View more polls
Leave a reply →
what idiot didn't see this coming when they put women in the military?
There MUST be a zero tolerance policy that is enforced 100%. All current policies need to be thoroughly reviewed and adjusted and/or new provisions added. As a retired field grade officer, I strongly feel that commanders, etc, be taken out of the decision process for investigation and prosecution and that the process be handled thoroughly by an impartial agency, such as the JAG Corps. We must do everything we can to provide a safe environment and to protect our most valuable resource - 100% of our service members.
thank you. I would like to add that there are male on male assaults in the military as well. There have been since the dawn of time. To the people who likened women in the army to Roman times; history states there were many, many mal on male assaults. Sexual assault is about control, not sex.
I've read the comments and it appears that the majority seem to believe this is only a male vs. female problem that needs addressing. This is not that exclusive, nor should it be considered that way. Most of the existing regulations were written before women in combat positions was a political football booted around to advance a social change experiment. Women in combat is not a new idea, women have endured combat conditions since our country went to war.
The rules are written to provide recourse thru the UCMJ for inappropriate physical interaction between all military personnel. I firmly believe the rules as they are written should be enforced and convictions and sentencing should not be overturned by Command without compelling new evidence. I also remain firmly convinced the thorough investigation of each individual incident is required to maintain fairness and discipline. I do not see how the institution of a Zero Tolerance policy automatically equates to the institution of the former or the elimination of the later.
Any "ZERO-TOLERANCE" kind of rule or regulation is asking for trouble. Organizations (military, schools, etc.) seem to have a bad habit of over-reacting and over-compensating when dealing with such things. Each case should be viewed and dealt with, based on its own evidence, within available guidelines. That's my 2-cent's worth.
Maybe my father who served as an Infantryman and a veteran of WW-II, Korea, and Vietnam was right, “Women should not be in the Army”.
Women should not be in combat. They are NOT men's physical equals. They weaken the combat Army. How many women were in the Roman Army or in Combat positions in WWII,Korea, or Vietnam. It is insane. They want to be like men but it someone slaps them on the ass it's Sexual harassment. Remember Jessica Lynch? Her quotation when asked 'What did you do when the firing started?' She said an I quote, "I dropped to my knees and I prayed" Yeah I want someone like that watching my back. They gave her a Bronze Star and a free scholarship to the University of West Virginia. Too bad the people with her didn't get scholarships but they all were killed. STOP THE INSANITY WOMEN DO NOT BELONG IN COMBAT.
It's a very slippery slope. During my career I made it my policy to steer clear from any advances toward soldiers. However others may not be able to have such self control. I think the appropriate response or punishment is to pull rank. If the risk is worth it then by all means have at it but don't complain when you lose your stripes.
'Zero tolerance' needs to be carefully defined since there have been abuses in the past when the term has been used. Further, the implementation of the policy placing females in combat roles, should it be decided upon, should wait until the proper procedural safeguards are in place to deal with the current situation regarding sexual assaults. For political correctness well-intentioned individuals are seeking to put women in situations that make sexual assaults more possible.
Sexual assault happens at the school house, at basic training, at female only dorms, in parking lots, at parties. According to the 2012 DoD report, less sW23Uthan one third of sexual assaults happened in combat zones.
Sexual harrassment is already illegal in both the military & civilian arenas. It is obvious that more laws aren't the answer. Enforce the ones we already have. Awareness, enforcement, accountability and consistency are what's needed. If people can't obey 5 laws what makes anyone think they'll obey 6?
From experience one of the most difficult times is to serve long periods without the opportunity to speak to a woman. Gets pretty lonely at sea. I am much too old to understand placement of women on ships at sea. In particular the subs with confined quarters. No mention of the affect this has on waiting wives back home.
No mention of any records of consensual sex. No records of pregnancy. No records of enlisted men with women officers. No mention of gay couples? How about all the facts without fear or favor?
At such a young age seems like the hormones work overtime. At COMNAVFOR Japan my job was to investigate, arrange and assist prospective marriage couples. The job was to work with the Japanese police and American Embassy as these were international marriages. I handled and approved close to 100 applications. One application tabled as she was a Chinese spy out of Singapore. It was the Viet Nam War period.
I always felt the job as strange because does the government or the military have the right to deny
the right to marriage? The ramifications of women serving together in the military are many.
How does this policy work in places like Israel or other countries? Is it a cultural problem or a
problem seen in every country?
You really need to do some reading. You are way off in your thinking.
The problem will exist as long as there is a coed military. I know it is not politically correct and others may call it sexist, but the fact remains that women should not serve with men.
A little over 10% of the sexual assaults are male on male. What do you propose in your infinite wisdom we do about that? Rape has nothing to do with sex. It is abuse and control. Plain and simple. The actual fact is that the military mimics society. The numbers of assault in the military are very close to being the same as in the civilian world. The biggest difference is in the low prosecution levels.
Dear Survivor, I believe your 10% of Male on Male Rapes is way off. The most recent number of Rapes in the Armed Forces is 55% Male, and 45% Female. Male Rapes are on the rise in a big way! In 1989, at NAS Moffat Field, I saw firsthand what a rape can do to a woman. I was walking down a Barracks hallway, when I heard a woman screaming terribly. I was not sure what to do, so I looked in and saw a friend of mine scrubbing her skin raw. I ran to a phone called the MP’s then woke up a friend of hers to help her out! That incident has stuck with me in detail all these years. I also in 1990 watched a Chief Petty Officer’s career end abruptly, after 22 years of service charged with Sexual Harassment. Three months after this event happened, this so called Female sailor tried it again. She had a bad habit of being late for work, and when she was counseled, and written up she tried the same thing. This time they figured out her little game, and she served a sentence, and was thrown out. They, the Military never recalled or cleared the Chief from the first offense, they wanted to save face I guess. So long story short, a little bit of NCIS investigation can go a long way when properly utilized!!!!
They need to take the fact that there will always be that temtation there. Remove it and take it out of harms way.
No matter what policy is "enforced" the problem lies in the fact that the chain of command determines the outcome of any and all charges. Noted is the fact that an Air Force pilot Lt. Col. James Wilkerson, an F-16 pilot convicted of aggravated sexual assault against a civilian was convicted in a Court Martial and received a prison sentence. The General of his base overturned his sentence and returned him to duty with no punishment! The resolution to this scourge is that all sexual assaults should be reported to civilian authorities and civilian Courts. The military has shown that it can longer be trusted to enforce these laws.
Put Bill Clinton in charge. He's consistently set a splendid example of how to treat off-limits women.
A "Zero limits" policy is open to abuse and UN-reasonable results. Each incident should be investigated and considered in the light of past behavior and intent of each party. The cry of "he touched me inappropriately either on the dance floor or in a passageway may be the result of revenge, antagonism or frustration, or blackmail on the recipients part. or it may be a misguided attempt to develop or further a relationship. In many cases a simple sincere apology should be the end result.
"Zero Limits" on guns ina school resulting in suspension of a child for pointing a pencil in imitation of a action movie is to extreme result of a misguided policy.
As a survivor and victim advocate I can most assuredly tell you that less than 1 percent of the over 25, 000 assaults reported restricted and unrestricted are unsubstantiated. And of those over 75% recant before adjucation. Keep your personal agenda out of facts that you definitely do not know.
I am not sure who you were responding to. We do not need more rules. What is needed is for Officers not to cover up assaults and prosecute the offenders