MovieChat Forums > La ciociara (1961) Discussion > Who were the 'Allied Soldiers' doing the...

Who were the 'Allied Soldiers' doing the raping?


Who were the "Allied Soldiers" doing the raping? I think the next day, the villagers said that "The soldiers came and raped all the women", but who were they? The Allies didn't invade Italy till North Africa had been taken. Their outfits looked like they may have been North African tribesman. The Germans and Italians were hated there. Remember the Nazi Officer talking about the Italian Colonies? Raping the "Enemy's Women" (as usual) would be the ultimate revenge for past atrocities. This was filmed in 1960, not too long after WWII, so the Italians would know the answer back then, but not Americans in 2008.

reply

I remember someone saying (I can't remember who) that they were Moroccans.

reply

Moroccans was correct. They were from North Africa. Hud

reply

The rapists were North African troops, who were part of the Free French and commanded in Italy by the Americans. There were hundreds of thousands of North African soldiers, and yes, they were responsible for countless mass rapes as they travelled up through Italy. Around the Monte Casino area they raped virtually every female in every town. They behaved exactly the same when they reached Germany. Truly horrific.

reply

They may have been Allies, but we should also remember that some of the most ghoulish wartime atrocities were perpetrated by the Soviets. Their advance on Berlin was sickeningly brutal, sparing not even underage girls. It has been estimated that as many as two MILLION German women were raped by Russian soldiers just within the next two years after the war's end.

reply

Many of the most ghoulish wartime atrocities were perpetrated by the Germans against the Russians during the German 1000 mile wide invasion of Russia. This invasion led to the defeat of Germany at the Battle of Leningrad. The Russians lost over 22 million people during WW2 but thank goodness they defeated Germany and won the the second world war. The United States didn't enter the war in Europe until after the Russian victory. The U.S. figured they might as well wait and let the Russians and Germans kill each other. Then the U. S. entered to mop up what was left of Germany and Italy. After the war, the Allies slaughtered the Italian Resistance that had been fighting the Germans and Mussolini's fascists. Jean Paul Belmondo represents this Resistance. The U.S. didn't like them because they were Communists.

reply

About the rapes, these were allegations and a number of troops were executed, without trial I might add. It should be pointed out that there was a lot of racism against colonials and other non-whites in the Allied Armys esp in Italy. There were accusations against Indian troops as well, the British investigated and found them baseless; the French simply executed whoever was accused to pacify the locals.

The N Africans were highly thought off, the US army considered them highly professional and diciplined. As Mark Clark said

"In spite of the stiffening enemy resistance, the 2nd Moroccan Division penetrated the Gustave [sic] Line in less than two day’s fighting. The next 48 hours on the French front were decisive. The knife-wielding Goumiers swarmed over the hills, particularly at night, and General Juin’s entire force showed an aggressiveness hour after hour that the Germans could not withstand. Cerasola, San Giorgio, Mt. D’Oro, Ausonia and Esperia were seized in one of the most brilliant and daring advances of the war in Italy... For this performance, which was to be a key to the success of the entire drive on Rome, I shall always be a grateful admirer of General Juin and his magnificent FEC."


reply

[deleted]

And yet, in spite of this high regard, they were mass rapists. No punishment for them, a lifetime punishment for the women.

reply

[deleted]

I only recently saw this film for the first time, and while I consider myself very knowledgable about World War II, this was the first time I had heard of this atrocity. Of course, it was very well-known in Italy. There is a decent synopsis here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marocchinate

that includes several links to related topics (mostly in Italian).

"Marrochinate" was the term that came to describe the thousands of rape victims. Literally, it means "Moroccaned."

reply

Tarmcgator, finally a grown up in this thread!
Thank you for posting the link to the marocchinate, which can be translated as "what the Moroccans did."

The rape scene was based on actual events that took place and have been fully documented.

reply

Having them gang raped by a bunch of blacks was racist to me.

reply

Let's burn the history books then.

reply

Sorry to offend you, but it's history. Not racism, just a horrific fact you don't like.

reply

[deleted]

(Look at celeb like Rihanna, Whitney Houston... beaten by their men. I am not racist, I am a professor of sociology)

Racist, Kid22 that is what exactly sound like with such a statement because what stupid celebrities actions doesn’t prove the moral workings of any race. With your convoluted logic all Polish men kill and rape boys because of John Wayne Gacy’s actions.

reply

There is a statue commemorating the victims of these mass rapes. The name of it is the inspiration for the Italian name of the film.

"In Castro dei Volsci, a monument called the "Mamma Ciociara" now stands to remember all the women and mothers who tried in vain to defend themselves and their daughters.[5]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marocchinate

reply

Wonder how Moroccans reacted to the accusations, and/or to this movie? I'm not questioning their bravery, but evidently some were extremely rude to civilians. PS Fascists probably didn't treat north africans very well either so the rapes could have been payback, which is ALWAYS a bitch.

reply

Raping women is being "extremely rude to civilians"?? What an idiotic remark!

reply

I found the acting and direction throughout the film to be top rate, but in particular the rape scene and its aftermath were very compelling. The film showed the brutality of war and how civilization in such circumstances is a thin veneer torn away too easily in such circumstances.

reply

Agree with Kenny 164. Civilization goes to hell quickly when its infrastructure and values are removed, by natural or other means. The womens' remarkable performances reflect this fact. Rudeness is one's disregard for the feelings and well being of others. Thus rape is EXTREMELY RUDE precisely because it is a despicable intentional act which violates most peoples' shared values. Duh.

reply

I would not try be an analyst if I were you. You suck at it.

reply

Your comment is an atrocity to read.

Firstly,because of your rape-apologetic attitude, and secondly,
because you obviously couldn't even follow the movies not so complicatd story-line.

It sounds to me as if you are somehow implying that it was Cesira's fault that she and her daughter were raped, or that she should have known she would be raped if she went there and there at that time?
You know this isn't only misogynistic, but also idiotic.
At no point of the movie was suggested that Cesira was a psychic, so I see no reason why you would expect that from her character, except if you have secretely the belief its a women's responsibility to not get raped.

Now let me explain some points in the plot that you somehow missed:
"soldiers from both sides about"
There were not soldiers from both sides. The front lines were far, far away. The only troops she was likely to encounter were allies. (British, American, French, Russian).
So in what way was it stupid to go, in broad daylight, towards Rome?
"There is safety in numbers. " Wasn't it obvious watching the movie that Cesira always had to look out for herself, so she didn't expect "protection" from others?
Do you think women were supposed to not go out during the war, or always move in "numbers" when the country was occupied by the allies? So women should have stayed at home 5-10 years, or else inviting rape upon themselves?

reply

Bunch of lowlife savages who don't know how to be allies. Better not to have them at all than have them on your side. They were wild and out of control and couldn't be trusted.

reply

Bravo. Preach it!

reply

To me those historical events represent a bit of a stain in the Allied's war efforts: the troops were fighting for them and under Anglo/American guidance, they should have controlled them a bit better.

And I remember of even having read that some troops had been promised a free hand of doing whatever they wanted if they had penetrated the front (I would have rather avoided this pun.. )

reply