The issue of sexual assault in the military has been in the news a lot this past week. I suspected I knew a major reason for the majority of sexual assaults in the military, but I was concerned that I might be making unfounded assumptions or generalizations without sufficient evidence to support it. I did a couple of hours of Internet research today, and found a study published with the National Center for Biotechnology Information, a government-sponsored web site. My “uninformed assumption” on the subject appears to have data to support it, in the form of a study called “Predicting Sexual Assault Perpetration in the US Army Using Administrative Data“, NIHMSID: NIHMS917120 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072/)
In this study, the researchers obtained data from several Army databases that kept track of service personnel arrested for some sort of sexual assault:
“This study investigated administratively-recorded sexual assault perpetration among the 821,807 male Army soldiers serving 2004–2009.” (“Predicting Sexual Assault Perpetration in the US Army Using Administrative Data”, NIHMSID: NIHMS917120, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072/)
The study looked at what were considered only “founded cases” of sexual assault, i.e., cases for which the Army found sufficient evidence to warrant a full investigation, even if there was no conviction:
“Six HADS databases were used to obtain information on date, type, and judicial outcome of all reported crimes occurring over the study period. Crime types were coded according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) classification system.24 Qualifying sexual assault crimes included (Appendix Table 2): rape (i.e., forcible vaginal intercourse), forcible sodomy (i.e., attempted or forcible oral or anal sex), and “other” sexual assault (i.e., attempted rape, fondling, indecent assault). The outcomes were founded cases; that is, cases for which the Army found sufficient evidence to warrant full investigation regardless of whether the investigation resulted in a formal conviction.” (Id, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072/)
The sample size of the persons studied seems to be described here, although I am no expert on statistics:
“A total of 4,640 men had records indicating an occurrence of sexual assault perpetration against non-family adults, 1,384 against non-family minors, 380 against intra-family adults, and 335 against intra-family minors. All four outcomes included perpetrations against both opposite-sex and same-sex victims, though data were not available to distinguish between the two.” (Id, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072/ )
If I understand it correctly, the study looked at what are known to be common predictors of sexual assault in the military world:
“Predictors
As mentioned in the introduction, there is a rich civilian literature on risk factors for sexual assault perpetration,9–11 but few studies have examined these risk factors among military personnel.12,13 A considerably larger literature has examined predictors of any (physical or sexual) violence perpetration among military personnel.27–34 As reviewed by Elbogen and colleagues,35 four broad classes of predictors have been identified in these military studies: socio-demographic and dispositional predictors (e.g., sex, race-ethnicity, personality); historical predictors (e.g., childhood experiences, military career experiences, prior violence); clinical predictors (e.g., mental and physical disorders); and contextual-environmental predictors (e.g., access to weapons).”” (“Predicting Sexual Assault Perpetration in the US Army Using Administrative Data”, NIHMSID: NIHMS917120, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072/ , emphasis added.)
In other words, the above says that gender (presumably being male) and one’s race are predictors for committing sexual assault. I’m sure you’ve already guessed which race if you are at all honest with yourself. The article sums this up here:
“Non-family adult predictors Unmarried, racial-ethnic minority, and combat support or service support soldiers had elevated odds of perpetration against a non-family adult.” (“Predicting Sexual Assault Perpetration in the US Army Using Administrative Data”, NIHMSID: NIHMS917120, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683072 , emphasis added.)
In other words, non-white males who are single, and are not likely to be involved in combat, are the most likely to commit rapes against adult people (likely women) that are not family members.
The study’s Table 2 seems to give the odds that a member of a particular category will commit a sexual assault, although I’m not certain of this, because I’m no expert on statistics. The percentages don’t add up to 100%, so I’m not sure what these mean exactly. But, it lists “Race/ethnicity – Non-Hispanic Black” at 18.2%, and “Race/ethnicity – Non-White” at 34.7%.
Essentially, what seem to be the predictors for persons who commit rape in the civilian world are the same in the military. Black people commit a disproportionate share of the rapes in the civilian world, and they appear to also commit a disproportionate share of the rapes in the military world.
None of this will be addressed in the news media or in Congress, of course. Recognizing reality on this topic isn’t conducive to keeping one’s job as a reporter or getting elected to public office in the society we live in today. It would call into question too many sacred cows.
