A first-of-its-kind investigation by The Intercept found that the greatest threats to women serving in the Army come at the hands of male soldiers.

…

Analyzing over 14 years of Defense Department death data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, The Intercept’s investigation is the first to compare rates of violence against women in the Army to factors like duty location, jobs, and relationships with perpetrators. The FOIA data also reveals deaths not previously announced by the Army and the Department of Defense.

Violence against women in the military also appears to take a mental toll. In addition to the 41 women who died by homicide, another 128 died by suicide, the majority of them lower-ranking enlisted soldiers. From 2011 to 2024, the last complete year of data, homicide and suicide rates for women in the Army were double their equivalents for women nationwide.

The Army doesn’t make any of this public, and the Intercept’s investigation has found flaws in what data collection currently occurs: Homicide and suicide death rates are not separated by gender or calculated per capita, preventing deeper analysis and comparison.

There’s also nothing publicly accessible on how many homicides are committed by service members, who their victims are, or where homicides occurred. The Defense Department’s annual suicide report doesn’t note how many of the deceased had experiences with sexual assault or harassment.

Meanwhile, systems meant to protect women are being rolled back and dismantled.

…

  • velma@sh.itjust.works
    35·
    3 days ago

    That’s not what they’re comparing though. They’re comparing the rates of homicide and violence against women in the army against rates of violence against women in general.

    The title doesn’t need to mention men.

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      51·
      3 days ago

      The headline does not compare women in the army to women in general.

      The headline compares fellow soldiers to enemy combatants (in the context of the deaths of women in the army).

      The argument you’re making is a core part of the problem, because the rest of the article does indeed mostly compare the violence against women in the army to violence against women in general. But if that’s what the article is about, why does the headline state something completely different? This is the problem.

      • velma@sh.itjust.works
        15·
        3 days ago

        Did you read the article?

        It goes into detail and does compare the violence women in the army experience to general population of women.

        Talking about women doesn’t necessitate talking about men.