Panel Investigating Air Force Academy's Mishandling of Sexual Assault Charges Resembles "Fox Guarding the Hen House"

June 13, 2003

by NOW Staff

How ironic that Anita K. Blair, founder of the anti-feminist Independent Women's Forum (IWF) and arch opponent of the Violence Against Women Act has been chosen to run the day-to-day operations of the Pentagon’s investigation into the Air Force Academy's rape scandal.

Blair also was a leading opponent of admitting women into the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) and opposed gender-integrated training in the military. Blair's selection to be the executive director of the review panel has caused grave concern among feminist groups and anti-violence activists who fear that she will not conduct an unbiased investigation or propose fair solutions and reforms. Based on her past opposition to women attending these elite military academies, NOW has reason to believe that she will do little more than say "I told you so" to the victims and suggest that women who don't want to be assaulted "just leave."

But our real alarm is at the makeup of the entire panel.

There is no representation from the vast pool of knowledgeable individuals and experts who deal regularly with the issue of sexual assault—no victim advocate, assault survivor, trained counselor, academic, community leader or service provider to bring their expertise to the discussion of reforms and solutions. This egregious omission practically dims the likelihood of addressing and eradicating violence against women at the Air Force Academy.

In fact, panelist Amy McCarthy, a pilot for United Airlines and graduate of the Air Force Academy, has expressed her doubts as to the validity of the sexual assault charges—laying much of the blame on the "high risk behaviors" of female cadets, such as drinking alcohol.

Another IWF member on the panel, Sally Satel, repeatedly questioned the extent of violence against women and even went so far as to say "the battered women's movement has outlived its useful beginnings."

This "investigation" will lead to one big cover-up unless important questions are answered. Why does the Secretary of Defense have the sole appointment authority? Why isn't there attention to the conflict of interest of these panelists? Where are the panelists with true expertise and experience in halting as well as dealing with sexual assaults? What will be the length of the inquiry and will there be limits on their access to personnel records? What are their reporting requirements and what is the enforcement mechanism for their recommendations? Will there be any Congressional oversight and will Air Force Secretary Roche—who was quite cavalier about the episodes when he appeared before Congress—be responsible for carrying out and enforcing recommended policies and procedures?

Rep. Sue Kelly (R-N.Y.) is a former rape crisis counselor—why isn't she on the panel? Where are the experts from the National Sexual Violence Resource Center and the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN)? Where is the "obvious diversity" that a Senate Republican staff member recently said was part of this panel? Where is the professional experience and personal knowledge needed for crafting solutions and recommending improved policies?