“What started as a fun Friday night out in Columbus for a group of off-duty Fort Benning soldiers, allegedly turned violent for one. Police say the group of friends came back to a home on 20th Street in Phenix City. In the early morning hours on Saturday, one male soldier tells Phenix City investigators he woke up to another male soldier sexually assaulting him. Police have arrested and charged 24-year-old Christopher Whitfield with sexual abuse in the first degree.” [WVTM]
Alabama Soldier Charged with Sexually Assaulting Another Male Soldier
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
gayinsf
…ah, could someone slip Chris my phone number….just saying. (Sympathy to the GI who didn’t care for the advances.)
Brinycbri
See this is exactly what we don’t need. DADT won’t get repealed with people exploiting these kinds of stories. As a minority (race and sexuality), unfortunately, I will always be representing my minority class(es) no matter what I do. It’s a responsibility to act accordingly.
seitan-on-a-stick
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Now, Down Low?
kiltnc
Japhy, drop cut this article from Queerty! This does nothing for our cause. There is also no mention of anyones sexuality in the article. I may not even be gay related.
Smokey Martini
While I’m all for anonymous blowjobs and the like, I myself wouldn’t want to get one without giving my prior consent — and much less if I’m in a state where I’m unable to give it (i.e. sleeping). That’s just sleazy. No consent, no sex. Sexual assault is sexual assault no matter how you look at it.
I agree with KILTNC: this probably has nothing to do with DADT, UNLESS it was established that the two men hated one another’s guts and wanted the other guy out of the force. You know, as a form of revenge. But there is no indication of any animosity between the two — at least not yet. Why can’t we just say Whitfield fucked up? We don’t have to back every (PRESUMABLY gay) sex offender, you know.
Better reporting next time, Queerty.
Jon
I agree that there is no indication that this article has anything to do with a “gay agenda”. It’s typical Queerty reporting. I thought they would improve on their irresponsible blogging with a new editor and new look, I guess I was wrong.
St. Francis of A-sissy
I think there’s A LOT more to this story that we’re not hearing about…
Devin Bach
First blush says, “ever heard of “no thanks””?, but then sounds like someone has an ax to grind, mainly Whitfield’s um . . . friend. The article is way too inconclusive with details to make any rational distinction around the case, as of yet. But two assumably same-age young guys as friends in the same bed? Sounds like a case of, you asked for it. It will be an interesting case to watch. I don’t think this will affect DADT, as it could have happened anywhere. With all the str8 date rape that happens, this case would have little to no bearing, and it didn’t happen in a barracks, but in a private home.
Japhy Grant
@Smokey Martini: “Better reporting”? Um– the entire piece is a cut blurb from another article (hence it being entirely in quotes with the link to the quote at the end)and there’s zero mention of Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell by them or by me. It’s a news story off the wires. As you all mentioned, the news of a male soldier sexually assaulting another male soldier has an impact on the gay community. If you want to bury your head in the sand guys, this aint the place to do it.
Robert
I agree with Japhy… while it doesn’t cast a good light on the individual, we need to be aware of the good the bad and the indifferent.
Smokey Martini
@Japhy Grant:
This news story will ONLY have an impact on the gay community if ignorant reporters (and bloggers) make the perpetrator out to be some sort of closeted homosexual. Yet we all know this is not necessarily the case. Not everyone who loves dick is a homo and, by extension, not every story involving physical contact between two guys merits a cut-and-paste into Queerty’s site.
So Whitfield is probably a guy who likes dick from time to time. Who gives a fuck? No one should, especially if he identifies as straight or even (to allow for some wiggle room) as bi. What is the main issue of the story is that he had sex with the other dude without the other dude’s consent. Now THAT’S a big deal. Not only for the gay community (as YOU suggest) but also for the straight community (where there is still an assumption in some circles that men simply cannot be sexually assaulted).
If this is what you’re going for, then by all means report this stuff. But do make your intentions clearer so you can avoid backlashes like the ones above.
ask ena
@Smokey Martini:
Umm…I kinda thought if you love dick, it just speaks for itself, no?
Charles J. Mueller
Gay, straight, bi or just confused….I think it was a dumb move on Whitfield’s part. He’s in the service and he knows the policies of the military.
You don’t hit on the people you work with, even if it is in a private home. And you don’t make a sexual assault on someone without their permission. That’s rape.
Sounds like this “kid” has a little growing up to do before he becomes a responsible human being in any sense of the word.
Smokey Martini
@ask ena:
Bingo, Charles. And no, Ena — that’s where the ignorance starts seeping through. It’s not all black and white.
While one man may engage in sexual activity with another man (what is commonly referred to as “homosexual” activity), it does not necessarily mean that the guy identifies as “homosexual”. And no, it doesn’t mean he’s a closet-case either. That’s where the fallacy comes in: “homosexual” acts are not the exclusive domain of gay men.
In many cases, men who suck dick or like to get theirs sucked see themselves as merely “over-sexed” straight guys who would fuck/eat out anything that moves, so to speak. Or, in some cases, they may consider themselves 100% straight while engaging in sex with another guy, since (a) their conception of gay men renders their sexual partners “feminine” and, hence, “fuckable”, while (b) keeping their own macho (aka “straight”) image intact at the same time.
So yes, while there is nothing wrong with a straight guy enjoying some meaty dick from time to time, the confusion associated with the man’s non-gendered sexuality stirs up a series of red alerts from others who are uncomfortable with the ambiguity. The straight guy is expected to either come out as gay (‘once and for all’), or stop with the dick action to better conform to his professed identity. Or, if all else fails, to at least come out as ‘bi’. But if he truly identifies as a straight guy and, given his standards of straightness, feels he is entitled to engage in sexual activity with another guy (homo or not), then who are we to stop him, right? As long as he’s honest and open with what he does, then there should really be no problem.
Which is why Whitfield’s story is still iffy. This may be the first time he tries to suck a dick and, given that he and his sleeping buddy had a good time the night before and, in all likelihood, were drunk, then he may have found it a great opportunity to get in on a little dick action or whatever. That doesn’t necessarily mean he’s a homo (and merits attention on Queerty). It may just mean he’s a little curious. The fact that he did it unlawfully is what’s at stake here.
Steve
The story really doesn’t give enough details to make any judgments at all. There could have been consent, until they were discovered by someone else, or until the “victim” changed his mind. Or, Whitfield could have believed that there was consent. Or, the “victim” could have decided to accuse Whitfield falsely, and set up the situation.
It all depends on the degree of consent, or the belief that consent had been given. Drunk soldiers often do things that they would not have done sober, and their judgment can be impaired, so consent may well have been given.
Clever Pseudonym
It’s important that men are not afraid to report rape. The article doesn’t say whether either man identifies himself as gay. It doesn’t matter. What the article demonstrates is that any person can be a victim of sexual violence, therefore it is stupid for the military to prejudice itself against any person, and that they should instead focus on justice for rape victims.
Alan down in Florida
Did anyone read the original article from the link?
“Phenix City police, the CID Division, responded to a call, I believe it originally came out through Martin Army Hospital, where a soldier from Fort Benning had been sexually assaulted.” Somehow I don’t think a simple blow job would have landed him in the hospital.
That being said, I think the responders who think reporting this story will damage the chances of a repeal of DADT are exactly wrong. This is not necessarily a story about rape (though it may turn out to be).
This was a group of soldiers who have been partying. The two men in question, as victim and violator, may indeed have had consensual sex but out of fear that others in the group may have seen or heard them, the accuser is making a fuss in order to protect his ass (pun intended) from being released from the service due to DADT. Were it not for DADT this complaint might never have been made. It’s like the teenaged girl who has sex and then gets second thoughts and cries rape.
At this point we really do not know what actually transpired. That is for the military courts to decide. One thing is for sure – there’s more to this story than meets the eye.
Karl Johnson
I wanna see a video of this event so I can truely get the facts straight..
Karl hanging out at www.gayvolt.com
I wanna see a video of this event so I can truely get the facts straight.
Jaroslaw
Smokey – I normally like what you say and even here, you make some good points, but I don’t see how you’re faulting Queerty in this case.
This happened, it was reported, like ALL news stories, with most of the details missing.
I’m really not sure what you mean by “better reporting” and “ignorant bloggers.” If this is reported in the mainstream media (and I’m not sure how they will report it) we need to know about it.
Barbie
Alan I think you are absolutely correct. I do know the “victim” is married, and did consent to this, but after wards got scared because he did’t want his wife to find out, interm screamed rape. Whitfield is inicent until proven guilty!
LSlade
This article is vague and to hammer someone based on your assumption dosent tell the facts. This case has long been over and Whitfield is still in the Army and suffered no reprocussion from this so make your assumption now. Personally I think this should be removed.