President BO (the amateur president) is going to meet with military leaders about the issue today.
Of course, as Commander in Chief, he has absolutely no responsibility in these matters.
The very person in charge of preventing sexual harassment in the military has been accused of running a prostitution ring!
Well! We certainly didn't see THIS coming!
Who would have imagined that when men and women are in close proximity in a military setting that this could happen?
There was, of course, no possible way that anyone could have predicted this type of thing.
How could anyone have known that placing men and women in the same Company, Battalion, Battle Group, Unit or any other close quarters would result in sexual harassment?
No one...I mean absolutely NO ONE would ever have had even an inkling that this stuff might go on. NO ONE!
Oh, sure. There were a few radical, right-wing Christian groups who made statements about these possibilities, but, come on! What do THEY know? They're just a bunch of judgmental moralists who don't know how far we've evolved as a species.
They couldn't possibly have been right. NO! NEVER!
The best course of action right now is to simply change the definition of harassment. I know...we can make death a requisite for sexual harassment. If nobody died, nobody was raped or harassed.
There. That will fix it!
Now let's go back and see how many military women were killed as a result of harassment or during a rape.
Oh, good. That did the trick. The stats are much better now.
(But you still can't tell a co-worker that she looks nice today. That's the equivalent of rape.)
What a logical world we live in!
19 comments:
Classic, "blame the victim".
Waffling on your claims to value individual responsibility, Joe?
Ducky: Not at all. Each incident should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
My point is (which you seemingly missed - as usual) that some saw it coming. The more stupid among us didn't think it would happen.
It did.
The "naysayers" were right.
But you will never learn. You just can't.
Joe - I hope they get to the bottom of this - pun intended.
Ducky: Not at all. Each incident should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
That's the problem, Joe, they aren't. The 26,000 figure is the number of assaults that went unreported. The reason most given for not reporting is fear of reprisal. Of the 3,374 cases that were reported, 62% were retailiated against. That included punishments, demotions, reductions in pay and being forced to work with their attacker.
This is about the the military culture that overlooks sexual assault. A small fraction of cases ever get tried and convictions are routinely overturned by officers. If there was actual justice for these crimes, it would go a long way toward reducing it.
There were a few radical, right-wing Christian groups who made statements about these possibilities
C'mon, Joe. Their objections have to do with womens physical abilities. Old Testiment mumbo jumbo how men are built for war. Another popular complaint is that the men will be so inherently inclined to protect the gals, they will loss their fighting edge. Quite the opposite is the case.
This has nothing to do with man's sin nature and everything to do with men in the military assaulting women with relative impunity.
(But you still can't tell a co-worker that she looks nice today. That's the equivalent of rape.)
Yeah, that's it. You're so clever. You love to throw out this stupid canard, men are being fired left and right for complimenting a co-worker. If they do it constantly, that's harrassment. If you say, "nice suit", it's different than saying, "your ass looks great in those pants". If anyone says that to you, you've got a case, Joe. Stay away from those flattering Sasabelts, you'd only be asking for it.
What we have here is Joe trumpeting the religious right's attitude that women should know their place, not tempt men and act modestly.
You sound like a militant Muslim, Joe.
Ducky - Exactly the point I was going to make.
Joe seems to be asserting that you simply cannot put men and women in close proximity without men raping women.
Men can't help it! It's in their nature! They have no control!
It is the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT that the extremist Muslims use to require Muslim women to wear burqas.
Joe seems to endorse some form of Sharia Law where men and women are segregated and if a man commits sexual violence against a women, it is her fault.
The man cannot possibly be to blame! He is just a man with the manly urges that God gave him in order to expand God's Kingdom!
XO & Ducky: So, if I understand you correctly, the fact that this was predicted and then happened means nothing...right?
You seem incapable of drawing the right conclusion(s) from a set of facts.
I believe women should be paid the same as men for a given job. I believe women should be respected and appreciated for who and what they are. I believe women should be able to serve their country in the military.
What I have said, and still say, is that co-mingling men an women in certain stressful situations invites distraction, and that's just what we got...in the extreme.
You might not like it, but we got it. You might not have believed it would happen, but it did.
So, without attacking me, what do you make of this horrible happenstance?
Joe - "What I have said, and still say, is that co-mingling men an women in certain stressful situations invites distraction..."
So rape and sexual assault is the result of "distraction"???
Seriously, Joe?
I think that the RAMPANT sexual abuse problem in all branches of the military is because of attitudes like yours.
"Well, ya know, ya put men and women together and this sort of thing is bound to happen!"
That pervasive attitude at the command level permeates throughout the command structure and gives carte blanche to the military men to abuse military women in any way they see fit because they know their commander shares your attitude and won't pursue charges.
XO: "... is because of attitudes like yours."
Actually, it is because of attitudes like yours.
Joe - "Actually, it is because of attitudes like yours."
Seriously? That's all you've got to defend your position?
"I'm rubber and you're glue!"?
Not that I'm all that surprised.
XO: And your comment was different how?
I find it interesting how people can just make up facts. 26,000 assaults went unreported. If no one reported them, then how do they know they happened?!?!?!
Women have no business being in combat units. When they started such social engineering in the mid-1970s, those of us in the military said that sexual assaults were just ONE thing which would happen if you put men and women together in close quarters for any length of time. Over the years they shared living quarters in the field, modesty became a thing of the past, and people began acting on their sexual urges. It is human nature. Go figure.
G.E.C. - "I find it interesting how people can just make up facts. 26,000 assaults went unreported. If no one reported them, then how do they know they happened?!?!?!"
Do you do any research at all before you open your mouth and let the stupid spill out?
That 26,000 number came FROM THE PENTAGON!
"The issue’s importance was heightened by a Pentagon report this week that – using anonymous surveys and sampling techniques – estimated that 26,000 active-duty personnel had experienced “unwanted sexual conduct” last year. That represented an increase from the estimated 19,300 such cases in 2010.
Those estimates were far higher than the actual cases reported. An annual report this week on sexual assault in the military said that, in fiscal year 2012, there were 3,374 actual reports of sexual assault involving service members as victims or subjects – an increase from the 3,192 reports of such offenses the previous year.
The offenses ranged from abusive sexual contact to rape. Fewer than one in 10 such cases ended with a court martial and a sex-assault conviction."
Enlighten me, G.E.C. What possible motive would the Pentagon have to make up a fact like that and include it in their own report?
"Women have no business being in combat units!"
That is a sexist, misogynist statement that has absolutely no basis in fact.
"When they started such social engineering in the mid-1970s..."
Guaranteeing equality under the law as laid out in the Constitution that you claim to hold so dear is not "social engineering". It's walking our talk.
"Over the years they shared living quarters in the field, modesty became a thing of the past, and people began acting on their sexual urges. It is human nature. Go figure."
You are using the exact same reasoning as the Taliban.
Women must be segregated from men and be covered from head to toe in burqas because if a man is around a woman and see's her skin, he's going to rape her! Because he just can't help himself! After all, he's a man! That's what men do!
** sigh **
If you are that weak, you should be locked up.
Men who are that weak should, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES, be allowed to serve in the military.
If you can't behave as a sane human being and refrain from committing sexual violence against a woman under ANY circumstances then you should be locked up and prevented from having any human contact with anyone, EVER!
There is no excuse, no justification for sexual assault or rape. Never!
What part of that simple concept do you not get?
X.O.
Hey, stupid, what difference does it make who made up the estimates? It isn’t a fact, and that is my point. You are in such a hurry to be a jackass you don’t care that I’m correct. I pointed no fingers except to say it was fraudulent. There is no reason for such “estimates” except to promote an program of more control rather than fix the problem by keeping women and men separated. Of course with today’s military you also have homosexual assaults.
So it is sexist to say women have no business in combat? You are really, really stupid. Our society has decided there are no innate differences between men and women. Women are much higher rate being non-deployable due to specific female issues, they do not have the strength for rigorous combat duties, nor the emotional capability, and they get pregnant! Not only that, they get abused when captured. You may not have value for women, which makes YOU the misogynist, but people like me value our women and don’t want them put into such situations. And that statement has every basis in fact. Have you ever been in the military you ass?
“Equality under the law” does not mean you ignore gender differences. It is idiots like you who came up with gender-neutral bathrooms, who treat women like they are men, who have no respect for women as women, etc, you misogynistic pig.
Taliban your granny. It’s human nature when you put men and women together someone is going to be an animal - it’s called sin. Look at coed college dorms and the amount of sexual assaults which have increased since they began such nonsense.
And it isn’t just sexual assault, it is also consensual to where the sexual relations become the distraction in combat. Men will want to naturally protect the women and will put themselves in harms way to do so, will have less effective fighting ability when numbers are needed, the women will not be able to carry wounded off the field, etc.
No, there is no justification or excuse for rape, but people like you have been training our youth from the public schools, college, and the media that sex it to be taken any way you want it, that it is just for recreation, etc. And then you wonder why they follow what they were taught. You are a complete ass
G.E.C. - "Hey, stupid, what difference does it make who made up the estimates? It isn’t a fact, and that is my point."
It is a fact. The women who responded to the Pentagon's survey who said they had been sexually assaulted but didn't report it for fear of retribution make it a fact.
Unless you are calling these women liars. Is that what you are doing?
"...you don’t care that I’m correct. I pointed no fingers except to say it was fraudulent."
You are not correct and it isn't fraudulent. It's a fact.
" There is no reason for such “estimates” except to promote an program of more control rather than fix the problem by keeping women and men separated."
Nothing about that sentence makes any sense whatsoever.
The estimates came from The Pentagon. What "program of control" is The Pentagon trying to "promote"?
Please, please be specific. I'm dying to learn more about how The Pentagon is seeking to promote a program of control by making up cases of sexual assault in the armed forces. This should be entertaining (in a complete goonbabble kind of way).
"Of course with today’s military you also have homosexual assaults."
That is an absolute lie! Site me one single case where a homosexual member of any military branch has sexually assaulted someone.
I'll save you time because YOU CAN'T! It has never ever happened. Not even once. You, are a liar. Plain and simple.
"Women are much higher rate being non-deployable due to specific female issues..."
Really? What, exactly is that rate? Please site sources. And what "female issues" are you referring to? Go ahead...say it.
"... they do not have the strength for rigorous combat duties, nor the emotional capability..."
There are women in the military today who could kick your ass and mop the floor with what was left of you. You don't know what you are talking about.
And numerous psychological studies and comparisons over many decades have shown that women are MUCH more emotionally strong and resilient than men.
"... and they get pregnant! Not only that, they get abused when captured."
So what?!? The military already has procedures in place to deal with pregnant soldiers.
And men get abused when they are captured too. Getting captured sucks. Soldiers, male and female, are trained to deal with captivity. Bottom line is they both endure what they have to endure and perform their duty as best they can.
"You may not have value for women, which makes YOU the misogynist, but people like me value our women and don’t want them put into such situations."
The key phrase in that quote is "our women". Neanderthals like you view women as objects to be owned, hoarded and kept.
Women aren't some sub-genre of humankind that need your condescending "protection".
Women are and always have been the smartest, strongest, emotional core of our species. Don't be fooled by the fact that they let you wander off into the woods to kill defenseless animals and gather a few nuts and berries on your way back home.
"It’s human nature when you put men and women together someone is going to be an animal - it’s called sin."
Really? I'm an atheist and hold myself above your silly and ridiculous "divine laws". I don't believe in the concept of "sin". And yet, I have never sexually assaulted anyone.
But according to your immature and juvenile view of human nature I should be just "agoin' at it" with everything around me 24/7.
Your position does not stand up to close scrutiny. SURPRISE!
Nonsense. Women have the same adrenal glands as men.
Your arguments are absurd.
X.O.
Your diatribe is so full of fallacious nonsense, ignorance and abject stupidity, that I really don’t have the time for it. Your foolishness has been demonstrated so many times on these blogs as to prove you are not open to correction.
Have a nice day.
Gee, the Pentagon reports that homosexual assaults are indeed taking place.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/military-suffers-wave-of-gay-sex-assaults/?cat_orig=us
G.E.C. - Oh crap. You saw that. LOL! I was kinda hoping you wouldn't. I saw it about 24 hours after I made my bold claim and challenge and got this disturbing crow-like taste in my mouth.
However, that being said, it is important to remember that sexual assault of any kind is not actually about sex. It's a display of power carried out in a violent and brutal manner.
You see this in violent conflicts throughout the world where rape is used as a weapon of war to demoralize, humiliate and subjugate the victims of war.
In the story that you linked, there was no suggestion that homosexuals allowed into the military were assaulting heterosexual soldiers.
In fact, there was a reference to the sexual assaults being more akin to "prison rape" which is all about power, dominance and control.
This leads me to believe that it is much more likely that it is the gay soldiers who are being victimized by the same sort of sexual violence as the female soldiers.
It is a message to women and gays that the neanderthal mainstream of military culture does not want either of them there and will brutalize them to drive them out.
X.O.
Rationalize it all you want.
Post a Comment