Lackland AFB. But as this link shows: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/14/health/military-sexual-assaults-personality-disorder/index.html there are big problems across the board.

I think there are a number of problems that contribute to this.

1. The military segregates itself somewhat from the civilian community. There is a separate culture in the military and in each of the branches from the civilian community.

2. That separate culture tends to be further to the conservative right than the civilian community. The kinds of things the women in the link related as to what was said to them after their assaults, you hear those things on the farthest right message forums. The right wingers who enlist or commission tend to reinforce each others viewpoints on things and make each other even more extreme. That includes attitudes towards women, minorities and the LGBT community. Obviously that is not the case everywhere, many places have no issues with women or any diversity group. But you see how this happens in certain places. The average ideological bent in the military is not far from what it is at Free Republic. The Air Force and Navy actually tend to be the more progressive services. The Army and Marine Corps tend to be the furthest right wing, to the point that they found neo-nazi paraphernalia and kkk in various marine and army baracks and an active KKK group at one marine base http://www.salon.com/2009/06/15/neo_nazis_army/ .

3. Military training environments where trainees/recruits are subject to emotional hazing have a lot of good people in command and in their NCO cadres, but they also tend to attract those people who want to emotionally haze people, i.e. for lack of a better term, people with some sadistic tendencies. But I want to stress, most of the drill/training instructors are really good people. In the Lackland situation, there are 500+ drill/training instructors and less than 20 or so were under investigation.

More soon...

On edit: Fulldisclosure - I am former USAF enlisted and yes, went through Basic Training at Lackland AFB

has a similar problem--one wherein I repeatedly saw women who reported sexual abuse being thrown out, while the perpetrators remained (tailhook, anyone?)

the whole military system is complicit from top to bottom, and I don't see things changing in the near future.

"wingman policy"??? yah, because, after all, if you are never alone, nothing can ever happen to you (like telling the women in iraq and afghanistan to never go to the bathroom by themselves, instead of dealing with the perps.)

oh yah, the military makes me feel all safe and secure.

One couldn't leave the ship unless signed out with at least one other and those who returned without their buddy or group faced losing liberty privelages or being placed on report.

It was for our own safety that this was done.

On board your own ship or on your own base?

When I was stationed in Philadelphia, we were advised not to walk thru parts of South Philly on our own lest we be attacked by one of the gangs there. Some sailors didn't follow that advice and ended up in the hospital after being robbed and badly beaten. One shouldn't have to walk around in an American city in groups for protection but there is only so much local law enforcement can do.

And not actually, you know, STOPPING THE RAPISTS and the culture that gives them free hand.

Which is what the OP is about, and not shore leave.

DU itself exhibits some tolerance towards prison rape jokes as we have members who make such jokes and juries that vote to leave them. It may take months before there is zero tolerance here for that kind of stuff but it's a small part of the journey towards the bigger goal which is "stopping the rapists and the culture that gives them a free hand".

In the meantime, it's wise to take some precautionary steps to protect oneself and others and I've given examples from my experience in the Navy.

Not zero. It puts the onus of stopping rape on the VICTIMS, not the rapists.

Since it's been proven that so many of the higher ranking officers can't control their baser instincts, give them a buddy to ensure that they have somebody to be accountable to.

The Air Force has just admitted that there is no discipline, that they can not use the hierarchy and code to keep trainees safe. That's pretty sobering.

The other thought I had is that with a buddy system, will people who are assaulted in the future be held culpable because they didn't have their buddies with them? What about when the buddies are assaulted together? Will it still be their fault?

The military is a cross section of the general public and you have some of the best of the best, a whole bunch of average types and some of the worst of the worst. Screening and boot camp weeds out many of the bad ones but not all.

Your comment:

"The other thought I had is that with a buddy system, will people who are assaulted in the future be held culpable because they didn't have their buddies with them? What about when the buddies are assaulted together? Will it still be their fault?"

If it's an order, then one can be held liable for failing to obey a lawful order. Towards the end of my time in the service, it became a standing order that anyone driving or riding in a motor vehicle had to wear a seat belt even if the state one was driving in didn't require it. If one was involved in an accident and wasn't wearing a seat belt, even if the operator of the other vehicle was at fault, the punishment was the service person who was injured may be held responsible for all medical costs or if killed, the life insurance policy would be forfeited. Failure to obey a lawful order had consequences even if another was at fault.

when the blame belongs on the rapists/sexual assailants and in some cases their up-the-chain supervisors who failed to act swiftly and decisively.

The buddy system may be okay as a stop-gap but it isn't addressing the larger organizational failures. I saw in the comments that the Army has had a trainee buddy systems for ten years or so -- if the impetus for that system was also sexual assaults, it's time that the Army deal with the real issues too and stop placing the burden on the lowest level personnel.

The blame for that crime rests entirely on the person who committed it. The trainee not following a lawful order is no defense nor is it a defense for higher ups not to take swift and decisive action.

The buddy system is a stop gap measure and it of itself does not address larger organizational failures and I don't think anyone is trying to argue otherwise.