We have a follow-up to the "ladder of shame" story from last month.
Shall we let out a collective "sigh" now, or wait until the end? Once again, retrograde forces are trying to pull us back to a time of segregation and disunity and away from cohesion. For their own socio-political reasons as well, spiced up with a bit of insecurity and self-loathing to make it interesting.
As Lex points out in the thread that CO links to, looks like the CO of the HOWARD has other priorities.
On July 3, 75 women from USS Howard (DDG 83) and USS Chung Hoon (DDG 93) gathered for a women’s symposium hosted by USS Howard’s female commanding officer, Cmdr. Ande Bergmann, to discuss professional development topics for women in the US Navy, and to discuss sexual harassment, assault and the policies governing the issues.Being that you did this little stunt in civies - Skipper I'm going to call by your first name, Ande.
“We heard a cry, specifically on how to address and confront sexual assault and harassment,” Bergmann said. “In response, we decided that a small symposium would allow us to come together and truly educate ourselves on these issues in the workplace that women throughout the fleet face.”
Held at an off-ship location, women from all ranks were able to meet in a more intimate setting and discuss the tough issues confronting women embarked on ships.
Ande, I have supported women in the service since I was a wee-MIDN - but it is leaders like you that, in 2012, continue to pull us back and make it difficult for men like me to tell others to treat you as equals. The reason? You don't act like you think you are.
I won't speak to your personal reasons that led to your discriminatory actions - only you know your heart - but I will say this; it is a cancer on your wardroom and others - a cancer of your creation.
Would you like it if a couple of male destroyer COs had a "men only" event to discuss ways to avoid false accusations of sexual harassment? False claims do happen, you know.
How about any "men only" event? Would you celebrate that?
I know that you are just following the cues from people like RADM Klein - but that really isn't an excuse. This is the second decade of the 21st Century. Lead all your people Ande; don't act like a patronizing sexist. You're better than that - and so is our Navy.
How about holding a marlinspike seamanship seminar next month instead? Something radical like an "all hands event."
177 comments:
You got to be Shitting me... ? FRATERNIZATION!!!! Using the word "intimate" in the article makes my blood boil.. Maybe all the Men of these two ships make a "He mans women hater club" and all the boys go shooting and hollering in a more "intimate" setting...
JIBBERJABBER!
PAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No wonder Deck Div is hosed so bad... Capt. Bergman, you need to get your head out of your ass and start making sailors out of ALL your people (no, I won't call them sailors, not if they can't tie a simple knot and keep a bar pilot out of the water).
Civvies? Game over. Lol.
OSC ret
The only support group Sailors need to do their jobs is morning quarters. Period. If we are having problems with behavior, institute greater ship wide discipline and hold all hands training. To paint with such a broad and divisive brush will only screw things up, and in turn cause any male ranked lower than any female to contest their FITREP with PERS.
Seems like someone is trying to save her career after the ladder of shame. She's resorting to SECNAV's number one priority!
BTW, I encourage folks to make comments (nicely, please) over to USS Howard's page. I did. The link is in the good Commander Salamander's article.
Marine6's comment in the last post about USS Howard should earn him a cookie.
Are those beer bottles on the table in that picture on Sal's article?
So, not only do you get a day off (it was a Tuesday), but while everyone else in your shop is pulling up your slack, you get to drink beer?
That's it - I'm getting a sex change operation.
I don't think this was a response to the ladder of shame per se - it was held months before that incident.
It seems more like a cum hoc ergo propter hoc relationship...
PRT standards are easier, so the beer gut is less of an issue too!
On a personal query, I wonder if they discussed the prevalence of false accusations of sexual assault and harassment and how destructive they are for male/female relations, professionalism, and the ability of REAL victims to report abuse. It might be refreshing for a female group to address that.
Additonally, if sexual harassment and asault are such an issue under her "leadership," then clearly she ineffectual in not only basic seamanship, but also in supporting her crew. Maybe she should be relieved if this is such a problem on her ship. Clearly knot tying is.
Admiral Greenert....Just where is the warfighting priority here?
Kissing Lesbians calling the new media so they "can show who they are"
Angry women in civvies <span>NOT</span> taking care of their boats.
Having watched this Grand Gender Experiment continually <span>EPIC FAIL</span> since 1975 when women first came aboard auxiliaries, all I can say is....
(Chick CDR and AR, not talking about y'all...But just look at that ladder over the side of the rusty Howard -old girl was lookin' like a nasty Singapore Tramp along the waterline might add...And the now standard explosive bolt Command Pins...And that pic of angst filled women in the post...And I rest my case)
I TOLD YOU SO!
Oh yeah... wasn't the Chung Hoon herself wrapped up in some big bacchanalian sex scandal a few years back in Hawaii?
Anyway, I know. Can't unring the bell. etc etc.
The USN is just going to have to fight the next one with a bunch -oh make that not nearly enough and the wrong kind- of rusty, lubberly Drama Boats.
Meanwhile...
I just did a quick google image search to confirm my suspicion - it's San Mig Light Beer.
Here's a picture from the interwebs.
Off-site meetings in the business world can be fairly expensive.
As a taxpayer I'd like to know who paid for this Girls' Night Out. Were MWR Funds used or did the funding come from above (DESRON)?
That's all right, on a ship that is clearly so well run they almost kill a harbor pilot they can afford to spend the time doing things like this. Probably even managed to shoehorn it in the POD between the mandatory sensitivity training and the safety stand down for hurt feelings. And yea, those are beer bottles, San Miguel if I'm not mistaken (light of course, a lady must watch her figure). The rest of that wardroom ought to go for a two martini lunch and dare her to chew them out for it.
glad to see that she followed that good leadership policy of not invitingthe XO -- sure don't want him to know what is casuing concerns among the troops!
This navy reminds me of another from the last century...
It too was suffering from a poor material condition, and was manned with crews more concerned about social change -and officers more concerned about position- than warfighting.
Of course, none of that prevented them from being sent across the seas on expeditionary missions.
The transit itself was kinda ugly..
But when they got to where they were supposed to be...
Well...It got REAL bad.
Take a hard look.
Thats how <span>YOUR</span> Navy is starting to look like.
Sid, in all fairness, that rust showing in the pic with the pilots ladder is not that bad. That is what is call "running rust" or "bleeding rust" Every ship will get that and you cant exactly clean and paint the waterline while underway.
The all girl meeting may have been chocked full of good stuff (don't really know), but at the least it does give the appearnace of gender discrimination as Sal said.
So I am expected to believe that there is rampanat sexual harrassment and sexual assault onboard two Navy vessels and the only response the women can come up with is a symposium?
Really? Rampant sexual harrassment and ASSAULT and your response is a symposium??!! WTF?
Words have meanings. If you really do have rampant sexual harrassment and sexual ASSAULT going on, then a symposium is a pretty weak-ass and ineffectual response to the crimes being committed onboard two Naval vessels. On the other hand, if you really do not have rampant sexual harassment or sexual ASSAULT, stop advertising the symposium as addressing these (non-rampant) problems.
Or here is a novel concept - why don't we treat each other as a SHIPMATE, regardless of gender? Or is that too difficult a concept to grasp?
Good grief.
For those wondering; Article 134 says all that needs to be said about this me thinks
69 ways to say "no" to female superior, symposium to be held in ....... on 2012,,,,,, Free beer for all attendees!
along those lines ....... let's not forget about the good CDR Orlich http://www.public.navy.mil/surfor/ddg93/Pages/Bio1.aspx
I wonder about his involvement (or lack thereof). Just sayin........
<span>Looking at the photo, all I can think is that You guys have got it all wrong; If you note the seriousness on the speaker's face, I can tell she is dicussing the finer art of discerning Diesel Submarines in the littoral using the Tail for second CZ detection and the LAMPS team for close in prosecution.
Pretty tough getting the target related low end frequencies out of the clutter below 50 hertz.
Or I could be wrong. Could be Jibber Jabber, which brings pain. (Thanks, Mr T!)</span>
Oh, jeez. And they wanna send them down to run silent run deep too? Sloppy "knot tying" in that environment will have much more serious repurcussions than a nearly drowned pilot.
Pilots can float...sometimes.
Nuke reactors not so much.
The only meeting that captain needed to have was an all-hands with the chiefs and DIVOs about what was to be tolerated and not tolerated or it's the long green table for offenders. Should have been a simple solution, no?
Jibber Jabber! I will translate all of this meeting...
"Blah blah blah"
"Blah blah blah"
the voices from Charlie Brown come to mind...
At least Potempkin wasn't aluminum. And it did have a gun or two.
But other than that, social experimentation and political favoritism abounds.
Okay, I know this is WAAAAYYY off topic... BUT....
If one is looking to be elected to the House of Representatives from MA-4, how much do you cringe when the press describes you as "going all out to get Barney Frank's seat"????
Makes you sound like Boy George....
Is it just me, or is all this nonsense going crescendo?
Wow what a horrible taste in drink.
TFMI! Yechhhh
I can't help but hear this when reading the post : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juNSYH7RveY
that sounds like a sex act that used to be prohibited by the UCMJ until DADT was repealed.
WOW! What ever happened to the leaders of the past, oops that's right, they're in the past. It's people like this that are flushing what was once a powerful fighting force down the toilet with their sociopathic views.
(chasing AOD around with a latin textbook to beat him over the head with it.) Tsk.
Just wonderful...a year ago they canned a proven warfighter, CAPT Honors, for lack of judgment, but this is acceptable ? Where has the Navy gone ?
In all of my sea and shore tours combined I remember exactly zero occurences of mtgs among all ranks, in civvies, with beer present, and especially with the CO not only in attendance but leading the mtg. Not the course of action that I would have recommended for many reasons.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
Poor DB. She is reaching the same inescapable conclusion that my poor Mom did. All men are eleven years old, and confuse crudity with sophistication....
Why yes, Old Navy, this is totally acceptable. The people being excluded are males. So no harm done.
Sounds gayer than getting a pedicure from Ru Paul while chained to the wall of Boy George's sex dungeon.
Well, there were a few times I can remember having the crew and the wardroom together with the skipper, and lots of liquor present ... but there was no official business being discussed.
It's probably just me but I don't see anyone in the photos worth harassing.
Wow, this happened in July while they were assigned to the "Ronald Regan" strike group.
USS Howard is is homeported in San Diego, is a member of the Ronald Regan Strike Group and Destroyer Squadron Seven. The ship is currently deployed in support of Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT).
Lt. Alison Derr, USS Howard Public Affairs
Way to go Lt Derrrrrr!
So???? What were all the Males doing when this meeting was taking place?? Maybe....WORKING?!!!
Or, as Barney would call it, "Congwessional Wecess".
To play the devils advocate about this, the time that this sexist synposium occured when when that sexist poster appeared on the Navy's FB page that maybe this command staff wanted to show the CNO and SecNav they were doing something serious about Sexual Assualt/Sexual Harass situtation that had become a big news this past summer within the DoD. Of course to have this synposium without men only plays into how men in the DoD (and Navy specifically) feel about SA/SH training on a whole. That is a person with a pen is shall be treated as an evil person.
True "sophistication" is being able to be sophisticated and utter a crudity at the same time and sounding intelligent doing it :)
How is a discriminatory "symposium" for the possible "victims" supposed to cure a ssexual harassment problem?
It should be a matter of record to show IF ANY sexual harassment was reported aboard this command, and if so, just what disciplinary action was taken against those doing the harassment.
Clearly if there was not appropriate action taken, any reasonable ISIC should have ample evidence for a loss in confidence for "Ande" to remain in command.
CAPT Honors was fired and vilified for far less. But, he was a "male" not one of the "more equal" females who must be protected and promoted even if it means lowered performance standards, decreased readiness and loss of warfighting capability.
i like the cut of your jib, sir.
I was going to suggest more training in combatives.
No, the lady speaking does ooze a certain sensuality. Your standards are too high Sexist Male. From this POV though, I cannot fully assess her decollete.
Uh...
... did I just say that out loud?
Maybe you've heard they are changing the concession hot dogs at Fenway? From Fenway Franks to Barney's Franks. The concessionairres mention that if you don't like the way they taste you can shove them up ......
I followed AW1 Tim's advice and mailed the USS Howard's PA officer a polite (for a change) letter, expressing my concern about the vessel's warfighting capabilities. Within half an hour I got this reply from a certain ensign Ashley Valanzola:'Michael- The Captain is out of the office at a convention today. You may havebeen largely misled by the article, which did not mention the all malesymposium held onboard earlier that week for anyone who wished toattend.The Howard has no further comments on the article. Please let me know if there are any other questions I can help addressfor you. Regards,ENS Ashley ValanzolaPAO'CDR? You been misleading us?And what was that all male symposium about? Sexual harassment?
"Would you like this slapped on a plate or shoved in between buns?"
It's not too late yet!
SJBill and URR out to the woodshed! Those comments do NOT meet the level of "sophistication" discussed elsewhere. Tsk. >:o youse guys!
If it would make a sixth-grader giggle, then it is at precisely the right level!!!!
Should ask her if there was alcohol served at the all-male event too.
You are right. Let's not forget CDR Orlich, the other CO "involved." HE was placed between a rock and a hardplace. Can you imagine what would have happened to him if he had told Cdr Bergman that as far as he was concerned it was improper and inappropriate for any "leader" to have single gender, civilian attire (with alcohol) meetings and that he was not going to allow any woman on his ship to take a day off on government time to attend? How long do you think it would have been before a certain admiral (or the IG) would have initiated an investigation? How long do you think he would have retained command after his refusal to allow women from HIS ship to attend? How terminal in grade would he have become?
Of course, as for CDR Bergman, she wasn't so concerned about women's issues as she was ensuring the meeting was highlighted by the ships PAO for the rest of the "diverse" world to see and salivate over....not to mention something to be highlighted for her next promotion. It was an inappropriate event but hwat made it even more inappropriate was show-boating about it.
It is time for the new CNO to come out with new command guidance about gender and diversity. It is time to make a statement about ONE Navy and for him to publically state that the Navy will no longer allow any special activity, groups, associations or treatment that excludes other races or genders. Let him specify that anything that smells to others when the term "White" or "Male" are substituted does not belong in the 21st century Navy. He has 4-stars already. Now, does he have the guts to use them for the common good of the Service he alledgedly leads? Or is he in the job simply for the perks and the opportunity to make more money as a "consultant" when he retires? Maybe he can get an adult dialogue going..with the other so-called adults "leading" our Naval Services.
Old Grunt,
Are you implying that there is a double standard?
Why, how could you ever say such a thing?
Sometimes it's just way too easy. I'm just surprised that we aren't getting seismic warnings caused by Halsey, Nimitz, Earnie King et al who by now must be up to around 2,500 rpm. As my father used to say, "It isn't the old Navy!"
C'mon Jarhead!
What would Nimitz, King, Halsey, et al., know about anything? They are white males!
What is that compared to a wise latina woman?
Just when in h3ll are the leaders going to step up to the plate? This is exactly what I would have expected a Commanding Officer to do: " as (far) as he was concerned it was improper and inappropriate for any "leader" to have single gender, civilian attire (with alcohol) meetings and that he was not going to allow any woman on his ship to take a day off on government time to attend..."
what the H3LL is this crowd doing to MY NAVY!?
Old Salt,
With the way that some CO's are threatening even thier XOs and CMCs for willingness to stand up against stupid actions, it is no suprise to me that no one in today's politically charged atmosphere is willing to put thier neck out to throw the BS flag.
Leave all things Fenway out of this please... URR - see what you stahted? Might have to post the rest of the jokes
The voters of Massachusetts 4th district bear sole blame for Bawney Fwank.
All other jokes, double entendre, or allusions to Barney's seat, Barney's frank, buns, or cond<span>o</span>ments are purely coincidental.
Soon they will have another Kennedy to boss around in that seat (or is it another Kennedy that will boss them around?)
<span>To me, the crazy thing is that the article was posted on the SURFPAC website. They're actually *proud* of this.</span>
really? Beat me with a Latin text book? With a name like Adversus Omnes Dissident? C'mon, Ms. Delta. You know I'm just playing.......
I have to pull the nice southern lady's pigtails every now and then.
Tangential question: where is YN2 these days? We haven't seen him for a while......
Of course they were. They have been drinking the Kool-aid. There is the mentality that of course ALL of these women are being sexually harassed or assaulted, and a psuedo mental masturbation summit will fix this. Talking is miraculous! But if assault and harassment were all over these ships, then having a beer summit would not be the fix. Wrong focus, wrong professional concerns, judging from the look of the USS Howard.
And you need to work in a question about knot tying. Did she have any comments about knot tying? Maybe the Captain was out at a knot tying convention...Knotfest 2012.
He's (1.) busy as heck with his current assignment with ADM Stavridis
(2.) Tweeting his a$$ off at http://twitter.com/Surface_Sailor ;)
Knotfest 2012 made me laugh out loud.
DB, I understand your frustration, but I have to admit that AOD's comment made me laugh in spite of myself.
Shhh! You're not supposed to let them KNOW you're amused.... (you're young. you'll learn....)
The nice southern lady didn't say she wasn't amused..... ;)
Maybe their motto should be "we are knot worthyyyyyy!"
Did Justin go ahead an host a symposium for men on the Chung-Hoon? I can't imagine a group of officers and enlisted getting together in civvies to just sit around and talk if it wasn't the command picnic. Clearly this sends the message that they're women first.... Not so good.
Oh, and a BS in Physical Education from Chico State and a Masters from University of Phoenix? Really?
Hey y'all! Kids homework all done, now I can play! Missed you, Sal! How are y'all LT B and URR?
@Old Grunt: The CNO is too busy screwing around with fashionable new uniform issues to be bothered with substantive issues. We're a nation at war and no one, even our leadership, seems to remember that. But a couple years ago the office did commission an investigation on sexual assaults, though I've never seen any published results (see RADM(S) bit below).
@Guest: About "rampant sexual assault, etc." several thoughts....In my vast experience with this particular thing, I've found "Dude, really? Do I have to call your wife? Back the f off..." works like a charm. If, for some inexplicable reason, it doesn't, I carry a simple "sticker" (or two, usually one one each hip, or on a drop holster if I'm downrange) and have been told by an NCIS agent, never pull your knife unless you're gonna provide me DNA evidence. Roger that. But for the most part, I'm probably just lucky (to date) that I carry myself with that Texan "Try and f*** with me" attitude. (Oh, and taking us back to last week, best advice/mentoring I ever got about dealing with POS dudes was from my husband, yup, a dude, vice any chicks. Nuclear option: always derisively refer to genitalia size, but only in front of their buddies. Never fails. "Needle..." is my fave.)
That all being said, when I was in "How to Be a Skipper 101" school in the summer of 2005 (yes! they actually have skipper school, 2 weeks, how not to screw up, which makes this all the worse...then you have the option of attending a follow-on 2 weeks of nothing but UCMJ, how really truly not to screw up. I went to both!) we were told about some stats wrt the increase of sexual harassment/assaults in our Navy - and shocking to me was that the number one assault was no longer chick related! It was senior male on junior male, which tells me that ALL crewmembers need to be reached out to, not just chicks. I went thru NIACT w a very hard core EOD RADM Select chick (who picked up her own shell casings and freaked the heck out of all the POs, cracked me up!) She was heading to Afghanistan on a special assignment to look into why the exponential increase in sexual assaults in theaters. Like outrageous numbers. Same in Iraq, when I landed in May 2010, the NAVCENT fwd det briefed us that VBC base alone was up to 65 assaults YTD - again, many were male on male.
So there is a problem out there. Whether it's up due to more reporting, or whether there's more frequency, there's a problem. But I don't understand how the good chick CO in our little story here could ever think, "Hey, what a great idea! Let's be exclusive to those icky boys, and introduce alcohol to an already emotionally charged issue! Nothing but good can come from this...!" And since symposiums take time to put together, she had more than a day or two to rethink her options. And time to square away her ship. Good God a mighty! The ladder issue is just a manifestation of an already broken person/process. So uncool, in all ways. Inexcusable.
@Sexist Male: Dude, my point exactly! The only chicks that ever hit on me are the Really Very Scary Ones. Especially Army chicks (shiver). Army truck drivers, in particular, were really diggin' my sh** in Iraq. It was a huge joke in my office.... I mean, where is Portia di Rossi when my ego needs it? Puhleeze....
Last year I attended a conference on sexual assault and harassment held by a mental health group of professionals for military veterans. The conference was earmarked for women veterans, however, in attendance were women and men. There were times when the conference was highly emotional, and one cannot escape a bit of bloodletting when someone is recounting an experience that was personal and shook the foundations of their being. Every single person who had been a victim of sexual assault or sexual harassment was undeniably traumatized. How trauma is stored in the memory, or the physical body, or how it affects their outlook and future functioning is not to be glossed over.
But sexual harassment and sexual assault are not just a "womens problem," but a societal ones. The breach of trust when either assault ot harassment occur, has long lasting repercussions that often affect the victim's life over the long term. But sexual harassment and assault happens in every form: male to male, female to female, male to female, female to male. The results of such events are often tragic. This being said, it's important to have both men and women there, speaking frankly about their experiences, and also working together to end this horrible form of bullying.
How best to address it in institutions? I think there is room for same-sex meetings in the form of therapeutic meetings that are beneficial. But a symposium, sponsored by the very institution where the attacks are happening is different. Air the problems in a mixed group, make it part of the group awareness, and find ways to obliterate both behaviors from the insitution. But don't confuse a therapeutic setting with a symposium. They are unique events.
Makes some of us late bloomers from Moo-U feel downright lofty.
careful, sistah. You speak truths that some might not like out there for public consumption. And you leave a trail of breadcrumbs identity-wise. Your personal accounts are fascinating, but too telling.
Singapore tramps are required to comply with SOLAS regs. The pilot ladder on the ship in question is worse than the "things not to do" illustration in the SOLAS guidance. You should apologize to the Singapore flag vessels sailing on irregular schedules with cargos of opportunity. Not to mention the enforcement arm of the Singapore Coast Guard (equivalent)
Having an open and honest dialogue about sexual harassment and sexual assault is, IMHO a good thing.
HOWEVER...the number of male victims I have had to hand hold through the criminal justice system suggests this is not a "women's issue". It's a people issue. Cutting out half of your potential victim pool is hardly addressing the problem.
I have heard that there was a seperate "men's symposium"...but really? The last time I remember a "boys in this room, girls in that room" program I was 10 and we learning about tampons while the boys, (I speculate) were discussing nocturnal emissions.
Haven't we matured since then?
AR, you and CC both bring up a question I've wondered about. Has the incidence of same-sex assault increased with the loosening/repeal of DADT? Has removing the career-ending consequences of going public with SSA had unintended consequences?
DB, if you think this is too truthful for public consumption, I have not yet begun to write! But seriously, thank you for your concern, but there's nothing I write here that I wouldn't say directly to any Admiral, General, or Secretary. In a more respectful tone, of course, but the meat of the matter remains.
DB, my first awareness of same sex assault was several years before DADT was repealed, and I haven't seen or read any stats about an increase. The inquiry into the increase overseas was more focused on the stressors as related to drawnout wars, trying to discover if perpetrators were multiple time deployers vice first timers, etc. The Big Headshed was at a loss as to why the sudden spike. I think we'll have to wait a year or two (or longer) for those post-DADT numbers, and even then, as they would be concurrent to wrapping up of wars, how accurately would they reflect that one policy change?
ROFL!!!
CC,
I would also argue that the reporting on same sex assaults will NOT be honest. I say again, it will NOT be honest. It touches on a third rail of the DADT repeal concerns. One that even some of the vocal amongst us who were not for the repeal never really addressed as one of OUR concerns. I have had to deal w/ female on female abuse, but not on male on male, and when I discussed it w/ my chain, they were less than excited about dealing w/ it. I had a female brought into my office (like pregnancy) to break up a lover's triangle that was also comprised of a LTjg and two other enlisted females. I also forecast that there will be an under reporting of pregnancies on subs.
Why haven't we cloned you yet? Need more honesty, need more professional openness. You rock girl!
Adm Greenert, you listening? Doubt it, just another politician.
I guess I disagree just because I've already seen pretty high male on male reports, and they have been aggressively prosecuted. What you may see more of, now that the defense is no longer an admission to a basis for ADSEP is the accused trying to argue, like in a male on female case, that the victim consented, rahter than using the defense that it's all a lie and no sex occurred.
I guess you see a different side than I do. I have still seen more false claims than I have real ones for the uniformed side of things. For obvious reasons, I would like to see us prosecute the false claims.
The book looks mighty interesting.
I think that press release was a cover, and they were really talking about something far more controversial: http://www.passiveaggressivenotes.com/2011/11/15/when-you-pee/
I told Sal to get his Front Porch genetecist on cloning...
Nothing yet. He must have to go through government procurement, so that a six-week, $100,000 project will take two years and cost $3.5 million.
I think they have only cloned sheep and CC and AR do not strike me as sheep.
Phib, next 'Plooza, invite ChickCDR....Really, really invite her. I wouldn't mind spending four hours and a couple of pitchers of beer at Stricklands listening to her bust our cajone's 8-)
puke
Seventh Fleet must have been okay with it or would they have touted the meeting in this article?
http://www.c7f.navy.mil/news/2011/07-july/021.htm
When I see incidents like this, I think of the 1980s movie, 'An Officer and a Gentleman', where the Drill Sergeant Foley taunts the little wanna-be Navy pilot Casey Seegar ...
'....that's exactly what'll beat you, Seegar ... your mental attitude as a person of the female persuasion. Under all your bullshit, you still think like a second class citizen, Seegar. You could never give orders to men.'
No matter how things appear to be changing, it all appears to stay the same.
She has to get down to Jax though.
MY question is: Has it gotten more serious or are people just more sensitive? There used to be some real hi-jinks going on when I was in the Canoe Club. Things we used to call 'grab-assing' might get someone thrown out today.
Some of the things that I have witnessed from berthing follies to crossing the line (or CPO initiation) have been all but eliminated in the Navy of 2012, but the reportable incidents seem to be on the increase.
Apparently, sexual harassment is something new in the last 20 or so years? ;)
Oh, LT B,
Just because I have seen some legit rapists use the "she was into it" defense does not mean that there aren't cases in which this was, in fact, true.
Where do you think the rapists get the idea to use that defense in the first place?
And for THAT reason, I too would like to see false claims prosecuted. Every "buyers remorse" rape claim gives that many more sailors and potential jury members a story about "my buddy who was falseley accused" which makes them that less likely to convict when the witness really is a victim of an assault.
It's like the boy who cried wolf, except instead of just disbelieving the one boy who lied, the village decides that no little boys can be trusted...ever.
Now, obviously I'm not suggesting prosecuting victims in cases where maybe they were telling the truth, but there just wasn't enough evidence and tie goes to the runner...some rapes are hard to prove. But when there is hard, objective evidence that a claim was false (which I have also seen) then there needs to be accountability.
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....
j/k
Something about a hundred guilty men going free rather than convicting a single innocent....
FratMan - sometimes the good of the Service is more important than a career. I would not want to be a part of a Service in which this kind of non-warfighting behavior is not only condoned, but used in PAO releases. Somebody must sstand up. >Leaders< must stand up.
I had two commands, and my ISIC's did not tell what what and how to run my ship. I would have been considered a failure had that been the case.
I crushed divisive behavior when it reared its ugly head. "The purpose of a warship is to fight and win at sea, all else is secondary." Divisive behavior, whether from men or women, is injurious to that.
Navy is in deep and serious trouble if this kind of divisive behavior is being tolerated, and if we are seeing pictures of improperly maintained and rigged pilot ladders, that too speaks loudly and clearly of much deeper and more systemic problems.
FWIW, the majority of male on male cases I saw were on either Destroyers, Frigates, or Mine Sweepers.
Most were pretty odd too...very few violent assaults but a lot of "fly by night weenie touchers" in the berthing kind of things.
Of course, one of the challeges to taking these cases to the mat, was teh male victims either (1) didn't report in the first place and so a "midnight marauder" went on assaulting for over a year without action; or (2) they did report, but then didn't want to participate in the trial.
So, shouldn't we be making a conscious effort to do MORE outreach with this group? To ensure they understand that being a crime victim is not a stain on their masculinity? To make sure they have adequate access to counseling and other victim services? To make sure that, like the female victims who get it drilled into their head all year, that being assaulted does not mean it's their fault, or that there's something wrong with them?
Nah. Why would we do a silly thing like that? I recall being in the deployment pipeline and some jackass decided to go off on his views about women in warzones and, to prove his point, made the mistake of asking me "Well...what are you gonna do if you get RAPED???"
My response: "Personally, given where I'm going, I'm more concerned about EFPs and death. However, before you get on the plane, I suggest you look into the middle eastern practice of male rape, and remember that I, as a female, have spent most of my life innundated with Law and ORder SVU, Lifetime movies of the week, not to mention the barrage of stupid DoD trainrngs about how lurking behind every corner is a rapist. So I've spent a lot of time accepting the fact that someday, I may be assaulted, and I am fully aware of what resources are available to me. I'm guessing you haven't. So the better question is...What will YOU do?"
Exactly my point - that is where it has to start, forget waiting for another 4-star to send down more policy. He absolutley should have "told Cdr Bergman that as far as he was concerned it was improper and inappropriate for any "leader" to have single gender, civilian attire (with alcohol) meetings and that he was not going to allow any woman on his ship to take a day off on government time to attend". There is not a single untruth to that statement...... and if any repercussions came his way because of it, it would be a very sad day.
I would opine that the overwhelming majority of same sex assaults have nothing to do with DADT and everything to do with psychopathic power that the individual gets from asserting his/her will over another (male or female). The PSU defensive coordinator is but one example. He was and apparently is still happily married with his spouse overtly defending him. I'll cite a quote from my favorite movie of all time...Shawshank Redemption where Tim Robbins tells Morgan Freeman that he isn't interested in another man's advances because he is not ghey. Morgan Freeman stated, "...neither are they. They would have to be human first to be considered ghey." In other words they are psychopathic predators asserting their will over anyone they can.
Where was the Command Master Chief? Probably sitting neutered in his office. This is the person who should have stood up and said that the meeting was improper.
Then again, would his standing up to this physical education major ... be a career terminating event? SAD, but POSSIBLE.
Darn good answer, AR!
Old Salt,
Not only is it tolerated but encouraged to violate the rules, laws and common decency. We will continue down this path for as long as the Diversity Friendship circle has ready access to our civilian leadership in the Five-sided wind tunnel and for as long as they threaten the budget.
Chico State - That explains the bad beer & bad attitude
Delta Bravo Said, "Nuke reactors not so much."
Maybe that is why Naval Reactors has been working so hard on making a reactor plant system that needs fewer operators and has more automatic functions. More and more equipment being made 'Sailor-proof'.
LT B - you'll have a hard time under-reporting pregnancies on submarines. Some clever OB/GYN will start noticing a correlation between Navy mothers and glow in the dark babies.
Actually, Old Nuke, there has been a decrease in the reporting over the past couple/3 yrs. Interestingly enough, the spin provided by the "industry" was that this was horrible because women were afraid to report it so THAT must be why the reporting went down. They do not even consider that maybe all the money, time, effort and training that went into it actually has paid dividends.
You know, Guest, if that had happened and the ISIC had reached out, this would be a non issue... "CDR, I know your heart is in the right place, but it smells of favoritism and falls under the anti-fraternization policy. Don't do it again. Now about that pilot ladder I saw at Phib's place..." :)
<span>They do not even consider that maybe all the money, time, effort and training that went into it actually has paid dividends.</span>
An interesting conundrum, although easily explainable from the industry perspective:
1. If the training is effective, that means a leveling off or reduction in the resources provided to the industry selling such training. Not a desirable outcome from the industry's perspective.
2a. If the training is not effective, then either more training is needed (a desirable outcome, since that means more money), or ...
2b. we've reduced the problem to the lowest possible level and/or there are just some people who will never "get it". Not really a desirable outcome from the industry's perspective, although they will spin it as a need for more resources in an attempt to get to "zero defects".
nom nom mmm, crunch (that's me eating grass)
See, LT B, you just don't get this kind of experience in the corporate world!
Give me a date/time, I'll be there, even to JAX...!
Phib, Make it happen!!!!!! Seriously, time for another 'Plooza!!! ChickCDR, about two years ago, Phib set up a meet and greet at an infamous Mayport Mafia drinking and eating joint right outside the back gate of the base and on the St. Johns. Great time, great people, a LOT of lies got told, which made it a great night ;) You'd fit right in 8-)
All I can think of is the Wallace and Grommit sheep.
<span>Commander Bergmann attended California State University, Chico earning a Bachelor of Science Degree in Physical Education. She earned a Masters in Education from University of Phoenix.</span>
WTF!!!!
This is what the Surface Force worries about when the real problems are "too hard". Hey, SURFPAC, how are those INSURVs goin' these days?
<span>If this crime is an issue in an operational unit, we have a discipline problem. Full stop. That's something we are supposed to be experts at. Why are we abandoning 200+ years of experience in that area to conduct sociology forums?
Honestly, if we believe we are going to unwind the hyper-sexualization of American youth and the attendant aborrations that go with that, we are hopelessly deluded. Treating this as something other than crime only desensitizes the discipline apparatus in dealing with it. "Oh, that's a SA/SH issue. It's special. My normal discipline skills and methodology don't apply."
An "open and honest dialogue" among a fraction of potential SA victims is a tantamount to taking half the ship to the PX to shop for new padlocks so they can foil thieves - screw the rest your shipmates. Are our personnel showing up so weakly equipped from society and basic training that they can't adequately defend and/or recognize and report crime when they experience it? Are we so innundated with these cases that JAG can't process them?
If we believe victim management is the hallmark of good leadership, where does actually accomplishing the mission fall in the line up of priorities?
</span>
Walked into a Crowne Plaza in Chicago a few months back that was slam full of these people (?) having a conference
It was a Hunter S Thompson moment....
Even better example
Perhaps there should be a SurPac sponsored symposium for Furries' Rights.
You take no prisoners. Your questions about personnel being unable to report crimes or the inability of JAG to process them boils the issues down to their essences.
sounds like CNO needs to message all units that navigation pilots rate at least 4 sideboys, two of which will be rescue swimers and dressed out in their working uniform......
C
"fly by night weenie touchers"!?!?!?!?!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Sounds like a post-DADT repeal name for a Navy night fighter squadron!!!!
VF(N)-6969 The Fly By Night Weenie Touchers!
Gotta ask the obvious question....
<p><span><span>@Sid:<span> </span>If the “Grand Gender Experiment” has been an EPIC FAIL since 1975, then why should we continue with it?<span> </span>You can’t un-ring a bell, but you can ring another one and start a new round.<span> </span>Nothing will change otherwise.<span> </span>It’s insane to keep doing the same thing, like WWI generals.<span> </span>Bottom line is:<span> </span>All-male, all-straight force = no male-female issues, far fewer male-male sexual issues, much less wasted time/resources, one physical standard for all.<span> </span>Unfair to some?<span> </span>Sure.<span> </span>Better overall policy.<span> </span>Why are the career opportunities and sensibilities of some people worth more than having the most effective Navy possible?<span> </span></span></span>
</p><p><span><span></span></span>
<span><span></span></span>
<span><span>I’m sure if Holly Graf, Etta Jones or Ande Bergmann had posted on this site, they’d have sounded exactly like CC and AR.<span> </span>The problem is that for 30 years everyone’s been able to TALK like Bull Halsey; everyone claims to have met the same standards; everyone has been to “war”; and, everyone has been highly impressed with themselves.<span> </span>It would be far more impressive if everyone could agree to meet the same physical standards and if there was an honest discussion of how they relate to realistic shipboard tasks.<span> </span>I’m also sure HG and EJ really did believe they were fully qualified, great leaders, who met all the same standards as men and were just victims of sexism.<span> </span>Meanwhile, not one ship-building or weapons program has been competently delivered in the last 20 years, material readiness is questionable, ASW is ignored, we have more carriers than air wings, we have more admirals than ships, we need civilian pilots to dock ships, and basic deck seamanship clearly needs work.<span> </span>But, there is a laser-like focus on diversity, mentoring, sexual harassment, work-life balance, repealing DADT, relieving CO’s and (the wrong kind of) damage control.<span> </span>Of course, this is the “best Navy ever” and the policies would be perfect if not for some bad-apples (of whom there seem to be a lot).<span> </span>Sure it is.<span> </span>And communism would have worked fine with the “right” people in charge</span></span></p>
Hey if the FBI has decided to add men to potential victims of rape does that mean that we can now have men only synpousims on how to prevent men from being raped?
Yea and if a man starts rubbing on another guy and then said victim beats the living hell out of the assualter what do you think the chances are the victim will be either brought up on a hate crime and not believed. OR basicly believed, have justice where the perp is brought up on charges and punished and then the victim is punished for making the Navy look bad.
Sadly i dont see that as impossible or unlikely in todays Navy.
Agreed. We can and should send women to self defense so they can disengage and run, but a male on male incident may be turn ugly for the assailant. The politics of this does not bode well.
EJK's statement needs to go up to the CNO.
<p><span><span>This is a strictly rhetorical comment, but what in the h3ll is wrong with Navy leadership? Or is that an oxymoron these days?</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>We don’t see these constant leadership failures in the Marine Corps, or in the Army, or the Air Force or the Coast Guard. Relief for cause is a highly unusual occurrence in every service other than the Navy. But in 2011 it happened about every fourteen days in the Navy.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>Other services seem to understand that the mission is combat readiness. Navy leadership doesn’t seem to give a rat’s a$$ about combat readiness and seems only interested in diversity.<span> </span>And that “diversity” doesn’t seem to buy us anything at the pointy end of the spear other than endless problems.<span> </span>We have seen the creation of a number of “special” classes that get endless preferential treatment. They get special preference in promotion, in selection for command, and in screening for choice assignments.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>As an outsider I may be wrong, but my impression is that those special preferences are certainly not appreciated by those who receive them because they expect them as their “right” because of perceived wrongs in decades past.<span> </span>But this is not to say that these preferences go unnoted. Those who are not members of one of these “special” classes know that they are held to a far higher standard, and they know that regardless of how stellar their performance might be they are not playing on a level playing field. And they resent it bitterly. </span></span>
</p><p><span><span>Someday we might realize that we have lost many highly meritorious people because they recognize the basic unfairness that the Navy continues to foster. And someday Navy “leadership” may realize how poisonous this whole diversity farce is to the service. <span> </span></span></span></p>
Won't make a lick of difference. The leadership is simply not on the job. The Navy, according to the junk coming out of HQ, is no longer a military service, but an experiment in fecklessness. See the fresh eminations from the genius factory up at the headshed. Hopefully you can click on the pics and enlarge - I sent the .pdf to Sal and perhaps he can post it. I'm in the rear of the rear and see many of the studies on what to do in the near and far future for mission and systems - a lot of thinking, little coherence. At least the football team has been doing pretty well lately. Otherwise, USN, going, going, gone...
d4mn - was supposed to post my last as a reply to LT B's comment to forward EJK's comments up the chain. Take my comments and the attached in that light. S/F/DF
postus interuptus...comments above meant as a reply to "<span>EJK's statement needs to go up to the CNO."</span>
I think I recall that lover's triangle. I did the JAGMAN on the guy(!!) involved. I characterized it as "Kafkaesque", and the CO did not like my recommendations.
Reply was intended for LT B's post. Sorry to cause confusion.
My opinion, Marine6, is that USMC/Army/AF don't do public firings. I believe they have the same bad actors, but just let them do their time, or maybe arrange for an early change of command (with a band), but not a public relief.
Reasonable minds can differ; I have no evidence other than anecdotal stories to back up my point, which is why I state it as opinion vice fact. I don't see how those with opposing opinions could back theirs up, so it's an "agree to disagree" thing.
I like that the Navy fires people; it shows some accountability.
You're right, though...it could be that all services have the same standards for public firings, and Navy leaders are so egregious that they're the only ones who meet those standards. I don't agree, but it's possible.
"<span>My opinion, Marine6, is that USMC/Army/AF don't do public firings. I believe they have the same bad actors, but just let them do their time"</span>
Nope. The Marine Corps nails COs to the wall for the same kinds of things the Navy does. But the Corps has fewer COs who fail to understand the honor and burden and responsibilities of command and leadership.
If you don't think the Marine Corps publicly fires people, go have a word with Colonel Dowdy.
Phib will have to post or forward to me. He has my email, and he can pass to you.
I don't recall a guy. There was a female jg, and a couple of females, one of the Cable, i think and I don't recall the other's command, but know that she ALWAYS volunteered to be a urinalysis observer and a lot of the women would say they did not want her to observe because they knew her proclivities.
I think there is also something else going on wrt mission readiness being #1 priority. My view is that the Navy can be broken into 3 basic "types." Dirt Navy, MA security teams, SEALs, EOD, and the Bees. After 9/11, they have been getting it done. Blue water Navy, spun up for a bit, but then settled into their sort of normal rotation. Then the DC Navy. DC Navy is wrapped around the POM/budgetary axel, trying to justify big ticket items (LCS), line up jobs post DC in the milcon world and competing w/ the other services during a period of two ground wars. They threw the baby out w/ the bath water when they began the diversity fellatio kabuki dance around Congress to suck money into the Navy coffers. Since DC Navy, especially since ADM Mullen took over, began this, it has moved to the #1 priority, vice warrior ethos and training being our #1 priority. Couple this with Vern Clark's business efficiency implementation and we really have gotten away from the Navy being a warfighting tool for diplomacy. We have lost our way, sold our souls, etc playing the budget game. Those in Congress that want to push the diversity industry upon the forces have not run up against a CNO that is willing to say openly how it affects readiness and detracts from what the Navy does for the country.
I don't really want to go down this road...it starts to sound like a silly Navy vs. USMC thing. I didn't say the USMC never publicly fires people, just that it's much more rare. The reason could be the people are better, or the culture likes to cover up. I recall they also canned an O-6? who was the head of recruiting on the East coast. Maybe a DUI thing?
I was not attached to any ground Marine units; I am told they are different (though my experience with a former ground Marine did not paint the Corps in a good light).
Liek I said, we can agree to disagree, as neither of us has evidence to back our opinions.
Just saw Sandlot. I looked online and saw they are remaking it. Except in this version, Squints is brought up on sexual assault charges, gets put on the registered sex offender list at the age of 10 and Wendy has to go through SAVI support to handle the trauma of being kissed.
If you didn't want to go down this road, why did you? You simply say that the Marine Corps is more willing to accept subpar leadership and cover up misconduct by commanders, yet you have no real experience or knowledge to support your rather disparaging assertion?
One branch is know for its discipline, warrior ethos, and espirit de corps. The other? Not quite so much, especially with the tolerance and encouragement of things like this.
Navy leadership is letting down its fine sailors, officer and enlisted. Why? Lack of "battlemindedness", maybe? Or maybe a function of having to endure Mullen and then Roughead, while the Corps was blessed with Hagee and Conway. The Marines are far from perfect, Lord knows we screw things up, especially administratively. But we don't tolerate or cover up idiocy from our COs.
The way JAG is operating these days, it will take over a year for a case to get to trial from report to verdict. They claim to be creating a "litigation specialist track" but that will only add to the problem, as many of those "experts" are going to the defense side and the goal of most defense counsel is "delay, delay, drive up cost, delay", it's a strategy I myself have used, as every day your client is still on active duty is a day he's getting paid.
It's really just not an efficient system, which is why for anything other than a no-shit felony, I've always advised my commands to just send him or her to NJP and then initiated an ADSEP. the people in JAG miltary justice land rarely understand that to the warfighter, efficiency is key.
that anyone would Volunteer as an observer should be a red flag.
most people I know conveniently duck out while the call is put out.
well, if it happened in my command I'd have to look at the degree of force used. First off, hate crime is off the table. It's either self defense straight up with no punitive consequences at all if the amount of force was reasonable to overcome the threat, or it's assault consumated by a battery with a strong mitigating factor of extreme emotional distress if, after subduing the threat, he continued to make the perv eat pavement. And then, again, I'd have to look at the extent of the beating to determine appropriate forum. all options would be on the table from counseling to court-martial.
The groper goes to a GCM for wrongful sexual contact, orders violation (sexual harassment), and, if the facts suggest, attempted aggravated sexual assault. My minimum acceptable plea is a "bareback special" (seriously...lol!) in which we drop it to a special court martial with no added protections and he has to plead to the WSC charge, which carries one year of confinement and sex offender registration.
How much is a bareback special costing in the JAG Corps these days? :) Sorry, I had to.
The XO always ordered me (he and I did not get along anyway) to observe the admiral and COS when they got picked. "The Royal Penis shall NOT be viewed by the peasents!"
I wonder, if the Navy chose not to fire people, could we say the same thing about them? "Look...no problems...no issues...because if there were, we fire the offenders. No firings, no problem!"
It's like drug issues...some commands do a lot of piss tests, and bust a lot of dopers. Some commands do 2 a year, and "don't have a drug problem".
On the other hand, there's a problem with looking at this from an Angletonian paranoid perspective and assuming that USMC leaders are corrupt, we just haven't found them yet.
It would be nice if there were verifiable data to make the comparison...but "misconduct" by commanders is a bit loosey-goosey, and "loss of confidence" is by definition a subjective call.
No question...many of the fired Navy CO's deserved to be fired. I wonder, though, were there USMC CO's allowed to ride out their tour, did their bosses have more confidence in their ability to command, even after doing the same stuff that would get a Navy CO canned? That's something I think we won't know.
You've obviously had positive experiences with the USMC that color your perspective...that's great, and I envy those positive experiences. I had experiences that made me question the USMC esprit de corps reputation, and I wish I hadn't had them. They color my perspective.
Bottom line...not enough to data to support either of our assertions.
Do you know of a way (besides Googling) to get a list of Marine CO's detached for cause? It would be a start in maybe getting data to refute my assertion. I suspect it would take a FOIA.
I could read it. Puked in my mouth a little bit. Sorry, CNO, this is the same kind of drivel we heard from your predecessors...
<span>Your assertion amounts to asking if someone has stopped beating his wife.
My experiences in the Marine Corps run the gamut, believe me. Thirty years in next July. I saw the espirit and the professionalism in some of the worst places the Corps has been since Okinawa. So perhaps there is enough data to support my assertion.
I have seen COs fired. Plenty. But I have very seldom seen the rampantly stupid behavior that has been exhibited by your Navy's cabal of relieved skippers. And when I have seen it, it sticks out like a sore thumb, is frowned upon by all ranks, and is dealt with quickly and harshly. Which may be why there ain't much.
If you doubt the Marine Corps, its reputation as a warrior service, or its espirit, then volunteer as an IA to go to Helmand and be attached to an infantry battalion, and walk with them for a while. If you don't go there, then spare me the assertions about what you think the Corps is about and how its leaders lead.</span>
So in other words, "Old Billy was right?"
<p><span><span>There is a clear logical fallacy in the argument Chris seems to want to make. My comment was not intended to start a Navy versus Marine Corps comparison, it was clearly stated that it was a Navy versus the rest of the uniformed services comparison. </span></span>
</p><p><span><span>I thought my point was clear. In the Army, the Air Force, the Coast Guard and the Marine Corps relief of a commanding officer for cause is a major event. In those services such reliefs are rare and are generally the cause of significant comment and attention.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>In the Navy they have become a routine event happening every two weeks on the average.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>Anyone who doesn’t see this as an epic failure of Naval leadership must live in some alternate universe.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>The military promotion system is designed to advance the best and most qualified leaders into positions of increasing authority. We entrust commanders with millions, and sometimes billions, of dollars in equipment, and more importantly, with the lives of our service members. They command the capability to protect and defend our constitution, and our very lives. They also have the inherent ability to cause and incident that could cause a major war. Those are very heavy responsibilities.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>The fact that a single commander is relieved for cause should be a matter of some concern. The reality that such reliefs have happened every two weeks or so in the past year are indicative of catastrophic failure. </span></span>
</p><p><span><span>This is not some comparison between the Navy and anyone else. This is an indictment of failed Navy leadership at many levels.</span></span>
</p><p><span><span>From the CNO down “Navy leadership” is failing our sailors, the American people, and the memories of more than 200 years of “the old Navy.” <span> </span></span></span>
</p><p><span><span>If you don’t get it, you really don’t get it.</span></span></p>
Marine6,
Thanks for adding that...I didn't see things from that perspective.
I agree the firings are a leadership failure...what do you tell all the guys who *didn't* select for command? "Gee, sorry, guess you would've been a better pick."
Having said that, do you think:
a. CO's are being canned for BS reasons; Navy should leave them in command.
or
b. Navy's putting the wrong people in command, and firing them when they fail.
In either case it remains possible (though not plausible) that the other services have the same problems, but just don't choose to fire their bad apples.
The only reason I got specific with the USMC is because my Army and AF experience is *very* limited, but I have ~5 yrs of USMC experience.
Also, where was my logical fallacy? I presented an opinion, and how I got there. I didn't state it as a fact. It's like saying "Chocolate ice cream is best" or "I think URR's the coolest guy around!"
You can disagree with those opinions, but I have trouble seeing how you can prove they are right or wrong.
Again, though, great point on Navy leadership failure being exhibited thru these firings...I agree with you.
<span>"I think URR's the coolest guy around!" </span>
That IS a fact. I mean, who else spends New Years' Eve watching zombies in the afternoon and reading about artillery tactics to ring in the new year?
The fallacy of your argument is that you assume that Marine Commanders exhibit the same kind of conduct that we have seen all too often in the Navy, and that the lack of firings is because that conduct is tolerated.
A TBS classmate of mine was fired for DUI. A MEU commander relieved for shoplifting at Wal Mart. I already told you of the 1st Marines commander relieved on the march up. There was another, who had commanded a Marine Regiment (superbly, by the way) in combat in 2003-04 who was relieved for an "inappropriate relationship". But those incidents (excepting Dowdy) occurred over the last five years. It does happen, and when it does, the Corps brings the hammer down. But like Marine6 says, it happens in the Navy twice a MONTH.
Something is catastrophically wrong with whom is selected to command, and how that selection is done.
EJK is on target. FFE. War winning is math, not sociology. A homogenous force is cheaper, more efficient and is capable of being as effective as a mixed one. Until war winning becomes the all encompassing, all determining factor in training and maintaining our forces, we are screwed anyway.
Our next first world enemy is going to have a real easy time putting us on the ropes for this reason. Shame we'll relearn the lessons of Bataan and Wake on the backs of so many well intentioned folks.
DF, I take it you noticed the word "combat" was mentioned exactly once...?
Here's a recent pic for you, URR.
Enjoy!
Alternately laughing and gagging.
Did you photoshop Barney's face on Bea Arthur?
<span>I might take it a step further. Not only is the command screening and selection process broken, but the basic problem is that a corrosive and highly destructive mindset has been fostered by "Naval leadership" that undermines the entire fitness report/rating process. The Navy has been turned into a politically correct engine of social change within which "diversity" has become an overarching priority to the detriment of all else.</span>
<span></span>
<span>As George Orwell said in "1984" not all pigs are created equal. Some get special preference because of their plumbing, or their pigmentation, or their self-proclaimed ethnicity. And that special preference is pervasive. It extends even to the outcomes of legal proceedings - witness the ASECNAV over riding the findings of the board and granting Holly Graff an Honorable Discharge at the rank of captain.</span>
<span></span>
<span>What is the solution? I can't even begin to make a suggestion on that. There clearly needs to be a radical change in sea state in the mindset of Navy leaders at every level. People need to be judged on the basis of competence without regard to race, creed, color or sex. Promote the best, $hitcan the rest. There needs to be a strong signal from the CNO that the mission of the Navy is fight and win the Nation's wars at sea and that anything that doesn't support that mission will not be tolerated. If you can't buy into that find another career. </span>
<span></span>
<span>There also needs to be a new approach to accountability for your own actions at all levels. I find it hard to believe that all those commanding officers who were relieved for drunken behavior were teetotalers until the put on their command pins. I doubt that the ones relieved for womanizing and sexual assault were choirboys until they were selected for command. And I suspect that there were any number who, like Holly Graff, were pi$$poor leaders and lousy human beings from the day they were commissioned. </span>
You would be surprised what Badgers see on a day to day basis.
<span>that anyone would Volunteer as an observer should be a red flag.</span>
I volunteered as an observer one time, for two reasons:
1. It was in consonance with my general belief that "I shouldn't ask my people to do anything I wouldn't be willing to do myself."
2. It was the most valuable contribution I could make to the Animal Farm that day, since it allowed an NCO to stay at his post and get some real work done.
I am on the USS Howard and I attended the women's sympoium.
The first point I'd like to make is that obviously do hold all hands meeting to talk about subjects which are pertinent to all hands. The point of this one time event was to cover subjects that some women might not want to discuss with men present. We wanted to find out of there were any concerns that were not being voiced due to personnel not being in a comfortable environment.
Second, there was an all male symposium also which was hosted by the Chaplain from the USS Tortuga, a male LT. From what I hear, they had a pretty lengthy "bitch session" regarding what they don't like about working with women. Maybe they had some things to get off their chests and I doubt that the topic would have come up had there been women present.
Lastly this was not only a meeting about sexual assault, or a meeting of sexual assault victims, although obviously it was a major topic of discussion. The sexual assualt coversation revolved mostly around how the reporting process works and what options and programs we have available. This was also brought up at the men's symposium. The rest of the syposium topics ranged from what is appropriate PT gear for a woman to wear on the ship to why we are not allowed to flush tampons down the toilets. If you think that the men need to be privvy to information like that, I can bring it up at our next radical "all hands event".
"...<span>why we are not allowed to flush tampons down the toilets.</span>"
You realize, of course, that most men - especially those who have daughters - have, depending on the nations, boats or other places they go - have already had that conversation more than once with women.
Adults can discuss those things - and that takes just a few seconds.
I think you missed the bigger points of my comment, and that was just one example of a topic that was brought up. My major point was that there are some topics that people, male and female alike, are not comfortable discussing in front of members of the oppsite sex. As a result, there maybe issues that are not brought to light and resolved.
Sure maybe we (meaning men and women) should grown up, get over it and discuss it like adults, but we will never know if someone was just too uncormfortable to mention something that was bothering them.
And as I stated, there was also a men's symposium for this same reason.
I will say that I think this was publicized very badly. No mention was made of the men's symposium, and the articles made it sound like a meeting to discuss how all women in the militay are constantly sexually harassed by the men. I'm just trying to make it known that this was not the case, nor was it the purpose behind the symposium.
Though I can not corroborate, as I was not there, one of the hot button issues touched upon either at this one or the follow up (held on board HOWARD) as I understand it was how "the vagina is like a self cleaning oven". Which, one would think, would be something that grown women already should know. Another of the themes was how "women need to stick together". Against who, we have yet to figure out. As a male on HOWARD, I was kind of incredulous at the whole series of male-only/female-only meetings. I thought it was a bit parochial and counter to how I had traditionally seen things go down in the Navy.
Commenting on the male symposium, a) it was held underway on HOWARD b) it was not catered nor was beer provided c) females were not required to stay behind and cover watches while the ship was in a liberty port. So "Sydney", no it was not equal AT ALL.
Some of the topics actually discussed by the males: 1) How we felt many of the women used sexual politics as a way to get out of work. 2) Why females aren't penalized for getting pregnant during critical times (INSURV/deployment) 3) How females using the CMEO card effectively undermine leadership and how you have to "look out for yourself" (ie. not correct certain females for fear of reprisal) 4) The double standards we saw on the ship for what females were able to get away with.
a) The CO did suggest an off-ship males symposium if one of the male chief or officers would host it. None of them wanted to and the general consensus was that the men weren't interested. If YOU are interested, think it's something the men could benefit from, or just want to get off early some day and drink beer, maybe you should bring it up. I'm sure that at another time (i.e. after INSURV) the captain would absolutely support it and the women could cover down for you. Also, why does women sticking together and supporting each other have to mean we're banding together against someone? It was meant more as a "sometimes you need another woman to talk to" thing.
b) That the vagina is a self cleaning oven IS something that a grown woman should know. Obviously, because it was brought up, there were a few who didn't. Granted it was funny, it's a silly way of wording it, but if you think about it, it's sad that there are girls on the ship who needed to be told. And can you imagine that topic coming up at an all hands meeting?
c)The women also discussed topics such as 1) women onboard who use sexual politics and how it makes those of us who do our jobs look bad, and 2)The repercussions and punishments of filing a false sexual harassment claim. And trust me, there was defiantely a discussion about how many females got their ESWS books signed off in about a week this deployment.
As a woman on Howard, I couldn't agree more that females should be penalized for getting pregnant at any point during thier sea duty tour. You are actually proving my point exactly, all of those things are completely valid topics for discussion...so why have they never brought up at an all hands event?
These meetings weren't meant to segregate, only to bring up issues that might otherwise be ignored. As I said, if you feel the females are getting special treatment with this, then organize your own symposium. I think the only resistance you will meet will be from the other men, which is the same reason you didn't have one in the first place.
Don't want and don't need a symposium. We've got bigger fish to fry. Hell, truth be told, I think the majority of the females didn't even want to go. It doesn't seem like you're picking up what I'm putting down. The larger point the author of the blog was making is that you don't segregate your crew and give the impression of favoritism. Perception is reality, remember? One should not unnecessarily foster resentment and create wedge issues to divide the crew.
If it was meant as "sometimes you need another woman to talk to", that's what should have been said. Not we should stick together. If you are sticking together, necessarily you have to have an adversary or obstacle. When you are in a position of authority, it is imperative that you are mindful of what you do and what you say. I think that was the moral of the story.
Also, why don't you take a look around? Did it help? More pregnancies or less? More sisterhood or less? Rhetorical question. You and I both know the answer.
Hmm, so there was a double standard applied? Know why the men feel "uncomfortable" voicing their opinions around the women? Because they are afraid of being brought up on sexual harassment charges for a hostile work environment if they call out specific women out on the double standard. True story.
tramadol 50 mg buy tramadol cod overnight delivery - tramadol 50 mg how many
Post a Comment