SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Page 1 of 3123>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Miltary's sexual assault problem< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 07 2013, 9:33 pm  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

First some background


Pentagon estimates of how many troops are sexually assaulted show the numbers increased by 35% since 2010, from 19,300
service members believed to be victims that year to 26,000 in 2012, according to a Defense Department survey released Tuesday.


http://www.usatoday.com/story....#

More articles on the problem and in particular the problem with rape

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politic....76

http://www.salon.com/2013/02/14/inside_the_military_rape_cult_partner/

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazin....?page=1

So with that in mind we also have the following


An Air Force officer was arrested for sexual assault. The remarkable thing is the accused man was the chief of
the Air Force sexual assault prevention unit.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18....assault


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
justwalkin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 494
Joined: Nov. 2008
PostIcon Posted on: May 07 2013, 9:35 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

This is unacceptable.  The military should be disbanded at once.

--------------
If a day in the mountains is better than a week at work, why aren't I working in the mountains?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 3
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 07 2013, 9:39 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

is that how you try and rationalize the problem?

By making a foolish sarcastic remark that reflects no one's position?


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 9:50 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ May 07 2013, 9:39 pm)
QUOTE
is that how you try and rationalize the problem?

By making a foolish sarcastic remark that reflects no one's position?

Perhaps we need to rethink the whole idea of gender integration in the Armed Forces?
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
geophagous Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1782
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 12:07 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Right.

The answer is that men just HAVE to harass women, so just get RID of the women.

NOW that is smart thinking!

The military is not some super "special" place that men need to be that way in.  Anyone who says so is just making excuses.

Might as well say it is the woman's fault as well.  Damn b*tch should know better than to be around a man and not be willing to put up with ANYTHING he wants!!!

YES that is the attitude that has made us a great country for sure!
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
ol-zeke Search for posts by this member.
Clear Creek
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12362
Joined: Sep. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 12:15 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I was thinking the opposite way, Geo.  Maybe we should ban men from the armed services.  Might lead to less need of such a large force and expensive toys.  

--------------
Everything I know, I learned by doing it wrong at least twice.

"I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on earth."  Steve McQueen
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
Lamebeaver Search for posts by this member.
trail? I don't need no stinkin trail!
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 18986
Joined: Aug. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 12:41 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

There's an old saying that a soldier who won't F _ _ _ won't fight.

Not meaning any disrespect to the military, but these are people who earn their living by directly or indirectly killing, or being willing to kill other people.  That's their purpose.

It's hard to train a person so they'll ram a bayonet through another man's chest without hesitation, and then walk off the field and behave in a manner acceptable to our modern, politically-correct society.  There's a bit of a paradox here.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 8
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 1:52 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(KenV @ May 08 2013, 9:50 am)
QUOTE

(Dennis The Menace @ May 07 2013, 9:39 pm)
QUOTE
is that how you try and rationalize the problem?

By making a foolish sarcastic remark that reflects no one's position?

Perhaps we need to rethink the whole idea of gender integration in the Armed Forces?

I hope Kenv is being sarcastic


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
double cabin Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 16481
Joined: Nov. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 2:23 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

With all due respect LB a fraction of a single percentage of our armed forces are ever called upon to kill.

The fact we spend more than at least the next ten if not next 17 nations combined on our military and we have this unacceptable problem is just another example of why a whole lot more of us should heed Eisenhower's words. When my disabled Vietnam Vet buddy got a letter from the Bush 43 Administration asking for him to give up some of his benefits for returning Iraq/Afghanistan vets while Blackwater,d Haliburton, Marathon, etc.  were raking in should disgust each and everyone of us. Women afraid to go to the bathroom in Iraq and dieing of dehyration as a result should disgust us all too.

We'll never have accountability if we don't demand it...and then verify it.


--------------
We have nothing to fear but an industry of fear...and man skirts.

http://www.facebook.com/media/albums/?id=129511480442251
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 10
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 3:42 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(geophagous @ May 08 2013, 12:07 pm)
QUOTE
Right.

The answer is that men just HAVE to harass women, so just get RID of the women.

NOW that is smart thinking!

The military is not some super "special" place that men need to be that way in.  Anyone who says so is just making excuses.

Might as well say it is the woman's fault as well.  Damn b*tch should know better than to be around a man and not be willing to put up with ANYTHING he wants!!!

YES that is the attitude that has made us a great country for sure!

You missed the point.   The military environment is VERY different than the civilian environment.  The present societal denial of this obvious truth is foolhardy and counterproductive.  Could that environment cause the observed behavior?  Could a reasonable solution to such behavior be to not have a gender integrated armed forces?  Note what I said there.  I did NOT say to "get rid" of the women. Nor did I suggest it was their fault.  Nor did I suggest that men "HAVE" to assault women.  But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.  Perhaps the solution is to keep the women in the armed forces, but to provide more segregation between the genders.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42724
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 4:07 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

So the people who currently  staff the military cannot be trusted to follow their orders?

The usual response to that is prosecution: and selecting people who will. Starting with the NOT "19 or 20 year" old Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski. The fish rots from the head down.

Yes the military environment is very different: following orders is not optional.

Though that message may have been muddied a bit by the recent ruling of the "Kill Team" ringleader:
http://www.channel4.com/news....-murder

"Gibbs was convicted on three counts of premeditated murder in the slayings of Afghan villagers last year that were disguised as legitimate combat engagements. Prosecutors said he acted as the chief instigator behind those killings and other assaults by members of his self-described "kill team".

Besides charges of murder, conspiracy and other offences, he was found guilty of beating a soldier who reported hashish use to superiors and of military code violations for cutting fingers off bodies as war trophies."

Parole in 8 1/2 years?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
Lamebeaver Search for posts by this member.
trail? I don't need no stinkin trail!
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 18986
Joined: Aug. 2004
PostIcon Posted on: May 08 2013, 4:39 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(double cabin @ May 08 2013, 12:23 pm)
QUOTE
With all due respect LB a fraction of a single percentage of our armed forces are ever called upon to kill.

With all due respect, DC, the people not directly involved in doing the killing (infantry, armor, SAC, etc.) are working to support that function.   The military has one purpose, to back up the foreign policy of the USA, and if that fails, to project that policy by force.

The cook in the mess hall who feeds the soldiers is just much a part of the machine as the soldier who pulls the trigger.

You can't be part of the military without supporting the mission.  It would be like a vegan working in a butcher shop and saying "hey, I don't believe in killing animals, but I don't actually kill them, I just grind hamburger."
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 1:15 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

kenv said
QUOTE

You missed the point.   The military environment is VERY different than the civilian
environment.  The present societal denial of this obvious truth is foolhardy and
counterproductive.  Could that environment cause the observed behavior?  Could a reasonable
solution to such behavior be to not have a gender integrated armed forces?  Note what I said
there.  I did NOT say to "get rid" of the women. Nor did I suggest it was their fault.  Nor
did I suggest that men "HAVE" to assault women.  But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and
women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to the military
is having a bad effect.  Perhaps the solution is to keep the women in the armed forces, but
to provide more segregation between the genders.


So stress is the cause of the sexual assaults? What documentation can you cite that correlates
stress with causing sexual assaults? If this is true there should be a higher correlation
between those in the military who have been in combat committing sexual assaults and those in
the military who haven't been in combat. What is the evidence? This seem like a preposterous
claim.

BTW Israel has a very integrated military and nor can it be said that those in the Israel
military have less reason to fell stress than the US military given the long long history of
Israel and much of the middle east in so far as military confrontation yet does Israel have
the sexual assault problem that the US does? I don't think so.


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
Chuck D Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 7856
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 8:18 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

How does the number of sexual assualts in the military compare to the rest of the population?

--------------
Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry,
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 15
ol-zeke Search for posts by this member.
Clear Creek
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12362
Joined: Sep. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 8:32 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

If 19-20 yr old soldiers are the ones who are having the difficulty, then I suggest we go back to the WW2 era age soldiers, where the avg ages were 25-27.  

I still see this as a problem of "boys will be boys" mentality.  Give clear and explicit training, and then prosecute all offenders fully.  Make the penalties applicable to the crime, and discharge, imprison, or fine as needed.  


--------------
Everything I know, I learned by doing it wrong at least twice.

"I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on earth."  Steve McQueen
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 16
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 8:52 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ May 09 2013, 1:15 am)
QUOTE
So stress is the cause of the sexual assaults? What documentation can you cite that correlates
stress with causing sexual assaults? If this is true there should be a higher correlation
between those in the military who have been in combat committing sexual assaults and those in
the military who haven't been in combat. What is the evidence? This seem like a preposterous
claim.

Hello Dennis!  See that little curvy thing at the end of my sentence?  That's called a question mark.  That means the sentence preceding it was a question, not a statement nor a declaration nor a "claim".  If there was a "preposterous claim" it was your assertion that I made any "claim" at all.   I asked questions.

I have no idea if stress "is the cause of the sexual assaults".  I do know that the military environment is by nature stressful.  In multiple ways.  There are also many other aspects of the military environment that are very different than a civilian environment.  Those are facts.  Another fact is that the military draws from the general population and is (generally) a reflection of that population.  Another fact is that the military population. despite drawing from the general population, has a high incidence of sexual assault.

Given those facts, the QUESTION I'm posing is (this is a QUESTION Dennis, not a claim), could the military environment be causing the observed negative behaviors?

If so, what is the solution?

Can we change the environment without damaging the ability of the armed forces to perform their mission?  If so, what in the environment do we change?

If changing the environment is not a viable option, what can we change to prevent the observed behaviors?  Would less gender integration and more gender segregation be a solution?  And even if that solves the problem, is it an acceptable solution?

QUOTE
BTW Israel has a very integrated military and nor can it be said that those in the Israel
military have less reason to fell stress than the US military given the long long history of
Israel and much of the middle east in so far as military confrontation yet does Israel have
the sexual assault problem that the US does? I don't think so.
Hmmm.  Let me quote someone's phrase that may be familiar to you.  "What documentation can you cite that" supports two supposition you made in the quote above as follows:
1. The Israeli military is "very integrated" gender wise
2. The Israeli military has no sexual assault problem.

Separately, are comparisons of the Israeli military (which is predominantly a conscript force) with the US military (which is an entirely volunteer force) valid?  Despite the huge differences in the two militaries and the populations each military draws from, let's assume comparisons between the two are valid.

Given the above assumption, what do you REALLY know about the Isreali military?  Is your supposition that the Isreali military is gender integrated the way the US military is have any basis in fact?

The Israeli military is based on a gendered division of labor and a gendered structure of power. ( LINK )

If it is true that Israel has no "sexual assault problem" is it because the Isreali military is LESS gender integrated than the US military?

It is a fact that women have had combat roles in the Israeli military for far FAR longer than women in the US military.  Given that fact, should we perhaps ask ourselves the following questions:  (Please note, Dennis, that unlike you I am posing QUESTIONS, and not making any claims.)

Is the Isreali experience applicable to the US military?  Why or why not?
Is the US military's recent problem with sexual assaults related to the US military's recent high gender integration?
Should the US military have LESS gender integration in a manner similar to the Israeli military?  Why or why not?
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 8:55 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(ol-zeke @ May 09 2013, 8:32 am)
QUOTE
If 19-20 yr old soldiers are the ones who are having the difficulty, then I suggest we go back to the WW2 era age soldiers, where the avg ages were 25-27. 

How do you propose we accomplish that?  The WW2 military was highly conscript, and the vast majority of volunteers did so because of an ongoing major war.  Today's military is entirely volunteer.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 18
ol-zeke Search for posts by this member.
Clear Creek
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12362
Joined: Sep. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 9:03 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Chuck D @ May 09 2013, 5:18 am)
QUOTE
How does the number of sexual assualts in the military compare to the rest of the population?

I looked up some numbers for you, Chuck.

There were a reported 26,000 sexual assaults in the military in the last year reported.  There were 1.43 million service members, so 1 in 55 were assaulted.  The military estimated 80-90% of assaults go unreported.  That is 1 in 5 women, and 1 in 15 men, in 1 year, not during their entire service.

40% of all female service members say they were raped or assaulted during their time of service.  61% of women in the Army make the same statement.

As a comparison, 25% of college women state they were sexually assaulted during their years in college.


--------------
Everything I know, I learned by doing it wrong at least twice.

"I would rather wake up in the middle of nowhere than in any city on earth."  Steve McQueen
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 19
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 1:11 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

kenv said
QUOTE

Hello Dennis!  See that little curvy thing at the end of my sentence?  That's called a question mark.  That means the sentence preceding it was a question, not a statement nor a declaration nor a "claim".  If there was a "preposterous claim" it was your assertion that I made any "claim" at all.   I asked questions.


Hello Kenv. But there wasn't any question mark.

here is the relevant sentence

But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly
stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.


^^ No question mark in the above

The phrases in the above that are most relevant are "stressful environment" and "bad effect"

Since the topic is sexual assaults in the military the clear implication is that what kenv
refers to as "bad effect" must refer to sexual assaults

kenv says
QUOTE

I have no idea if stress "is the cause of the sexual assaults".


Then why did Kenv make the statement(not a question)

But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly
stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.
?

Note "is having a bad effect"

Not "might be having a bad effect" or "probably is having a bad effect"

and again since the topic is about sexual assaults what else could Kenv be referring to
by "bad effect"?

kenv says
QUOTE

I do know that the military environment is by nature stressful.  In multiple ways.  There
are also many other aspects of the military environment that are very different than a
civilian environment.  Those are facts.  Another fact is that the military draws from the
general population and is (generally) a reflection of that population.  Another fact is that
 the military population. despite drawing from the general population, has a high incidence
 of sexual assault.

Given those facts, the QUESTION I'm posing is (this is a QUESTION Dennis, not a claim), could
the military environment be causing the observed negative behaviors?


I was talking about Kenv's statement(not question) which implied stress was a cause of sexual
assaults. Kenv is trying to backpeddle away from what he said.

kenv says
QUOTE

If so, what is the solution?

Can we change the environment without damaging the ability of the armed forces to perform their mission?  If so, what in the environment do we change?

If changing the environment is not a viable option, what can we change to prevent the observed behaviors?  Would less gender integration and more gender segregation be a solution?  And even if that solves the problem, is it an acceptable solution?


how about to start we actually have leaders in the military that are tough on those that
commit sexual assaults and don't pull stuff like the following


The Air Force was already grappling with the case in which Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin,
commander of the Third Air Force in Europe, reversed a guilty decision in the sexual assault
case of an Air Force lieutenant colonel
-- a decision that has received high-level scrutiny
from Congress and the Pentagon


http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article....tufts_d

kenv says
QUOTE

Hmmm.  Let me quote someone's phrase that may be familiar to you.  "What documentation can you cite that" supports two supposition you made in the quote above as follows:
1. The Israeli military is "very integrated" gender wise



The IDF is the only army in which women are drafted as part of their country’s  mandatory
military service requirement and as such it has the highest proportion of enlisted female
conscripts in its forces.  Women comprise 34% of all IDF soldiers and fulfill various  
senior and combat roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. Currently,  88% of all roles
in the IDF are open to female candidates.


http://www.idfblog.com/2010....ug-2010

So it seems pretty clear to me that the IDF is not only very integrated but the most integrated
military in the WORLD when it comes to integrating women in the military.  Geez Kenv has to
realize that his discussing something with DTM and DTM isn't like Kenv where Kenv makes
claim after unsupported claim

kenv says
QUOTE

2. The Israeli military has no sexual assault problem.


^^ Strawman...who has the reading comprehension problem now?

That isn't what I said

I asked the question  "yet does Israel have the sexual assault problem that the US does?"
(see the ? at the end?)"

Then I said  "I don't think so.". That means I don't think Israel has the sexual assault
problem the US has which does NOT translate into "Israel has no no sexual assault problem."

kenv says
QUOTE

Separately, are comparisons of the Israeli military (which is predominantly a conscript
force) with the US military (which is an entirely volunteer force) valid?  Despite the huge
differences in the two militaries and the populations each military draws from, let's assume
comparisons between the two are valid.


explain how the fact that the Israel military has an all volunteer force would explain any
potential differences in sexual assaults between the IDF and US military?

kenv says
QUOTE

Given the above assumption, what do you REALLY know about the Isreali military?  


Lets quote the quote again


The IDF is the only army in which women are drafted as part of their country’s  mandatory
military service requirement and as such it has the highest proportion of enlisted female
conscripts in its forces.  Women comprise 34% of all IDF soldiers and fulfill various  
senior and combat roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. Currently,  88% of all roles
in the IDF are open to female candidates.


http://www.idfblog.com/2010....ug-2010


In fact I was even surprised by the extent of those #'s. I knew the IDF was very integrated
but not that much.

But what does Kenv really know about ANYTHING? Time and time again he comes on this forum
with so much confidence in what says yet but time and time again he is proved wrong over and
over again.

For example, Kenv claims to have worked for the ATF and he went on and on and on very very
confidently, as Kenv almost always is, how the ATF doesn't regulate the gun industry even
though over and over again on ATF's very own website it said they in fact do regulate the
gun industry. If Kenv doesn't even know such a simple fact about an organization he
apparently worked at then heck, only a fool would take Kenv's word on ANYTHING he claims.  
Its amazing the mismatch between the confidence Kenv shows and how often he is wrong. For those
interested observe the huge mismatch in the confidence Kenv displays in his posts to how
often he is wrong in this forum. No other forum member in this forum that I can think of
comes close to Kenv in this regard.

kenv says
QUOTE

If it is true that Israel has no "sexual assault problem" is it because the Isreali military
is LESS gender integrated than the US military?


well the quote that I've quoted twice now puts the "Isreali military is LESS gender
integrated than the US military?" to rest.

kenv says
QUOTE

It is a fact that women have had combat roles in the Israeli military for far FAR longer
than women in the US military.  Given that fact, should we perhaps ask ourselves the
following questions:  (Please note, Dennis, that unlike you I am posing QUESTIONS, and not
making any claims.)


Again the following was not a question
But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly
stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.


This, by me on the other hand, was a question

yet does Israel have the sexual assault problem that the US does?

kenv says
QUOTE

Is your supposition that the Isreali military is gender integrated the way the US military is have any basis in fact?


Here is the quote again


The IDF is the only army in which women are drafted as part of their country’s  mandatory
military service requirement and as such it has the highest proportion of enlisted female
conscripts in its forces.  Women comprise 34% of all IDF soldiers and fulfill various  
senior and combat roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. Currently,  88% of all roles
in the IDF are open to female candidates.


http://www.idfblog.com/2010....ug-2010


Its amazing. Kenv and I have had countless back and forth discussions yet he hasn't learned
by now that when I make a statement, unlike Kenv, that I do have the facts to back it up and
that I'm not just talking out of my arse like Kenv routinely does.

kenv says
QUOTE

Is the Isreali experience applicable to the US military?  Why or why not?


The relevant characteristic of the US military that Kenv highlighted in relationship to the
subject matter at hand was "stress" and so if that is the relevant characteristic then what
other military would be more applicable to the US military?

kenv says
QUOTE

Is the US military's recent problem with sexual assaults related to the US military's recent high gender integration?
Should the US military have LESS gender integration in a manner similar to the Israeli military?  Why or why not?


So what does Kenv really know about the Isreali military? Clearly in the above he thinks the
US is more gender integrated than the US given the part where he says Should the US
military have LESS gender integration in a manner similar to the Israeli military


Here is the quote again


The IDF is the only army in which women are drafted as part of their country’s  mandatory
military service requirement and as such it has the highest proportion of enlisted female
conscripts in its forces.  Women comprise 34% of all IDF soldiers and fulfill various  
senior and combat roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. Currently,  88% of all roles
in the IDF are open to female candidates.


http://www.idfblog.com/2010....ug-2010


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 20
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 09 2013, 1:15 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(ol-zeke @ May 09 2013, 9:03 am)
QUOTE

(Chuck D @ May 09 2013, 5:18 am)
QUOTE
How does the number of sexual assualts in the military compare to the rest of the population?

I looked up some numbers for you, Chuck.

There were a reported 26,000 sexual assaults in the military in the last year reported.  There were 1.43 million service members, so 1 in 55 were assaulted.  The military estimated 80-90% of assaults go unreported.  That is 1 in 5 women, and 1 in 15 men, in 1 year, not during their entire service.

40% of all female service members say they were raped or assaulted during their time of service.  61% of women in the Army make the same statement.

As a comparison, 25% of college women state they were sexually assaulted during their years in college.

damn

those are some pretty pathetic #'s.

Seriously WTF is wrong with our culture?

Then again its not just our culture.

India, for example, seems to have a huge problem with rape(obviously here I'm not
just talking about rape in the military but the society in general)


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 21
wwwest Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6286
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 10 2013, 2:51 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

It's hard to train a person so they'll ram a bayonet through another man's chest without hesitation, and then walk off the field and behave in a manner acceptable to our modern, politically-correct society.  There's a bit of a paradox here.

I am ashamed to read such a statement from an American who claims to admire our armed forces.  And I am amazed that KenV would join in defending this totally unacceptable behavior, he being a graduate of the Naval Academy.

I know several active members of our armed forces and every one of them is a sterling example of good citizenship and well able to distinguish right from wrong and to understand the rules of engagement.

Two are women, and they both see this as a huge problem that is making both the Army and the Navy much less effective organizations.

None of them are "bayonet rammers", as most members of the armed forces are not.  But they all deal with command decisions that send aircraft and drones to kill the intended target, or operate ships in a hostile environment.

I think that our soldiers and sailors are a lot better, and a lot smarter, than this behavior suggests.  What we need is some effective leadership.  Get a woman appointed the Joint Chief of Staff and watch how things improve.  

The Air Force Academy just appointed the first woman Commandant there, and I expect we will be seeing some noticeable improvement in the Air Force experience for women in the near future.


--------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 22
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 2:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

No question mark?   Dennis, you took my post out of context.  
The fact is there were multiple question marks in my post.  My whole post was:

The military environment is VERY different than the civilian  environment.  The present societal denial of this obvious truth is foolhardy and counterproductive.  Could that environment cause the observed behavior?  Could a reasonable solution to such behavior be to not have a gender integrated armed forces?

Those are statements of fact followed by two questions.  Again, I’m making no claims about the causes of the observed behaviors.  I’m asking questions.

The above was immediately followed with:

Note what I said  there.  I did NOT say to "get rid" of the women. Nor did I suggest it was their fault.  Nor did I suggest that men "HAVE" to assault women.  But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.  Perhaps the solution is to keep the women in the armed forces, but to provide more segregation between the genders?

Again a few statements followed by a question.  So, if I have been unclear, let me be as clear as I know how.  My intent is NOT to make claims about the causes of this problem.  My intent is to ask questions intended to explore the problem.

And further, the issue I’m raising is NOT the "presence of women" in the US military.  The issue I’m raising is the high level of gender integration in the US Military.

So the QUESTION I’m raising is, is the high incidence of sexual assaults in the military NOT a result of the presence of women in our military, but is it perhaps a result of the high level of integration of women in our military?  Again, that’s a question.

Perhaps our experiment with high gender integration in the military is proving to be a failure and as I asked in my opening post “Perhaps we need to rethink the whole idea of gender integration in the Armed Forces?

I don’t know what the cause is nor what the solution is.  But assuming the cause is high gender integration, would less gender integration be a solution?  And even if it is a solution, would it be an acceptable solution?  I don’t know, but I thought it worthwhile to discuss.  I guess no one agrees.  Most everyone here is much more satisfied with simply attacking our military.  Which I guess is pretty much par for the course.

As for women in the IDF, my previous post clearly stated that the IDF has lots of women.  That’s an indisputable fact.  But “women in the military” is NOT the issue I’m discussing.  Gender integration in the military is what I’m discussing.  There's a difference.  Dennis seems to deny there is a difference, but I insist that there is a HUGE difference.

For example, there were LOTS of African Americans in the US Military during WW2.  However the US military was not in the slightest racially integrated during that time.

In like fashion, although the IDF has the highest proportion of females serving in the military, the IDF is not nearly as gender integrated as the US military.  In fact, the IDF “is based on a gendered division of labor and a gendered structure of power."  The US military does NOT have the IDF’s gender division of labor NOR does it have the IDF’s gendered structure of power.  Thus it would appear that gender comparisons between the IDF and US Military are simply invalid.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 23
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 3:00 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

kenv said
QUOTE

Umm Dennis, you took my statement out of context.  My whole statement was:


No I didn't but I was expecting that response from Kenv

Kenv said
QUOTE


The military environment is VERY different than the civilian  environment.  The present societal denial of this obvious truth is foolhardy and counterproductive.  Could that environment cause the observed behavior?  Could a reasonable solution to such behavior be to not have a gender integrated armed forces?


Those are statements of fact followed by two questions.  Again, I’m making no claims about the causes of the observed behaviors.  I’m asking questions.

The above was immediately followed with:

Note what I said  there.  I did NOT say to "get rid" of the women. Nor did I suggest it was their fault.  Nor did I suggest that men "HAVE" to assault women.  But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.  Perhaps the solution is to keep the women in the armed forces, but to provide more segregation between the genders?

Again a few statements followed by a question.  So, if I have been unclear, let me be as clear as I know how.  My intent is NOT to make claims about the causes of this problem.  I’m asking questions intended to explore the problem.


I made it very clear that I was not responding to those questions but this particular
statement from kenv within that paragraph which once again was

But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly
stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad effect.


Kenv said
QUOTE

And further, the issue I’m raising is NOT the "presence of women" in the US military.  The issue I’m raising is the high level of gender integration in the US Military.


Which I addressed by brining up the IDF.

Kenv said
QUOTE

I don’t know what the cause is nor what the solution is.  But assuming the cause is high
gender integration, would less gender integration be a solution?  And even if it is a
solution, would it be an acceptable solution?  I don’t know, but I thought it worthwhile to
discuss.  I guess no one agrees.  Most everyone here is much more satisfied with simply
attacking our military.  Which I guess is pretty much par for the course.

As for women in the IDF, my previous post clearly stated that the IDF has lots of women.  
That’s an indisputable fact.  But “women in the military” is NOT the issue I’m discussing.  
Gender integration in the military is what I’m discussing.  There's a difference.  Dennis
seems to deny there is a difference, but I insist that there is a HUGE difference.

For example, there were LOTS of African Americans in the US Military during WW2.  However
the US military was not in the slightest racially integrated during that time.

In like fashion, although the IDF has the highest proportion of females serving in the
military, the IDF is not nearly as gender integrated as the US military.  In fact, the IDF
“is based on a gendered division of labor and a gendered structure of power."  The US
military does NOT have the IDF’s gender division of labor NOR does it have the IDF’s
gendered structure of power.  Thus it would appear that gender comparisons between the IDF
and US Military are simply invalid.


So what is the point here? That according to kenv, More women in the US are in positions of
power in the military compared to that of the IDF and that could be the cause of the high
incidences of sexual assault?


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 24
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 3:31 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(wwwest @ May 10 2013, 2:51 pm)
QUOTE
It's hard to train a person so they'll ram a bayonet through another man's chest without hesitation, and then walk off the field and behave in a manner acceptable to our modern, politically-correct society.  There's a bit of a paradox here.

I am ashamed to read such a statement from an American who claims to admire our armed forces.  And I am amazed that KenV would join in defending this totally unacceptable behavior, he being a graduate of the Naval Academy.

Wait,  WHAT??!!??

Where did I state, suggest, or imply that I defended such behavior?  It's despicable behavior.  That's a given.  The question is what is causing the behavior and what can we do to prevent the behavior?

QUOTE
I know several active members of our armed forces and every one of them is a sterling example of good citizenship and well able to distinguish right from wrong and to understand the rules of engagement.
Ummm, I have personally served with literally hundreds of women in our armed forces, and have literally put my life in the hands of many many women.  With few exceptions, they were exceptional individuals.

QUOTE
None of them are "bayonet rammers", as most members of the armed forces are not.
I'm not sure if this "bayonet rammer" business is relevant.  Because while I was never in a position to be a "bayonet rammer", I still received bayonet training as pretty much everyone who goes through military training receives some form of bayonet training.  Not for the physical skill such training provides, but for the mental/emotional toughness such training provides.  Separately, I have been in a position to blow people up and have in fact done so.  I believe it is no less difficult mentally and emotionally (and perhaps more difficult) to do that than to do "bayonett ramming".

QUOTE
But they all deal with command decisions that send aircraft and drones to kill the intended target, or operate ships in a hostile environment.  I think that our soldiers and sailors are a lot better, and a lot smarter, than this behavior suggests.
And I am very confident that they most CERTAINLY are better than this behavior suggests.  So what is causing this behavior?  Are there inherent flaws in our military's structure?  Could one of those flaws be a structure that is too highly gender integrated?  Would a structure with more gender segregation be an improvement?  And if it did improve the sexual assault problem, would this solution be acceptable?

[/QUOTE]What we need is some effective leadership.  Get a woman appointed the Joint Chief of Staff and watch how things improve.  [/QUOTE]I think you're being naive if you think this is just a problem of leadership.  Women are in positions of leadership EVERYwhere in the military.   And do you really think that the Joint Chiefs can address this problem and putting a woman on the Joint Chiefs will magically solve it?  That seems highly naive.  But if we assume you're right, then the Commander In Chief can solve this problem.   Are you saying this is Obama's fault?!!  Or are such notions perhaps a form of misandry?

QUOTE
The Air Force Academy just appointed the first woman Commandant there, and I expect we will be seeing some noticeable improvement in the Air Force experience for women in the near future.
I believe this to be another exceedingly naive statement.  USNA had a female commandant appointed back in 2006.  Have you seen "noticeable improvement in the Navy experience for women" since then?  Hmmmm?  Or are we now experiencing an INcrease in sexual assaults in the Navy?  Or is seven years not in "the near future"?
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 25
KenV Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6865
Joined: Mar. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 5:33 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Dennis The Menace @ May 11 2013, 3:00 pm)
QUOTE
I made it very clear that I was not responding to those questions but this particular
statement from kenv within that paragraph which once again was

You made it "very clear" in that initial post that you were addressing that single specific sentence?  If you say so, Dennis.  Nevertheless, I sadly misunderstood that you were addressing that single specific sentence.  Why?  Because removing the multiple questions that surrounded that one sentence clearly altered the meaning of what I wrote.  I assumed (apparently in error) that you were better than that.

In any event, I believe I have provided sufficient additional clarification to make clear what my point is.

QUOTE
So what is the point here? That according to kenv, More women in the US are in positions of
power in the military compared to that of the IDF and that could be the cause of the high
incidences of sexual assault?
Wow, you STILL missed my point!  (Or for whatever reason are purposefully misrepresenting my point.)  Dennis, where did I state, suggest, or imply that "more women in the US are in positions of power in the military compared to that of the IDF"?  In fact, I did not.

A second point of fact: when I first brought up the issue of gender integration I never mentioned the IDF at all.  The IDF thing was your comparison, NOT mine.  And I have questioned, at least twice now, the validity of comparing the IDF with the US Military.  So I will repeat myself once again.  Such comparisons between the IDF and the US Military are not valid.   Therefore I could NOT be stating, suggesting, or implying that ANY comparison between the IDF and the US military "could be the cause of the high incidences of sexual assault."

I said that the US military has a high level of gender integration.  That's significantly different than what you stated and I quoted above.

I then asked if it is perhaps possible that such a high level of integration in a military environment can result in a higher sexual assault rate.  And if so, should the military have less gender integration?
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 26
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10012
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 9:07 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Kenv said
QUOTE

You made it "very clear" in that initial post that you were addressing that single specific sentence?  
If you say so, Dennis.  Nevertheless, I sadly misunderstood that you were addressing that single specific sentence.  Why?  Because removing the multiple questions that surrounded that one sentence clearly altered the meaning of what I wrote.  I assumed (apparently in error) that you were better than that.


In my first response to Kenv I specifically said So stress is the cause of the sexual assaults? and there
was one specific sentence that Kenv said talked about stress which was But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and
women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to the military is having a bad
effect.
.


If that wasn't clear enough then in the next response to Kenv I specifically put it in italized in post 19 the
following
"
Hello Kenv. But there wasn't any question mark.

here is the relevant sentence

But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique
to the military is having a bad effect.
.
"

and my point still stands

Kenv said(not a question) the following


But a bunch of 19 and 20 yr old men and women in close physical proximity in a highly stressful environment unique to
the military is having a bad effect.


"highly stressful environment"

"bad effect"

I mean the topic is sexual assaults in the military and so it seems pretty clear that the "bad effect" would
at the very least have to be related to the topic of sexual assaults unless this sentence is a total red
herring from Kenv.

Kenv said
QUOTE

Wow, you STILL missed my point!  (Or for whatever reason are purposefully misrepresenting my point.)  Dennis, where did I state, suggest, or imply that "more women in the US are in positions of power in the military compared to that of the IDF"?  In fact, I did not.


This is really unbelievable. In post 16 Kenv says

Hello Dennis!  See that little curvy thing at the end of my sentence?  That's called a question mark.  
That means the sentence preceding it was a question, not a statement nor a declaration nor a "claim".  
If there was a "preposterous claim" it was your assertion that I made any "claim" at all.   I asked questions.


&


QUESTION I'm posing is (this is a QUESTION Dennis, not a claim)


&


Given that fact, should we perhaps ask ourselves the following questions:  (Please note, Dennis, that unlike
you I am posing QUESTIONS, and not making any claims.)



So after making a big deal about asking questions how does Kenv react to me asking a question?

Wow, you STILL missed my point!  (Or for whatever reason are purposefully misrepresenting my point.)  
Dennis, where did I state, suggest, or imply that "more women in the US are in positions of power in the
military compared to that of the IDF"?


so much irony

Kenv said
QUOTE

A second point of fact: when I first brought up the issue of gender integration I never mentioned the IDF at all.  
The IDF thing was your comparison, NOT mine


Where did I say Kenv brought up the IDF first?

Kenv said
QUOTE

And I have questioned, at least twice now, the validity of comparing the IDF with the US Military.  So I
will repeat myself once again.  Such comparisons between the IDF and the US Military are not valid.


Why aren't such comparisons valid in this context? Kenv specifically brought up gender integration and indrectly
stress as reasons that might explain why there are such instance of sexual assault in the US military and so on
those two points Israel would be a very good comparison. What other country would be a better example in the two
points of gender integration and stress?

Kenv said
QUOTE

Therefore I could NOT be stating, suggesting, or implying that ANY comparison between the IDF and the
US military "could be the cause of the high incidences of sexual assault."


Aside from the fact it was a question once again, I never said that the comparison between the IDF and the
US caused anything. What I asked was "That according to kenv, More women in the US are in positions of
power in the military compared to that of the IDF and that could be the cause of the highlv incidences of
sexual assault?" or said in another way More(compared to that of the IDF) women in the US are in positions of
power in the military and that could be the cause of the high incidences of sexual assault? There is nothing
in those statements that said the comparison caused anything(that would be an absurd claim. Since when does
simply comparing something cause something like sexual assaults?)

and the question follows logically from what Kenv has said.

I mean what does Kenv mean by "gender integration"?

He obviously doesn't mean just having more females in the military and given the following from Kenv


As for women in the IDF, my previous post clearly stated that the IDF has lots of women.  That’s an indisputable fact.  
But “women in the military” is NOT the issue I’m discussing.  Gender integration in the military is what I’m discussing.  
There's a difference.  Dennis seems to deny there is a difference, but I insist that there is a HUGE difference.

For example, there were LOTS of African Americans in the US Military during WW2.  However the US military was not in
the slightest racially integrated during that time.

In like fashion, although the IDF has the highest proportion of females serving in the military, the IDF is not nearly
as gender integrated as the US military.  In fact, the IDF “is based on a gendered division of labor and a gendered
structure of power."  The US military does NOT have the IDF’s gender division of labor NOR does it have the IDF’s
gendered structure of power.  Thus it would appear that gender comparisons between the IDF and US Military are simply invalid.


it seems Kenv was talking about integrating women within the military hierarchy or chain of command (in other words
placing more women in positions of power) and BTW when there is talk about diversity in the work place it means
incorporating people from many different backgrounds(including females) in positions of power and so there is no
reason to believe the phrase "gender integration" wouldn't mean essentially the same thing in the military specifically
for putting more women in positions of power.

BTW I would like to see more proof to back up Kenv's statement the IDF is not nearly as gender integrated as the
US military.
especially in regard to the statement " does it have the IDF’s gendered structure of power."?
"IDF’s gendered structure of power.". SO what does Kenv mean by that exactly? I mean it seems clear to me what that
statement means by Lets see Kenv give us interpretation.


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 27
wwwest Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6286
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 11:44 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

It is very, very clear that male command officers are NOT providing the clear direction needed to address this problem.

Prime example is the General who overturned the Court Martial conviction of Lt. Colonel for sexual assault, with no explanation other than the fact he had the power to do it under the UCMJ.

Pretty clear message there, for both sexual predators and women in the services.

Another prime example is the Air Force officer in charge of improving the sexual harrasment atmosphere, who is now charged with sexual assault!!

I am guessing that having a couple of women in those slots would have resulted in totally opposite results, and both men and women would have the message that sexual assault is not ok, not tolerated, will be severly punished, even for senior officers who take advantage of their position.

I applaus Obama for making a strong statement as CinC condemning those actions, and I hope to see that his administration is putting on pressure to change the culture of accepting sexual assault as part of the service experience.

There was a big change after Tail Hook, and I am betting that there will be an even bigger reaction and positive change out of these events.  YMMV


--------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 28
pass-thru Search for posts by this member.





Group: Members
Posts: 1475
Joined: Jul. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: May 11 2013, 11:52 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

The military's sex assault problem is a horseshat illusion created and perpetrated by feminazi extremists, especially in congress, because the military conveniently serves as a whipping post, the leaders of which don't have the nuts to poke back.  

Where do they get the numbers?  They have taken the actual number of reports and multiplied by 10....bullcrap!  And many of the actual reports are FALSE reports in the first place.

In the military, underage drinking, sex in the barracks, adultery, etc, etc are all punishable crimes.  There are many criminal acts that would not be crimes in the civilian world.  Female service members who get in trouble, for fraternization or adultery, frequently throw the sex assault card in order to keep themselves out of trouble.  I have seen this OVER and OVER and OVER again.   Yet because of the political climate, EVERY complaint, no matter how ridiculous, is taken to an article 32 hearing....the military equivalent of a grand jury.

Here's one from just last week:
http://www.militarycorruption.com/femalesgt2.htm

And the UCMJ has universal jurisdiction.   So cases that get laughed out of civilian court are subsequently prosecuted in the military.  And when the result is rightfully an aquittal, congress come screaming.

I actually precided over a 32 hearing where a female enlisted made insuations of sex assault after getting an std from a male she invited to share her hotel room.  They had consenual oral sex and he stopped when she said to stop.  But that turned to an implied sex assault complaint when she broke out in a rash.  During her interview with law enforcement they were putting words in her mouth, and she said "this is really going to suck if he doesn't even have an STD." The case was dropped before trial, but that young man had to live for months with impending prosecution over his head.

I represented one of three accused who had been locked up for over 90days in solitary for gang rape.  At the article 32 the "victim" admitted upon crossexamination that the sex had been consensual and she was angry because they were too drunk to drive her home, so she called uniform victim advocate just to get  a ride home, not realizing it would turn into prosecution.  Witnesses had been readily available to testify to sounds of consensual sex but never interviewed that night.

I could give over a dozen examples just of the top of my head.

Sex assualt is less frequent in the military and treated more harshly than on any college campus, yet the military is a whipping post for politios with an agenda, and it is a shame upon our nation.

It is shameful, disgusting and sick....and I am tired to death of it.  Could be a deciding factor for me getting out.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 29
wwwest Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6286
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: May 12 2013, 12:17 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Just a wild guess on my part, based on your tone, but nearly all of the women you are serving with will not be devastated at your departure, will they?

Sounds a whole lot like the whining from prosecutors back in the 70's when sexual assault was pretty much ok if the victim was not injured to the point of hospitalization.  Same claims about inflated numbers, but it turned out they were way low.

And colleges have made some headway, still not very safe for women, but better than the military at this point.  

Examples abound, and the brass have to admit the truth of the sad situation:

BriGette McCoy described how she was raped on her first military assignment, two weeks before her 19th birthday. She described how, later that year, she was raped by another soldier in her unit.

Then came sexual harassment by two officers -- including one who requested that she be moved to work directly for him, she said Wednesday.

Testifying before lawmakers, the former Army specialist described the "anguish" and "entrapment" she felt, and the horror of the ordeal that followed.

"I no longer have any faith or hope that the military chain of command will consistently prosecute, convict, sentence and carry out the sentencing of sexual predators in uniform without absconding justice somehow," she told the Senate Armed Services Committee's subcommittee on personnel.

"It even starts at recruitment," she said. "We have quite a few of our men and women that are being raped and sexually harassed during the recruitment process."

McCoy was one of four alleged victims who testified Wednesday about a problem the military has acknowledged.

About 19,000 men and women suffer sexual assault each year in the military, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, though he noted that only about 3,200 assaults were reported. About 10,700 of those cases -- 56% -- involved male victims in 2010, based on anonymous reporting collected by the military.

In painful, dramatic testimony, three women and one man, all of whom have left the military, described their suffering -- and explained why, in some cases, they never filed reports. They helped paint a picture of the military as a place where victims are often pressured to remain quiet or endure having their reputations and careers tarnished for coming forward.


http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/us/military-sexual-assault


--------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 30
Bass Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2116
Joined: Sep. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: May 12 2013, 7:16 am Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

pass-thru
QUOTE
Where do they get the numbers?  They have taken the actual number of reports and multiplied by 10....bullcrap!  And many of the actual reports are FALSE reports in the first place.

In the military, underage drinking, sex in the barracks, adultery, etc, etc are all punishable crimes.  There are many criminal acts that would not be crimes in the civilian world.  Female service members who get in trouble, for fraternization or adultery, frequently throw the sex assault card in order to keep themselves out of trouble.  I have seen this OVER and OVER and OVER again.   Yet because of the political climate, EVERY complaint, no matter how ridiculous, is taken to an article 32 hearing....the military equivalent of a grand jury.


Good points.

I also question the numbers. Reporting rape has a lot of unpleasant consequences for a girl - so I doubt that 90% of rapes get reported in civilian life either. In military life there currently seems to be more of an effort to address this problem - to encourage reporting.

To the military's credit, girl's who report rape do not lose wages when they take time off to meet with police - and that is often a big thing. The girl's employer does not discriminate against her for reporting her rape - in fact the military provides a lot of counseling and help. In summary, I think that there are fewer disincentives to report rape for a girl in the military.

This is not to say that there probably aren't a lot of FALSE reports of rape in the military, just as there are in civilian life. Maybe there are even more false reports as pass-thru suggests.

So I do not dismiss pass-thru's point:

QUOTE
Sex assualt is less frequent in the military and treated more harshly than on any college campus, yet the military is a whipping post for politios with an agenda, and it is a shame upon our nation.


Sexual assault is a serious problem in both the military and civilian life. But because of the many factors that discourage reporting, I don't think that we can trust the numbers.

I might point out the experience with rape statistics 10 - 20 years ago in cities who began charging girls $800 - 1000 for a rape kit when they reported rape. Reported rapes in those cites dropped to a fraction of their previous levels as girls stopped reporting rape. The practice of charging the victim for the rape kit has pretty much stopped now. ( There are still other devious ways that law enforcement can discourage crime reporting and make their FBI crime statistics look better though. ) But my point is that those rape and crime numbers are often not accurate.

In summary, I think that pass-thru has some good points. Sexual assaults in the military might not really be higher. We may just be seeing more reporting because the military is addressing the sexual assault problem more than civilian law enforcement is.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
61 replies since May 07 2013, 9:33 pm < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 1 of 3123>>
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Miltary's sexual assault problem
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions