6 ms·

Did the book address the topic of rapes by US soldiers? This was a big issue after liberation, and still is a major issue near US bases nowadays (in particular

Did the book address the topic of rapes by US soldiers? This was a big issue after liberation, and still is a major issue near US bases nowadays (in particular Okinawa).

fvdessen 5y ago
No. 75 years later this topic is still taboo
- orwin 5y ago
  It's honestly not taboo anymore. Multiple history books have breached the subject, and we can now say that while they were rape from US soldiers, the sentiments were inflated because the liberation let a lot of locals distraught, angry an hungry. Also US military had a bad reputation for multiple other reasons (some racism maybe, but also the bombing and the fact that they sort of replaced the germans as an occupation forces (it was temporary however). When looking for stories about US rapes, historian saw that the sotries were extremely localized (None came from brittany, although this was one of the first liberated area and also a poor one). Also, US soldier were rude, assertive and agressive towards women, and this was caused by racism and too much ego (French woman image from back home and stories from WW1, and their own self-inflated image)
  - eplanit 5y ago
    "US soldier were rude, assertive and agressive towards women, and this was caused by racism and too much ego" Do you regard French and Americans as different races?
    - Jasper_ 5y ago
      What's considered "a different race" has changed over the years and the classifications we have today is mostly along social and political boundaries. Before WWII, Polish natives were often seen as of a different race, today we would consider them Caucasian. Note how the remaining big race classifications recognized by the US Census are divided up mostly based around areas with which we still have some political tension or heavy political history: Asian, Middle-Eastern European, Latin American and African, and Native American and Native Alaskan, and Hawaiian.
      - eplanit 5y ago
        I think you're conflating race with ethnicity and nationality, which makes all three concepts meaningless.
        fridif 5y ago
        The only thing meaningless here is your attempt to be poetic.
        rvense 5y ago
        The connotations of the term race has changed. It was definitely common in the fairly recent past (WWI) for English people to speak of Germans as a different race, indeed using the term more like we would use ethnicity today. See also the English division of India into martial and non-martial "races". You are implying a use of the term which is more influenced by biology and some vague, folksy notion of genetic/darwinian relation, often focused on skin color etc. I understand your distinction. but it is, almost by definition, more modern.
        eplanit 5y ago
        The definitions I've known have remained stable until very recently. I'll stick with Race: genetics; Ethnicity: the group/tribe one "grows up" or is most shaped by; Nationality: the country you're in/from. They can all align to (mostly) one group, like in India and China, or can be mostly aligned like in northern Europe, or a melting pot like the US. It's the "connotations" (i.e. conflations) that are the reason that almost everything is labeled "racist".
        Jasper_ 5y ago
        Please try and define "genetics" in a way that isn't, in some way, sociopolitical. To give one example out of many thousands across history, still somewhat alive today: do you consider South Koreans and Japanese people to be the same race? Do you know if those groups consider themselves to be of the same race? The concept of race very much predates our understanding of genetics, which is a relatively modern science.
unishark 5y ago
Question 81 mentions problems caused by US soldiers. Crimes by foreigners generally cause a lot of outrage, regardless how common they are. I saw stats a few years ago that had the crime rates of US troops in Japan lower than the native population. While the crime rates of immigrants was higher than natives. But one of these topics is politically correct and the other is not.
- lukebuehler 5y ago
  Yep just came across it as well: > If you were a French soldier, whose land had been invaded, whose wife or sister or mother had been taken into a German concentration camp and raped or killed, you might have found it difficult to control Your emotions. > Lastly, a good many French women have been in terror of American troops, especially in Paris. Our SIP records testify to a deplorable amount of drunkenness, molesting of women and street fights -- by americans.
- watwut 5y ago
  You cant compare general crime rates of soldiers today, when it is big political problem and army does a lot to cut it down. Up to disallowing soldiers to even leave the base. With rape specifically after war, years ago in completely different situation.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  Not sure you want to call rape (or crime in general) by the local population "politically correct".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

Did the book address the topic of rapes by US soldiers? This was a big issue after liberation, and still is a major issue near US bases nowadays (in particular Okinawa).

fvdessen 5y ago

No. 75 years later this topic is still taboo

orwin 5y ago
It's honestly not taboo anymore. Multiple history books have breached the subject, and we can now say that while they were rape from US soldiers, the sentiments were inflated because the liberation let a lot of locals distraught, angry an hungry. Also US military had a bad reputation for multiple other reasons (some racism maybe, but also the bombing and the fact that they sort of replaced the germans as an occupation forces (it was temporary however). When looking for stories about US rapes, historian saw that the sotries were extremely localized (None came from brittany, although this was one of the first liberated area and also a poor one). Also, US soldier were rude, assertive and agressive towards women, and this was caused by racism and too much ego (French woman image from back home and stories from WW1, and their own self-inflated image)
- eplanit 5y ago
  "US soldier were rude, assertive and agressive towards women, and this was caused by racism and too much ego" Do you regard French and Americans as different races?
  - Jasper_ 5y ago
    What's considered "a different race" has changed over the years and the classifications we have today is mostly along social and political boundaries. Before WWII, Polish natives were often seen as of a different race, today we would consider them Caucasian. Note how the remaining big race classifications recognized by the US Census are divided up mostly based around areas with which we still have some political tension or heavy political history: Asian, Middle-Eastern European, Latin American and African, and Native American and Native Alaskan, and Hawaiian.
    - eplanit 5y ago
      I think you're conflating race with ethnicity and nationality, which makes all three concepts meaningless.
      - fridif 5y ago
        The only thing meaningless here is your attempt to be poetic.
      - rvense 5y ago
        The connotations of the term race has changed. It was definitely common in the fairly recent past (WWI) for English people to speak of Germans as a different race, indeed using the term more like we would use ethnicity today. See also the English division of India into martial and non-martial "races". You are implying a use of the term which is more influenced by biology and some vague, folksy notion of genetic/darwinian relation, often focused on skin color etc. I understand your distinction. but it is, almost by definition, more modern.
        eplanit 5y ago
        The definitions I've known have remained stable until very recently. I'll stick with Race: genetics; Ethnicity: the group/tribe one "grows up" or is most shaped by; Nationality: the country you're in/from. They can all align to (mostly) one group, like in India and China, or can be mostly aligned like in northern Europe, or a melting pot like the US. It's the "connotations" (i.e. conflations) that are the reason that almost everything is labeled "racist".
        Jasper_ 5y ago
        Please try and define "genetics" in a way that isn't, in some way, sociopolitical. To give one example out of many thousands across history, still somewhat alive today: do you consider South Koreans and Japanese people to be the same race? Do you know if those groups consider themselves to be of the same race? The concept of race very much predates our understanding of genetics, which is a relatively modern science.

unishark 5y ago

Question 81 mentions problems caused by US soldiers. Crimes by foreigners generally cause a lot of outrage, regardless how common they are. I saw stats a few years ago that had the crime rates of US troops in Japan lower than the native population. While the crime rates of immigrants was higher than natives. But one of these topics is politically correct and the other is not.

lukebuehler 5y ago
Yep just came across it as well: > If you were a French soldier, whose land had been invaded, whose wife or sister or mother had been taken into a German concentration camp and raped or killed, you might have found it difficult to control Your emotions. > Lastly, a good many French women have been in terror of American troops, especially in Paris. Our SIP records testify to a deplorable amount of drunkenness, molesting of women and street fights -- by americans.
watwut 5y ago
You cant compare general crime rates of soldiers today, when it is big political problem and army does a lot to cut it down. Up to disallowing soldiers to even leave the base. With rape specifically after war, years ago in completely different situation.
JKCalhoun 5y ago
Not sure you want to call rape (or crime in general) by the local population "politically correct".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]