View Full Version : Here come the porn police
Roguish Lawyer
05-07-2013, 18:16
http://www.militarytimes.com/article/20130507/NEWS/305070032/Hagel-Troops-workplaces-will-checked-degrading-images-women
"............The extraordinary searches will be similar to those the Air Force conducted last year and prompted officers to scour troops’ desks and cubicles in search of photos, calendars, magazines, screen-savers, computer files and other items that might be considered degrading toward women.............."
Why just women?
The Reaper
05-07-2013, 18:57
I fear who and what we are going to be fighting with when this business is done.
Are we warriors, or a PC social experiment gone awry?
All soldiers deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. Got it. If you screw up, you need to be hammered. Got it.
But there is a huge reach from an AF nose art display or a Dillon calendar to a sexual assault. Shoot, some of the avatars here would probably be unacceptable to the sex police.
I guess we need another half day of re-education training from the thought police. Then we can be pure again. :rolleyes:
TR
we have turned ourselves into a bad Saturday Night Live skit...
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has ordered a close-up and comprehensive inspection of all military offices and workplaces worldwide to root out any “materials that create a degrading or offensive work environment.”
Does this mean that they will take down the portraits of the current civilian and military chain of command?
Back in the mid 70's the Army had some slick magazine that I do not recall the name of but I do vividly recall the full page color pin ups of Wonder Woman, Farrah Fawcett Majors and Charlies Angels. I certainly do not remember those images being attributed to any sexual assaults.
Something has changed the dynamic over the years, we weren't quite so co-ed back then. Way too much social engineering going on these days in the services.
Ambush Master
05-07-2013, 20:28
In the late '80s to early '90s as we were going through this PC sexuality thing in the Airlines. Then we bought a BUNCH of SAAB Aircraft. In the process, many of our "Senior Management" (and I mean "Senior") went over to Sweden. I have taken the same "Tour" that they took, and I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE BEEN THERE!!! On the Tool-Boxes, Dividers, Walls,...........on virtually EVERY vertical surface there are posted pictures that you would have to PURCHASE on the "Internet"!!!
The one time that I got to take my wife over, we took a Tour around the waters of Stockholm, and the weather was more beautiful than I had seen it in the 10 years or so of my visiting there!! Of course, there were young Ladies laying on their dresses or blankets on the banks.........totally nude, and my wife still won't believe that that was the First Time that I had seen that there!!
Later
Martin
In the late '80s to early '90s as we were going through this PC sexuality thing in the Airlines. Then we bought a BUNCH of SAAB Aircraft. In the process, many of our "Senior Management" (and I mean "Senior") went over to Sweden. I have taken the same "Tour" that they took, and I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE BEEN THERE!!! On the Tool-Boxes, Dividers, Walls,...........on virtually EVERY vertical surface there are posted pictures that you would have to PURCHASE on the "Internet"!!!
The one time that I got to take my wife over, we took a Tour around the waters of Stockholm, and the weather was more beautiful than I had seen it in the 10 years or so of my visiting there!! Of course, there were young Ladies laying on their dresses or blankets on the banks.........totally nude, and my wife still won't believe that that was the First Time that I had seen that there!!
Later
Martin
Heck, what about Southwest and PSA's Stew's uniforms? :D
Pat
We always had to "sterilize" the barracks and team rooms for the AGI and then put 'em back up after it was over - they were never in the B Team or C Team areas, though.
Richard
Scimitar
05-08-2013, 01:22
I grew up in a Catholic Boarding School...
Always cracked me up when the Catholic Brothers (guys running the place), came around at the end of each year, and nicely asked everyone to take the porn on their bedroom walls home with them over the summer, as there would be spiritual retreats running at the school over the summer break. :D
S
Badger52
05-08-2013, 06:16
Does this mean that they will take down the portraits of the current civilian and military chain of command?From my heartfelt wish to your keyboard. Amazing.
:cool:
Interesting - I'm going to have to put up a poster from "Blue-Boy" magazine or the "Manhole" (if there are such things) and see if anyone complains. If so, I'll state I'm a homosexual and am a protected class. Wonder what will happen....
Maybe I can put it right next to my framed certificate of "Thumb-Drive Awareness".
mark46th
05-08-2013, 09:00
"Always cracked me up when the Catholic Brothers (guys running the place), came around at the end of each year, and nicely asked everyone to take the porn on their bedroom walls home with them over the summer, as there would be spiritual retreats running at the school over the summer break." Scimitar
Did that include the Altar Boy of the Month calendars?
mojaveman
05-08-2013, 19:02
Of course, there were young Ladies laying on their dresses or blankets on the banks.........totally nude
You're making me really want to go back to Europe. :D
Ok, thirty something years ago at the installation I was stationed at in Germany we had an old newspaper lady that sat in our large dining facility every morning and sold periodicals to the troops. Hustler, Penthouse, Playboy, Oui, etc.
I guess the Army has changed somewhat since then. :p
Stiletto11
05-08-2013, 19:58
To paraphrase Col Kurtz: " They ask young men to go and fight and die for their county but they won't let them write the word "fuck" on their airplane.
Stiletto11
05-08-2013, 20:02
Sorry here is the actual phrase: We train young men to drop fire on people. But their commanders won't allow them to write "fuck" on their airplanes because it's obscene!:D
And it'll be going beyond the team rooms...
Richard
WARNING: NSFW Graphic Imagery
Congresswoman Speier Alerts Marines To 'F'N Wook' Facebook Page, Sends Letter Urging Action
http://speier.house.gov/images/Correspondence/speiermarinecorpsfacebookpages8may2013.pdf
And it'll be going beyond the team rooms...
Richard
WARNING: NSFW Graphic Imagery
Congresswoman Speier Alerts Marines To 'F'N Wook' Facebook Page, Sends Letter Urging Action
http://speier.house.gov/images/Correspondence/speiermarinecorpsfacebookpages8may2013.pdf
If half of what she says in those FB posts is true, then she has every right to be pissed.
Sure it is all just harmless fun, until the pics and comments posted are about your wife, sister, daughter, mother.
No I am not being a typical woman who is easily offended. I actually am the one who gets talked to quite often for making men blush. With that being said, there is a huge difference between a girlie pic in someone's locker, and what is being discribed in this letter.
The Reaper
05-09-2013, 16:35
And it'll be going beyond the team rooms...
Richard
WARNING: NSFW Graphic Imagery
Congresswoman Speier Alerts Marines To 'F'N Wook' Facebook Page, Sends Letter Urging Action
http://speier.house.gov/images/Correspondence/speiermarinecorpsfacebookpages8may2013.pdf
I must be missing something.
If there is a civilian web site with people in the Marine uniform (not known to be Marines), and offensive captions, unless they are Marines, how is that the Commandant's problem, and is he going to be able to take any action (without violating their free speech rights) if they are?
Can the records of a civilian website be seized and user IDs revealed for possible prosecution because a Representative is unhappy?
Wow. Obviously, this is some juvenile and pathetic humor, but are we really going to UCMJ people for it?
But we have to tolerate pics of two guys in uniform swapping spit in public, and like it?
If something outrageous is posted on PS.com site and it offends someone, are we going to be investigated for it?
Slippery slope.
TR
Stiletto11
05-09-2013, 17:43
Isn't Congresswomen Speir the one who bribed Hicks yesterday in an open hearing asking him what assignment he prefers? In other words, shut up and we will help you.
Utah Bob
05-09-2013, 17:50
Does this mean that they will take down the portraits of the current civilian and military chain of command?
Nah. Those images are only degrading to real men.
Is it tasteless? yes
Is it juvenile? Yes
Is some of it offensive to women? Yes
But first it is a civilian website.
Second They have a right to express themselves even if it is distasteful. A JEWISH lawyer took up the case for the KKK to demonstrate for free in the late 70's. When asked why he did that he said that they had a right to their opinion no matter how screwed up and that when we begin to censer people opinion because their opinion is unpopular it is the first steps to what happened in Nazi Germany in the 1930's. The courts have upheld this.
Last but not least doesn't she have better things to do other than micromanaging the military? When was the last budget passed? The economy is a mess. we are at war with with a major terror organization worldwide with US troops being killed and wounded daily yet she is pissed because some 18 y/o boys are acting like........well 18 year olds. If congress was as interested in doing their job as she is in screwing with the military this country would be in better shape.
Well that certainly didn't take long for the" boys will be boys " to come out.
Are they entitled to free speech, sure they are. It just proves that being stupid isn't against the law, but it doesn't make it right. And every time we say boys will be boys, we condone the behavior.
What would you say if one of those women was a subordinate?
If you can't see that the DoD has a very big problem with sexual assault right now, nothing anyone says to is going to change that fact. And the use of websites such as this totally unprofessional, and promotes a work environment that goes against good morale and discipline. It is shit like that that has caused the problems we are experiencing right now. But that is ok, boys will be boys, no harm, no foul. That is until the next asshole thinks that it is ok to sexually assault another member in uniform.
I expected more out of members of this website than "boys will be boys".
uspsmark
05-09-2013, 22:41
Boys will be boys...Every unit I served in prior to the MFO was male only. Boys were boys and the trash talk and jokes ran the gamut. The modern day Army/AF/USMC/Navy/USCG is way different. Guys that have been in Infantry units, SF, etc. haven't had to deal with the PC police like the coed units have. Has the behavior been ignored and pushed aside in the past for all male units? Yes. Is that going to continue? Probably not.
BTW, the first female medic I met in the MFO was a Sergeant and I was as well. First thing she said to me was that her "cock" was bigger than mine and proceeded to show me her 12 inch long Peacock tattoo at one of the bars on base. She used to hang out at some of the same bars at Bragg that I did it turned out!
My wife is an artist...she did a nude pen and ink drawing for me and sent it to me while I was in the Sinai. I kept it in my room, but had to put it away any time there was an inspection of my billet. I lived in a room by myself at the time. This was in the 87-88 time frame.
BTW..."sexual assault", in any form is wrong...I don't condone it in any way shape or form.
Is it tasteless? yes
Is it juvenile? Yes
Is some of it offensive to women? Yes
But first it is a civilian website.
Second They have a right to express themselves even if it is distasteful. A JEWISH lawyer took up the case for the KKK to demonstrate for free in the late 70's. When asked why he did that he said that they had a right to their opinion no matter how screwed up and that when we begin to censer people opinion because their opinion is unpopular it is the first steps to what happened in Nazi Germany in the 1930's. The courts have upheld this.
Last but not least doesn't she have better things to do other than micromanaging the military? When was the last budget passed? The economy is a mess. we are at war with with a major terror organization worldwide with US troops being killed and wounded daily yet she is pissed because some 18 y/o boys are acting like........well 18 year olds. If congress was as interested in doing their job as she is in screwing with the military this country would be in better shape.How does the position you stake out in this thread square with your previous posts bemoaning the decline of morals in America. Is it your position that different groups of Americans should be held to different standards of moral conduct?
Also, given your frequent references to the Constitution and the original intent of the framers, why shouldn't a member of the House Armed Services Committee, especially one who sits on subcommittees tasked with oversight and investigations, and readiness take an interest in this topic?
Finally, what primary sources and/or secondary works do you have in mind when you argue that "censer[ing] people opinion" because their opinion was unpopular was one of the "first steps" towards the rise of Nazi Germany in the 1930s? I ask because I follow some guy named Richard J. Evans on Twitter and--based on your say so--I will gladly send him a snarky comment (totaling no more than 140 characters) that he doesn't know what he's been doing the last forty years or so. (Geoff Eley and Ian Kershaw and Peter Fritzsche and Peter Longerich and David Crew apparently don't Tweet. #OMFG! No worries. I'll send those Luddites some angry letters via post.)
Roguish Lawyer
05-10-2013, 07:07
Well that certainly didn't take long for the" boys will be boys " to come out.
Are they entitled to free speech, sure they are. It just proves that being stupid isn't against the law, but it doesn't make it right. And every time we say boys will be boys, we condone the behavior.
What would you say if one of those women was a subordinate?
If you can't see that the DoD has a very big problem with sexual assault right now, nothing anyone says to is going to change that fact. And the use of websites such as this totally unprofessional, and promotes a work environment that goes against good morale and discipline. It is shit like that that has caused the problems we are experiencing right now. But that is ok, boys will be boys, no harm, no foul. That is until the next asshole thinks that it is ok to sexually assault another member in uniform.
I expected more out of members of this website than "boys will be boys".
Or perhaps this illustrates why it never was a good idea to allow women in the military at all? :munchin
uspsmark
05-10-2013, 08:41
"Hagel: Troops' workplaces will be checked for 'degrading' images of women"
So...if I printed out a copy of afchic's avatar picture and put it up in my DoD office, it would have to be removed under these rules. Just an observation.
I really don't see how that will curb sexual assaults.
"Hagel: Troops' workplaces will be checked for 'degrading' images of women"
I really don't see how that will curb sexual assaults.
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
Ah - the irony.
Richard
BTW, the first female medic I met in the MFO was a Sergeant and I was as well. First thing she said to me was that her "cock" was bigger than mine and proceeded to show me her 12 inch long Peacock tattoo at one of the bars on base. She used to hang out at some of the same bars at Bragg that I did it turned out!
That's no daisy.
Streck-Fu
05-13-2013, 10:48
Separating the wheat from the chaff must be hard....LINK (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/12/false-reports-outpace-sex-assaults-in-the-military/)
False reports outpace sex assaults in the military
False complaints of sexual abuse in the military are rising at a faster rate than overall reports of sexual assault, a trend that could harm combat readiness, analysts say.
Virtually all media attention on a Pentagon report last week focused on an increase in service members’ claims of sexual abuse in an anonymous survey, but unmentioned were statistics showing that a significant percentage of such actually investigated cases were baseless.
From 2009 to 2012, the number of sexual abuse reports rose from 3,244 to 3,374 — a 4 percent increase.
During the same period, the number of what the Pentagon calls “unfounded allegations” based on completed investigations of those reports rose from 331 to 444 — a 35 percent increase.
In 2012, there were 2,661 completed investigations, meaning that the 444 false complaints accounted for about 17 percent of all closed cases last year. False reports accounted for about 13 percent of closed cases in 2009.
Robert Maginnis, a retired Army officer and analyst at the Family Research Council, is writing a book for Regnery Publishing Inc. about the Pentagon’s push to put women in direct ground combat in the infantry, armor and special operations.
“In the course of conducting interviews with commanders, I heard time and again complaints about female service members making sex-related allegations which proved unfounded,” Mr. Maginnis said. “Not only do some women abuse the truth, but it also robs their commanders from more important, mission-related tasks.
“Female service members told me that some women invite problems which lead men on and then result in advances the woman can’t turn off. Too often, such female culpability leads to allegations of sexual contact, assault and then the women feign innocence.”
The annual Pentagon report on sexual assault noted the numbers of false complaints but included no analysis. The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.
Elaine Donnelly, who runs the Center for Military Readiness, said the Pentagon's Sexual Assault Response and Prevention Office (SAPRO) is ignoring the problem of false reports.
“Unsubstantiated accusations remain a significant problem, but the SAPRO is doing nothing about it,” Mrs. Donnelly said. “I went through both volumes and found no evidence of concern about the significant 17 percent of ‘unfounded accusations.’ Something should be done to reduce the numbers of false accusations, the first step being an admission that the problem exists.”
The number of sex abuse reports has risen from 1,700 a decade ago to 3,374 last year.
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have pushed male and female personnel into close living conditions at a sprawling network of bases.
The existence of unwanted and wanted sexual contact in the war zone is not disputed.
For example, a group of Army physicians in 2010 studied one brigade combat team deployed to Iraq in 2007.
The physicians’ study, published in the Military Medicine journal, examined the number of soldiers who sustained disease or noncombat injuries. Of 4,122 soldiers, including 325 women in support roles, 1,324 had diseases or injuries that forced them to miss time or be evacuated.
“Females, compared with males, had a significantly increased incident-rate ratio for becoming a [disease or noncombat] casualty,” the doctors found.
Of 47 female soldiers evacuated from the brigade and sent home, 35 — or 74 percent — were for “pregnancy-related issues.”
Even before the wars, the Pentagon removed barriers across the board to women and took action to mix the sexes more closely. Men and women share dorms and barracks in boot camp and at the service academies, and deploy in close quarters on ships.
The integration promises to become even more intimate in coming years as the Pentagon places women into training for direct ground combat jobs.
“The latest SAPRO report confirms that problems of sexual assault against both men and women are getting worse, not better,” Mrs. Donnelly said. “Pentagon leaders nevertheless are planning to extend these problems into the combat arms. Congress and the Pentagon first must do no harm. At a minimum, the Obama administration must not be allowed to extend complicated issues of sexual assault, which have increased by 129 percent since 2004, into direct ground combat infantry battalions.”
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel last week announced several steps to eliminate assaults, including ordering commanders to conduct “visual inspections” of all workplaces to ensure they are “free from materials that create a degrading or offensive work environment.”
The Air Force completed such an inspection last year after a female service member complained of persistent harassment.
In January, the Air Force reported the “health and welfare” inspection results:
“The Air Force found 631 instances of pornography (magazines, calendars, pictures, videos that intentionally displayed nudity or depicted acts of sexual activity); 3,987 instances of unprofessional material (discrimination, professional appearance, items specific to local military history such as patches, coins, heritage rooms, log books, song books, etc.); and 27,598 instances of inappropriate or offensive items (suggestive items, magazines, posters, pictures, calendars, vulgarity, graffiti). In total, 32,216 items were reported. Identified items were documented and either removed or destroyed.”
Said Mr. Hagel: “We need cultural change where every service member is treated with dignity and respect, where all allegations of inappropriate behavior are treated with seriousness, where victims’ privacy is protected, where bystanders are motivated to intervene, and where offenders know that they will be held accountable by strong and effective systems of justice.”
Today's 'Stars and Stripes'
Does social media add fuel to servicemembers' degrading actions?
http://www.stripes.com/does-social-media-add-fuel-to-servicemembers-degrading-actions-1.221481
Image of front page of e-edition.
Richard
3,987 instances of unprofessional material (discrimination, professional appearance, items specific to local military history such as patches, coins, heritage rooms, log books, song books, etc.);
What is he talking about? Patches and coins?
Streck-Fu
05-20-2013, 12:31
What is he talking about? Patches and coins?
Perhaps stuff like this: LINK (http://milspecmonkey.com/store/patches/immediate-action)
I do a lot of employment law and, to justify firings, employers have a treasure trove with Facebook and other social media. People aren't acting more inappropriately today; there's just data capture of nearly everything anyone does. Sift through the white noise and you can destroy nearly anybody's career.
The best advice is to not put yourself out there for the general public to see. And be careful which "friends" you email "controversial" things to. One day they may not still be your friend. And one day something borderline controversial may become deemed by society as horrific or crossing the line.
$0.02
The Reaper
05-20-2013, 17:55
May 19, 2013, 6:16 p.m. ET
The Pentagon's Bad Math on Sexual Assault
Potential recruits need to know that serving in the military doesn't turn a woman into a victim.
By LINDSAY L. RODMAN
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323582904578484941173658754.html#p rintMode
In the days since the Defense Department's May 7 release of its 2012 Annual Report on Sexual Assault in the Military, the media and lawmakers have been abuzz. The report's estimate that last year 26,000 service members experienced unwanted sexual contact prompted many to conclude, incorrectly, that this reliably estimated the number of victims of sexual assault.
The 2012 estimate was also significantly higher than the last estimate, causing some to proclaim a growing "epidemic" of sexual assault in the military. The truth is that the 26,000 figure is such bad math—derived from an unscientific sample set and extrapolated military-wide—that no conclusions can be drawn from it.
Yet three bills have been introduced in Congress since the report's release, all intended in various ways as a response to the findings. This week the Senate Appropriations subcommittee, which has power over the Pentagon budget, will hold a hearing where military leaders will be questioned about sexual assault in the armed forces.
It is disheartening to me, as a female officer in the Marine Corps and a judge advocate devoted to the professional practice of law in the military, to see Defense Department leaders and members of Congress deal with this emotionally charged issue without the benefit of solid, verifiable data. The 26,000 estimate is based on the 2012 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Military. The WGRA survey was fielded throughout all branches of the military in September and November 2012. As the report indicates, "Completed surveys were received from 22,792 eligible respondents," while "the total sample consisted of 108,478 individuals." In other words, one in five of the active-duty military personnel to whom the survey was sent responded.
I am one of those who responded to the survey after receiving an email with an online link. None of the males in my office received the email, though nearly every other female did. We have no way of knowing the exact number of male or female respondents to the 2012 WGRA survey because that information wasn't released.
The term "sexual assault" was not used in the WGRA survey. Instead, the survey refers to "unwanted sexual contact," which includes touching the buttocks and attempted touching. All of that behavior is wrongful, but it doesn't comport with the conventional definition of sexual assault or with the legal definition of sexual assault in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as enacted by Congress.
The estimated 26,000 service members who fell victim to unwanted sexual contact in 2012 is higher than the 19,000 estimate based on the 2010 WRGA survey (the survey wasn't conducted in 2011). Does this mean that there was a 34% jump in just two years? The data are too unreliable to tell. Before 2010, the Defense Department did not extrapolate military-wide in this manner, and for good reason. If you apply the same extrapolations to the 2006 WGRA survey results, you arrive at a far higher number—34,000.
These numbers vary widely because incidents involving unwanted sexual contact cannot accurately be extrapolated military-wide using this survey. The number of active-duty personnel is more than one million. The U.S. military as a whole is 14.6% female. Though the 2012 survey does not specify the gender composition of its respondents, the 2010 respondents were 42% female (10,029 women and 14,000 men).
Nevertheless, to achieve the 26,000 military-wide estimate in 2012 (and 19,000 in 2010) over half of the victims must have been male. Of course, male victims do exist, but empirically males do not constitute anywhere near the majority of victims of unwanted sexual contact—no less sexual assault.
Here is what we do know: The actual number of reported sexual assaults in the military in 2012 was 3,374, up from 3,192 in 2011. These figures include reports by civilians against service members. Of the 3,374 total cases reported last year, only 12%-14% were reported by men.
We also don't know how actual sexual-assault rates in the military compare with civilian society. Last year's National Defense Authorization Act asked the Defense Department to undertake two major studies that would review judicial proceedings and compare the military system with best practices in civilian jurisdictions. Both studies are set to begin this summer.
The military isn't averse to changing to assure that all its service members, especially women, are treated justly. But change should come as a result of supportable data.
Each and every sexual assault is tragic and infuriating. But given the military's recent emphasis on awareness of the problem and insistence that victims come forward, it's no surprise that this number has gone up.
We in the military justice system want victims to come forward, and to seek accountability through the system. We want them to feel empowered to report, and to know that their command will take the allegation and their recovery seriously. An increasing number of reported sexual assaults, at least in the next few years, should be viewed as a positive sign that this message is being heard.
In my five years in the Marine Corps, I have seen revolutionary change regarding how military leadership addresses sexual assault. Ask the military service member closest to you whether the military takes sexual assault seriously. They will likely talk your ear off about increased training requirements, speeches from their leadership, videos they have watched and workshops they have attended. They can tell you what they have learned about bystander intervention, about alcohol and impaired judgement, and about the hefty consequences within the military justice system for sexual assault.
I often talk to young men and women interested in joining the military, and I find that women especially seek me out to gain the perspective of a female officer. In the past year or so, these potential female recruits have grown increasingly wary, asking many follow-up questions about whether women are treated fairly and respectfully. I tell them that serving in the military doesn't turn a woman into a victim. I am a proud Marine, surrounded by outstanding military personnel from every service who take this problem seriously, male and female alike.
Capt. Rodman is a Marine Corps judge advocate stationed at U.S. Marine Headquarters in Arlington, Va. Her opinions do not reflect the position of the Defense Department or the Marine Corps.
A version of this article appeared May 20, 2013, on page A17 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The Pentagon's Bad Math on Sexual Assault.
bailaviborita
05-20-2013, 18:57
- First I got an email from the Army Chief of Staff telling everyone that their primary mission is to combat sexual harassment and assault. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/hagel-details-steps-fight-military-sexual-assaults-article-1.1347436
- Next I got an email ordering me to inspect all work areas in my unit and annotate any pictures I ordered to be taken down that I deemed to be potentially offensive and of a sexual nature.
- Then I got an email telling me that Maxim magazines on desks were an example of things that were offensive.
Does anyone really think that this will decrease sexual harassment and assault survey number extrapolations?
The bottom line on this to me is that sexual harassment and assault as defined by the military and especially on military surveys is a very complex situation that will be very tough to tackle ('ever been inappropriately touched' is the standard???). We can't get Afghans to clean weapons and use power point- do we really think we can change the culture of the average American male- and I'm not talking sexual harassment and assault- I'm talking about the cultural change everyone is talking about. The objectification of women isn't going away with some military objectification inspections. Instead this will be used by some with an agenda to get more power- in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that is who is pushing this to begin with.
I have been aware of and/or involved with sexual assault investigations only twice in my career. One was a drunken orgy that ended in the morning with the woman accusing one of the men involved (only one) of rape. The other was a woman who accused three men of sexual assault and/or harassment only to find one unsubstantiated, one totally false (proven false), and the other a 50-50 proposition (she was just as in the wrong as he was in their recorded, on-line flirtations). I have not been aware of or involved with any investigations that rose to the level of the assaults that seem to make the headlines. Although I am sure they exist- I just haven't seen them on the scale that everyone makes them out to be (an epidemic).
My take on the problem is that at the same time the military is being forced to establish a sterile sexual environment- our pop culture is going in the exact opposite direction. We preach tolerance, individual choice, privacy, co-ed everything and 'anything goes' sexual relationship values- and yet expect our commanders to enforce terribly infeasible sex standards that amount to abstinence in both speech and actions. It amazes me the careerism that has turned our senior leadership into reactionary tools.
And I can't believe that the only person with balls in the military is a female Marine officer...
And to top it all off.....we want to integrate combat arms. Assclowns.
And the "hits" just keep on comin'... :mad:
Sergeant Accused of Secretly Filming Female Cadets
NYT, 22 May 2013
A sergeant first class on the staff of the United States Military Academy at West Point faces charges for allegedly videotaping female cadets without their consent, sometimes when they were in the shower, according to Army officials.
The Army is contacting a dozen women to alert them that their privacy may have been violated and to offer support or counseling as required, officials said.
The suspect, Sgt. First Class Michael McClendon, faces charges under four articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for indecent acts, dereliction in the performance of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, and actions prejudicial to good order and discipline. Sergeant McClendon, who had been assigned to the school since 2009, was transferred to Fort Drum, N.Y., after charges were filed on May 14, Army officials said.
During his tenure at West Point, Sergeant McClendon served as a “tactical noncommissioned officer,” described in academy personnel documents as a staff adviser “responsible for the health, welfare and discipline” of a company of 125 cadets. The person in the position is expected to “assist each cadet in balancing and integrating the requirements of physical, military, academic and moral-ethical programs.”
(Cont'd) http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/us/sergeant-accused-of-secretly-filming-female-cadets.html?hp&_r=0
Oh cool! Can I play "cite the study" too?
Victims of sex assaults in military are mostly men
Washington Times, 20 May 2013
More military men than women are sexually abused in the ranks each year, a Pentagon survey shows, highlighting the underreporting of male-on-male assaults.
When the Defense Department released the results of its anonymous sexual abuse survey this month and concluded that 26,000 service members were victims in fiscal 2012, which ended Sept. 30, an automatic assumption was that most were women. But roughly 14,000 of the victims were male and 12,000 female, according to a scientific survey sample produced by the Pentagon.
continued at link below:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/20/victims-of-sex-assaults-in-military-are-mostly-sil/print/
So I guess we need to focus less on the environmental factors leading to the objectification of women, and more on administering hormonal therapy to reduce the testosterone of the average US military male.
quit all the crying and continue the experiment...
PedOncoDoc
05-24-2013, 05:39
quit all the crying and continue the experiment...
If we had this level of adverse events in a medical study, we would shut it down, if we didn't - the ethics board (of the federal oversight on clinical trials) would.
Just sayin....
bailaviborita
07-23-2014, 13:11
Everyone should be glad to know that my unit no longer allows the local paper (Fayetteville) to be delivered or for anyone to possess such terrible objectification of women trash on their desks. During a walk-through investigation for Maxim and the like, a turned-over newspaper revealed an advertisement for women's bras. The newspaper ad was compared to the Maxim cover given as an example of what could not be tolerated and it was apparent that the newspaper ad was actually worse...
During a walk-through investigation for Maxim and the like, a turned-over newspaper revealed an advertisement for women's bras.
Uh, oh! :D
Pat
bailaviborita
07-23-2014, 19:24
Camp MacKall. Maxim magazine was the example. Students had to cough up a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit addition and the Company XO had to cough up the Fayetteville Newspaper...
Both were dutifully reported up the chain as incidents... presumably all the way to the Army CofS as positive metrics of the cleaning up of the Army...
Get the fuck out of here.... At Camp Mackall?!
Who was checking on this?
At least we haven't gotten to the point where someone files a SHARPs complaint because someone working out in a gym in Afghanistan was seen wearing a t-shirt that says "sex, weights, and protein shakes"
...because THAT shit would be WAY too offensive to tolerate.
We may have to put "21st Tactical" near Ft Bragg on the off-limits list because of those super offensive guns and titties patches they have. What kind of message are we sending when we let our troops support an establishment like that!!!
bailaviborita
07-24-2014, 05:34
Get the fuck out of here.... At Camp Mackall?!
Who was checking on this?
The chain of command, as directed by Army CofS. The crazy part is that it had to be reported- I'm assuming to feed the stats similar to the AF report that listed how many offensive materials were found.
We then had a briefing from our newly appointed green-suiter SHARPS guy. He told us no more sexual innuendo in the military as objectifying women led to sex harassment and that led to rape and that led to homicide. That logic was all on one slide (sexual innuendo=harassment=rape=homicide).
My friends in the Pentagon tell me the civilian appointees routinely say that the military's macho male culture needs to change- that it is the source for all things evil in the world...
WTF have we become. What do they want the military to be a bunch of fruit loops doing their nails talking about the view and afraid of their own shadows. We need Spartins that will fight and die if needed to keep this country safe.
Hell in my office the female agents are worse than any male with their language, jokes and attitudes. No one seams to have a problem with them........ Reminds me of how teams used to act and talk a little bit........ Refreshing
bailaviborita
07-24-2014, 07:49
There seems to be a belief nowadays that war is a luxury (we don't have to do it), when we do do it it can be relatively bloodless and mostly won by technology. Not lots of boots on the ground- and, when we do put boots on the ground, they don't have to run much risk and don't have to carry lots of stuff...
I wonder what will be said by putting up a calender of "Burqas Babes" or "Saudi T&A" (Toes and Ankles) in the team room? I'll just call it "Cultural Training" when the CSM asks. Small Victories......
better yet - post up some pictures from Blu-Boy magazine (if there is such a thing or it's equivalent) and watch the flying cheetah flips begin. They won't know WHAT to do. Simply claim you're gay and that you need this as an affirmation of your life experience. Anyone wanna bet they let you keep it...?
The chain of command, as directed by Army CofS. The crazy part is that it had to be reported- I'm assuming to feed the stats similar to the AF report that listed how many offensive materials were found.
We then had a briefing from our newly appointed green-suiter SHARPS guy. He told us no more sexual innuendo in the military as objectifying women led to sex harassment and that led to rape and that led to homicide. That logic was all on one slide (sexual innuendo=harassment=rape=homicide).
My friends in the Pentagon tell me the civilian appointees routinely say that the military's macho male culture needs to change- that it is the source for all things evil in the world...
This isn't the case across the regiment, I wonder why SWCS is leading the charge on this one. We are going to a strange, new place.... how very sad.
As for the macho culture, by all means try and get rid of it. Your recruiting and retention of warriors in the Marine Corps and Army combat arms branches will dwindle. People come here, and stay, to be part of a warrior culture. If it is dismantled, they will reap what they sow in the mid-term, not to mention the next war. Wars are won and lost by people, not equipment, and the intangibles matter.
This isn't the case across the regiment, I wonder why SWCS is leading the charge on this one. We are going to a strange, new place.... how very sad.
As for the macho culture, by all means try and get rid of it. Your recruiting and retention of warriors in the Marine Corps and Army combat arms branches will dwindle. People come here, and stay, to be part of a warrior culture. If it is dismantled, they will reap what they sow in the mid-term, not to mention the next war. Wars are won and lost by people, not equipment, and the intangibles matter.
Hmmm, project "Diane" comes to mind, wonder if they're sterilizing before that???
Hmmm, project "Diane" comes to mind, wonder if they're sterilizing before that???
Probably.
Although I did hear today that starting in 2016....anyone....wanting to branch infantry will have to complete Ranger School first after getting commisioned. Gave me a warm feeling inside that someone, somewhere, has the Army's best interests in mind. While Ranger can be modified, it will be enough to break down...anyone....who doesn't want to be an infantry officer for the right reasons.
Probably.
Although I did hear today that starting in 2016....anyone....wanting to branch infantry will have to complete Ranger School first after getting commisioned. Gave me a warm feeling inside that someone, somewhere, has the Army's best interests in mind. While Ranger can be modified, it will be enough to break down...anyone....who doesn't want to be an infantry officer for the right reasons.
Until women are allowed to go to Ranger School.
bailaviborita
07-24-2014, 19:38
Lest we forget:
http://professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36859&highlight=empathy+bellies&page=4 ("Army Orders Soldiers to Wear Fake Breasts and 'Empathy' Bellies")
I guess the quote: "Based on the direct order to integrate women into all jobs and schools by 2015, it seems to me illegal and a complete disregard for a direct order to continue to ban women from Ranger school. After all, Ranger school, like all other combat schools, is no longer reserved for men, it is reserved for warfighters."
From: http://taskandpurpose.com/qualified-female-soldiers-want-wear-ranger-tab/
is implying the idea that everyone is a "warfighter" (read: "warrior").
Makes me wonder how to reconcile the stars and stripes story with Heraclitus' quote on warriors in light of everyone being one...
“Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back.”
Until women are allowed to go to Ranger School.
The change will coincide with women being allowed to branch infantry.
Again, Ranger can always be changed. But even in a modified form it will still be an ass-kicker. And this COA is a far better one than allowing women to branch infantry, attend the far less demanding Infantry Officers Basic Couse, and be real deal platoon leaders. At least the ones the force is stuck with will have passed some sort of trial of will, even in a reduced form, and may be less of a burden to the warfighting career fields.
It would have been easy to do it the other way, and more politically expedient as well. Someone at the 4 star level is playing both sides. Better than I expected anyway.
The change will coincide with women being allowed to branch infantry.
Again, Ranger can always be changed. But even in a modified form it will still be an ass-kicker. And this COA is a far better one than allowing women to branch infantry, attend the far less demanding Infantry Officers Basic Couse, and be real deal platoon leaders. At least the ones the force is stuck with will have passed some sort of trial of will, even in a reduced form, and may be less of a burden to the warfighting career fields.
It would have been easy to do it the other way, and more politically expedient as well. Someone at the 4 star level is playing both sides. Better than I expected anyway.
Disagree. If it is dumbed down enough so a larger percentage can pass, which it will have to, it will not be an ass kicker nor a discriminator.
bailaviborita
07-24-2014, 20:24
I wonder if guys will want to go to Ranger if they let women in- regardless of whether they change the standards or not. Heck- will guys want to go SF if a bunch of women wear the beret? Maybe things are changing- although talking to cadets out of the various academies I'd say nothing much has changed vis-a-vis the sexes- but I'd say that most guys won't want to bother with things that lose their tough- natured appeal...
If "everyone" wears a tab and a green beret (even if just the perception)- will they still carry the same distinction? Airborne School used to be hard...
I am just wondering who will be teaching Ranger School? If a Ranger Qualified SM doesn't fill out a 4187 to have his tab revoked the minute a female does 1 push-up without a proper (buzz) haircut, the standard has been lowered. Period. I will not be associated with a group of people who lower the standards just to appease the PC morons that don't give a shit about winning on the field of battle. If EVERY SINGLE Victor Qualled guy did the same, what the hell would / could they do? It's a voulenteer organization, you can voulenteer OUT just as easy as you voulenteered in!