bloody war. Men bomb children or hack them to pieces, what makes you think they should know better than to rape? I expect rape to have been used as a weapon in most wars. How many American soldiers raped Iraqis? How many Congolese girls, boys and women are being raped? It's awful but not shocking, I expect it. In fact it would shock me to find that women weren't being raped. One of the reasons I can't stand romanticised war movies. War is cruel, Repulsive, violent and should be avoided at all costs. Where men are bombing and pillaging they are surely raping too you can count on it.

It's the fact that a man can only commit rape in wartime if he is "Enjoying" doing it that disturbs me most. It just makes you wonder if there is a high percentage of men among us who would be raping women right, left and centre if they thought they could get away with it.

I’m in no way endorsing it or saying it’s acceptable, it’s not, but it has occurred as part of war since time immemorial so why would you suddenly be shocked now?

War does terrible psychological damage to everyone involved, one way or another.

Terrible psychological damage leads humans to do a lot of terrible things they should not otherwise do.

It’s a cycle of harm.

Waging war requires taking normal human people and persuading them that they need to, and can, and should, cause deliberate harm to other humans.

The whole war situation comes with a built-in guarantee of creating situations where harm happens on a massive scale, and psychologically damaged humans are an inevitable by-product.

Theres no shock in knowing rape happens amidst war.

That link from the women's media center is very good - clear, concise, even with some hope at the end, and I am actually comforted that there is someone researching this.

From that article, they suspect that it's a cultural thing (as in the culture of that particular fighting force, not of the place they're from) - much like there are schools where bullying or not doing homework is rife, and schools where that is unimaginable, and those schools might be right next to each other, just have very different school-culture and expectations from the staff and students

I think rape in war says more about how evil war is than about men to be honest.
You can’t be forced to murder other humans in extremely violent ways and it not affect you, perhaps even drive you insane and result in you not being able to stop being violent.

Yes. You only have to read a little about any historical or current war to discover that.
I was just reading that at the Battle of Hastings the Normans cut the genitalia of the English prisoners.
It was only mentioned because it was considered particularly brutal at that time.

You must have forgotten about the rape. It was widely reported at the time.
www.newsweek.com/kuwait-rape-nation-201584

“But in Kuwait, Iraqi soldiers raped at will. Their victims included Filipino housemaids as well as Kuwaiti women. Samia al-Husallam, a medical student, said she was dumping her garbage when she discovered the nude body of a young Kuwaiti woman stuffed in a basket--apparently the victim of a gang rape.”

@MrsTerryPratchett
”I read a book about the Long March (Mao China) and women joined because they were told it was discouraged in Mao's army. That seems to have been the case. So when the culture is not to, they don't (as much). Which means the culture in most armies is one of rape.”

Im not sure I am understanding you correctly. The Long March was when Maos Red Army retreated on what was essentially a death March as only 10% of his followers survived it. His Army had both men and women in it, and yes raping women in your own Army was discouraged. But rape of women associated with the bourgeoisie enemy was definitely part of the culture and done by roaming gangs of Red Guard from the Red Army. They’d rape, murder and pillage as they went.

Its pretty standard that the culture of rape in war is that raping women on your side is discouraged (but still happens), while raping women on the enemy’s side can be anything from commanded to encouraged to enabled.

Maos Army was no different from every other Army.