The Complex Dynamics Surrounding the Adoption of the Term "Military Sexual Trauma" by the UK Ministry of Defence
/The issue of sexual trauma within the UK military is a deeply sensitive and complex topic that demands careful consideration and understanding. One aspect of this discourse is the terminology used to describe such incidents, with "Military Sexual Trauma" (MST) being a term that has gained prominence across the world. However, the adoption of this term by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is not a straightforward process and is influenced by various factors. This blog will delve into the reasons why the MoD might hesitate to embrace the term MST, examining cultural, institutional, and policy-related aspects.
Stigma and Perception: One primary reason for the reluctance of the MoD to adopt the term MST may be the fear of perpetuating stigma. The use of the term itself acknowledges the prevalence of sexual trauma within the military, which some stakeholders may perceive as damaging to the institution's image. The military often values a strong and resilient image, and acknowledging the existence of sexual trauma may be seen as a threat to that perception.
Cultural Barriers: Military culture is often characterized by a sense of discipline, hierarchy, and camaraderie. The term MST may be viewed as disruptive to this culture, challenging the traditional norms that prioritise cohesion and unity. The acknowledgment of sexual trauma might be perceived as undermining the trust and brotherhood that is crucial for effective military operations.
Historical Context: The military has a long history of dealing with issues internally, and there might be a hesitation to adopt new terminology that implies a need for external intervention. Admitting to the prevalence of MST could open the door to increased scrutiny from external entities, including human rights organizations and the public. This historical context may create resistance within the military leadership to embrace the term.
Legal Implications: Accepting the term MST could have legal ramifications for the MoD. It might imply a level of accountability that the institution may be hesitant to shoulder. Legal implications could involve compensation claims, investigations, and potential changes in military justice procedures, which could be perceived as a threat to the established order.
Challenges in Implementation: Adopting the term MST would necessitate a significant shift in the way the military addresses and handles sexual trauma cases. This could require the development of new policies, training programs, and support systems. The logistical challenges associated with implementing these changes may be a factor in the resistance to adopting the term.
Internal Resistance and Denial: Within the military, there may be a resistance to acknowledging the extent of the problem. Some individuals in positions of authority might deny the prevalence of MST or downplay its significance, viewing it as an isolated issue rather than a systemic concern. This internal resistance can impede the adoption of the term within the organization.
Perceived Threat to Discipline: The military places a high value on discipline and order. Acknowledging the existence of sexual trauma within the ranks may be seen as a threat to discipline, as it implies a breakdown in control and a failure to maintain a safe and respectful environment. This perception could hinder the acceptance of the term MST.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the adoption of the term Military Sexual Trauma by the Ministry of Defence is a complex and multifaceted issue. Stigma, cultural barriers, historical context, legal implications, challenges in implementation, internal resistance, and the perceived threat to discipline are all factors that contribute to the hesitation in embracing this term. As society continues to evolve, it is essential for the military to address these issues transparently, fostering an environment that prioritises the well-being of its members while maintaining its core values and principles. The journey towards acknowledging and addressing military sexual trauma requires a delicate balance between accountability, cultural sensitivity, and a commitment to fostering a safer and more inclusive military environment. What we do know is, adopting a Catholic Church approach to dealing with sexual violence and abuse is not sustainable or morally acceptable in the short and long term.
Tony Wright CEO Forward Assist
