US Air Force brochure advises rape victims to 'submit to attack'

[Darth Vader]

by Arturo Garcia
[RawStory.com]

A sexual assault “prevention and response” brochure issued by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) advises victims to consider submitting to their attack, Wired magazine reported on Tuesday.

“It may be advisable to submit than to resist,” the guide (PDF) said in a section labeled, “If you are attacked,” saying victims should make that decisions based on the circumstances behind their attack while being “especially careful” if their attacker has a weapon.

However, there are no instructions in the brochure advising service members to not commit sexual assault. Each suggestion listed puts the responsibility for avoiding assault or rape on victims. The brochure also seems to be written with the assumption that rapists do not know their victims, despite statistics indicating that a vast majority of assaults are perpetrated by people who know their victims.

The author of the brochure is not listed, but it surfaced a day after the USAF’s Chief of Sexual Assault Prevention, Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski, was arrested for allegedly assaulting a woman in a Texas parking lot. Krusinski was charged with sexual battery. A report scheduled to be released on Tuesday will also show that more than 70 sexual assaults are committed against military members every day.

According to Wired, the brochure was issued to service members at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina.

 

[T90TankGuy]

by Arturo Garcia
[RawStory.com]

A sexual assault “prevention and response” brochure issued by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) advises victims to consider submitting to their attack, Wired magazine reported on Tuesday.

“It may be advisable to submit than to resist,” the guide (PDF) said in a section labeled, “If you are attacked,” saying victims should make that decisions based on the circumstances behind their attack while being “especially careful” if their attacker has a weapon.

However, there are no instructions in the brochure advising service members to not commit sexual assault. Each suggestion listed puts the responsibility for avoiding assault or rape on victims. The brochure also seems to be written with the assumption that rapists do not know their victims, despite statistics indicating that a vast majority of assaults are perpetrated by people who know their victims.

The author of the brochure is not listed, but it surfaced a day after the USAF’s Chief of Sexual Assault Prevention, Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski, was arrested for allegedly assaulting a woman in a Texas parking lot. Krusinski was charged with sexual battery. A report scheduled to be released on Tuesday will also show that more than 70 sexual assaults are committed against military members every day.

According to Wired, the brochure was issued to service members at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina.

considering the bold part i agree . one has to look at the circumstances , if one is faced with a weapon or many attackers it does not make sense to fight. they may get violent and the victim may end up loosing her life.

 

[livingdead]

considering the bold part i agree . one has to look at the circumstances , if one is faced with a weapon or many attackers it does not make sense to fight. they may get violent and the victim may end up loosing her life.

I agree, but it will be difficult to press rape charges, dont they rely on sign of resistance?

 

[T90TankGuy]

I agree, but it will be difficult to press rape charges, dont they rely on sign of resistance?

Not necessarily . usually the marks on the victims genitalia is taken as a sign . i am not sure of the specifics as i am not a medical person.

 

[gambit]

I agree, but it will be difficult to press rape charges, dont they rely on sign of resistance?

No. It is consent.

 

[Haseebullah]

No. It is consent.

With no sign of resistance the victim's lawyer would be fighting a lost case unless there is a recording of some kind or a witness.

Or unless US has some time machine or a mind reading device would do.

 

[gambit]

With no sign of resistance the victim's lawyer would be fighting a lost case unless there is a recording of some kind or a witness.

Or unless US has some time machine or a mind reading device would do.

You are wrong. If a woman is intoxicated and unconscious, any sex engaged will be considered as 'rape'. Consent is the standard. Or more precisely -- INFORMED CONSENT. An unconscious person cannot consent. A child cannot consent. It is only in primitive cultures that consider silence to be consent.

 

[livingdead]

You are wrong. If a woman is intoxicated and unconscious, any sex engaged will be considered as 'rape'. Consent is the standard. Or more precisely -- INFORMED CONSENT. An unconscious person cannot consent. A child cannot consent. It is only in primitive cultures that consider silence to be consent.

I guess you still did not get it. I was talking about how to prove it. How as a judge I would know that consent was given at that time or not?
Who is talking about intoxication / child here?

 

[acetophenol]

It'll be like living to fight another day.

 

[TheJewverine]

With no sign of resistance the victim's lawyer would be fighting a lost case unless there is a recording of some kind or a witness.

Or unless US has some time machine or a mind reading device would do.

You've got to be joking me right now...

 

[jhungary]

I guess you still did not get it. I was talking about how to prove it. How as a judge I would know that consent was given at that time or not?
Who is talking about intoxication / child here?

Let me shred some light on this. My Cousin is a Detective with LA County and he is doing what you see on TV "Law and Order : Criminal Intent"

To successfully charge a person rape, one must demonstrate 3 things in a public court.

A Penetration
Forced
Lack of Consent.

Basically, defensive wound (Scratches, bruises and cuts) are not submittable as evidence as this is circumstance. Any lawyer could have argue a "Rough" or "Passionate" sex during intercourse.

On the other hand of the spectrum, absent of objection does not also equal to "Consent" to the sex.

Skip the 2 parts because that is very much the most easiest understandable.

The lack of consent come from the term "Physically object" but in this term, physical does not mean you have to fight the rapist yourselves but rather an expressed decision of intention, basically, a "yes" and "no" is enough for anyone to prosecute in a rape case.

How to define the "Physical Objection" ? Investigator need to find evidence that during or before said sexual conduct occur, the defendant have express objection to said sexual intercourse. For the evidence to be able to come as a consideration, said "Physical objection" have to be witnessed by a witnesses. Otherwise prosecutor can include a Circumstance case with probable cause.

For example, If the woman is working and require a groomed appearance such as realtor, a defensive wound in the head while having sex can be construed to certain degree of rape. As it is unlikely the woman would "Consent" to such a beating and at some point, she would have registered an objection, hence making the rape claim legitimate.

If one cannot proof, beyond reasonable doubt, that the women did not express physical objection before or during the sex, the sexual intercourse are said to be an "consented" act.

Of course gambit had already covered the case if the victim cannot physically express objection.

 

[livingdead]

Let me shred some light on this. My Cousin is a Detective with LA County and he is doing what you see on TV "Law and Order : Criminal Intent"

To successfully charge a person rape, one must demonstrate 3 things in a public court.

A Penetration
Forced
Lack of Consent.

Basically, defensive wound (Scratches, bruises and cuts) are not submittable as evidence as this is circumstance. Any lawyer could have argue a "Rough" or "Passionate" sex during intercourse.

On the other hand of the spectrum, absent of objection does not also equal to "Consent" to the sex.

Skip the 2 parts because that is very much the most easiest understandable.

The lack of consent come from the term "Physically object" but in this term, physical does not mean you have to fight the rapist yourselves but rather an expressed decision of intention, basically, a "yes" and "no" is enough for anyone to prosecute in a rape case.

How to define the "Physical Objection" ? Investigator need to find evidence that during or before said sexual conduct occur, the defendant have express objection to said sexual intercourse. For the evidence to be able to come as a consideration, said "Physical objection" have to be witnessed by a witnesses. Otherwise prosecutor can include a Circumstance case with probable cause.

For example, If the woman is working and require a groomed appearance such as realtor, a defensive wound in the head while having sex can be construed to certain degree of rape. As it is unlikely the woman would "Consent" to such a beating and at some point, she would have registered an objection, hence making the rape claim legitimate.

If one cannot proof, beyond reasonable doubt, that the women did not express physical objection before or during the sex, the sexual intercourse are said to be an "consented" act.

Of course gambit had already covered the case if the victim cannot physically express objection.

thanks for informative post. Apart from witness you can use circumstantial evidence then. And what helps you is the wound in your head.
No wonder conviction of rape is so low. Marital rape will be a nightmare to decide (as judge) I think.

 

[Developereo]

Reminds me of this real-life story where a zookeeper was attacked by a tiger. The zookeeper kept quiet while the tiger was eating his calf because, if he made noise, the tiger would surely go for his throat.

 

[Thorough Pro]

Bolded parts explain it well, What do you expect when the instructions are issued by the attacker itself, and once they submit, there is no case. quite brilliant, but what happens to women liberation and equal rights of women in society that claims to champions of women rights.

by Arturo Garcia
[RawStory.com]

A sexual assault “prevention and response” brochure issued by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) advises victims to consider submitting to their attack, Wired magazine reported on Tuesday.

“It may be advisable to submit than to resist,” the guide (PDF) said in a section labeled, “If you are attacked,” saying victims should make that decisions based on the circumstances behind their attack while being “especially careful” if their attacker has a weapon.

However, there are no instructions in the brochure advising service members to not commit sexual assault. Each suggestion listed puts the responsibility for avoiding assault or rape on victims. The brochure also seems to be written with the assumption that rapists do not know their victims, despite statistics indicating that a vast majority of assaults are perpetrated by people who know their victims.

The author of the brochure is not listed, but it surfaced a day after the USAF’s Chief of Sexual Assault Prevention, Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski, was arrested for allegedly assaulting a woman in a Texas parking lot. Krusinski was charged with sexual battery. A report scheduled to be released on Tuesday will also show that more than 70 sexual assaults are committed against military members every day.

According to Wired, the brochure was issued to service members at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina.

 

[gambit]

I guess you still did not get it. I was talking about how to prove it. How as a judge I would know that consent was given at that time or not?
Who is talking about intoxication / child here?

No. YOU did not 'get it'. If lack of resistance is the criteria, then threat of physical violence, as in gun to the head, to induce submission would be sufficient for any rapist. In any case of 'he said, she said' about consent or lack thereof, it would be up to both combatants in court to prove the other wrong, but that still does not negate the morally superior position that informed consent is the criteria.

thanks for informative post. Apart from witness you can use circumstantial evidence then. And what helps you is the wound in your head.
No wonder conviction of rape is so low. Marital rape will be a nightmare to decide (as judge) I think.

Is that a jab at US? If so, may I enter the mud pit? India's recent news worthy events regarding sexual assaults in particular and attitude about women in general would be fertile ground for the mud slinging.