Domestic violence in the United States is pervasive, occurring in 25% of marriages, causing 31% of all murders of women, and spreading across race and class to impact half of the women in America (Heintz, 2003, p. 277). It is defined by the WHO as behavior in an intimate relationship causing physical, mental, or sexual harm (Kwan et.al, 2020). Legal redress is late, with Congress enacting the Violence Against Women Act in 1994, granting federal prosecution rights. States universally adopted civil protective order statutes (Heintz 2003, p. 279). Despite these, one jurisdiction remains outside of reach: federal military installations.

On military bases, rates of domestic violence are five times that of its civilian counterpart (Heintz 2003, p. 282). Base victims report to the Family Advocacy Program, with problems of requiring notice to the commanding officer as the authority, then leaving the review to a Case Review Committee with standards based on soldier’s performance, and not providing victim assistance (Heintz 2003, p. 285).

While the military does have responses ready for cases of severe domestic violence, there is no criteria for what counts as "severe". This is left up to the committee reviewing the case and the commanding officer (Chase 2016, p. 10). Cases investigated through the UCMJ often do not result in a conviction, furthering perpatrators' careers, but providing less victim protection. Furthermore, the victim is not allowed to witness proceedings or provide input from their experience (Chase 2016, p. 8).

Profiles of the Women Who Brought Salience to Military Base Domestic Violence: The 2002 Murders at Fort Bragg (Lutz 2004)

For military personnel, both male and female, clean records are vital to the success of their careers. In cases of domestic violence, the system lends itself to keeping incidents off the record. There are two options for reporting a domestic violence incident within the military, restricted and unrestricted. When a restricted report is filed, advice can be given to victims but no actions are taken against a perpetrator, keeping the abuser’s record clean even if there is knowledge of a domestic violence incident. In the case of an unrestricted report, there is no real assurance that any permanent action will be taken which could further complicate issues like custody proceedings in cases of divorce (Chase 2016, p. 7).

Bases bridge the gap between war and home for military personnel, as they often work and live all on the same property. Men or women could be in the civilian spouse role living on base or working on base. The non-military spouse living on base would be at a disadvantage in any domestic violence investigations as the military has jurisdiction over the case, any civilian victims dealing with perpetrators in the military can run into the issue of military jurisdiction over their cases. The military has jurisdiction over any case that may occur on base face intra-body military justice and its conflicts of interest, regardless of whether all parties involved are military.

There are several power dynamics at play when looking at domestic violence on military bases. Not only are we dealing with the power hierarchy of ranking for officials, with effective violence in war translating to promotions—thus potentially psychologically translating to domestic violence—but also the feminine-masculine hierarchy that values masculine “toughness” over the perceived “weakness” of abuse victims. These power dynamics play an important role when it comes to who reports abuse, who perpetrates it, who is actually punished for abuse, and how the military educates its personnel on domestic violence. In a line of work where violence is expected, necessary, and even celebrated, how are domestic violence victims treated when it follows them home?

Domestic violence is a growing issue within the United States. However, there is a shocking disparity between domestic violence in civilian life and that which occurs in the military. The military is built upon the view and norm that hyper masculinity is celebrated and insisted upon. However, there was not a salient solid connection between military life and domestic abuse until 2002 (Lutz 2004). There is a distinct feminization of the “victim” in military life, whether this be on the battle field or within the home. There is no training on making these two different scenarios distinct from one another, and on-base domestic violence is the obvious problem occurring because of it. Because of the differences between the feminized home and masculine, powerful war, victims of domestic violence are not necessarily taken seriously by the masculine hierarchy in place. This leads us into the second power structure that affects victims coming forward and consequences being brought upon the perpetrator.

When violence is perpetrated within the home on a military base, there is a process which reports have to go through before anything happens to the perpetrator. Through the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence's framework, the final decision of whether or not to punish or pursue the report falls on the commander of the perpetrator's unit. If the commander determines the soldier violated the UCMJ in battery, assault, threathening, or rape, an investigation must be furthered. The commander can also issue a military protective order without notifying the perpetrator, but it is only enforceable by that commander (Somerville 2009).

If the commander does not act in a self-interested manner, justice is possible for the victim, if the proper steps are taken. However, the military as a masculine-coded hierarchy affects the actions of some commanders. If a commander takes the initiative to investigate a soldier, that could be seen as them not having the “best” equipped soldiers in their unit. This leads to a loss of power within the system for that commander.

The last gendered power dynamic we’d like to discuss is one that revolves around the act of reporting and the potential consequences of that reporting. Within the military, there is a gendered ideal of the nuclear family when it comes to benefits received from being a part of the military service, providing the historically male soldier with benefits for his service, which he can then extend to his heteronormatively female spouse and dependents (Lutz 2004). Military spouses and families receive benefits from the military, such as education funding through the GI Bill, medical care, housing, insurance, etc. However, if a soldier is investigated and dishonorably discharged, these benefits are lost (Franklin and Kuennen 2021). With this dynamic, there is a loss of agency for the spouse of a perpetrator when it comes to reporting because of the fear for the loss of their financial and home stability. This gendered risk of reporting, lack of agency for victims, and the hierarchal structure through which reports must travel, domestic violence on military bases is an issue structured with imbalanced power dynamics throughout the military system.