Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The first step to halting sexual harassment/assault cases in the military is to make it so that if the accuser makes a provable false accusation they are automatically dishonorably discharged from the military.
Nearly 10 percent of cases are shown to be false.
10% out of 100 means 90% of the cases are true. So maybe it shouldn't be the FIRST step.
I get what you are saying about costs, but what if it was entirely made up of retired veterans? they could still get paid but wouldn't affect the readiness of the military, and retiree's wouldn't feel like they might be retaliated against for being stationed there like a military member might.
People from older generations would IMO have a different opinion on sexual harassment and IMO be more inclined to side with the male, because attitudes were different then. See the post that talked about what it was like in 1990. Those guys would be the retired members now judging sexual harassment.
People from older generations would IMO have a different opinion on sexual harassment and IMO be more inclined to side with the male, because attitudes were different then. See the post that talked about what it was like in 1990. Those guys would be the retired members now judging sexual harassment.
I served in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
I was serving on Active Duty when urinalysis was illegal. The effort to make it legal took a long time. Many men were prosecuted throughout the process of developing a method of urinalysis that the courts finally agreed was legal.
I was also serving on Active Duty after urinalysis was finally happening in a manner where convictions were able to withstand the appeals process.
I have seen our military go through many transitions.
I fought against Direct Deposit for years. There were periods where I was ordered to sit through lectures about the 'benefits' of Direct Deposit. I tried DD and dispersing messed up my pay for months, so I went back to getting my pay handed to me in person. Until they finally re-wrote our enlistment contracts making DD mandatory as a condition of the enlistment contract.
I have never been to sea with females on the boat. But I have seen females serving on Shore Duty. While on Shore Duty I served alongside females [none of them had ever been out to sea obviously].
I have sat through many lectures on sexual harassment, so many I have no way to communicate exactly how many hours of training.
I think I would be capable of understanding the distinction between what makes harassment and what does not.
I was serving on Active Duty when urinalysis was illegal. The effort to make it legal took a long time. Many men were prosecuted throughout the process of developing a method of urinalysis that the courts finally agreed was legal.
I was also serving on Active Duty after urinalysis was finally happening in a manner where convictions were able to withstand the appeals process.
I have seen our military go through many transitions.
I fought against Direct Deposit for years. There were periods where I was ordered to sit through lectures about the 'benefits' of Direct Deposit. I tried DD and dispersing messed up my pay for months, so I went back to getting my pay handed to me in person. Until they finally re-wrote our enlistment contracts making DD mandatory as a condition of the enlistment contract.
I have never been to sea with females on the boat. But I have seen females serving on Shore Duty. While on Shore Duty I served alongside females [none of them had ever been out to sea obviously].
I have sat through many lectures on sexual harassment, so many I have no way to communicate exactly how many hours of training.
I think I would be capable of understanding the distinction between what makes harassment and what does not.
It’s not a matter of understanding it, simply the attitude of the day was very different than it is today. Many of them participated in a culture that was unfriendly to female military members, so now to ask them to sit in judgment of people accused of the same things that many of them and their friends did seems counterproductive. I am not saying that every military member back then engaged in sexual harassment by any means, but the poster who served in the late 80s early 90s, said it was a very different atmosphere. That requires complicence by many many people not just a few. Aside from that, most retired military are men, and I don’t know that it should just be men on these boards. For that matter, I don’t know that it just needs to be military people. Pretty much the problem we’ve had with police, police policing themselves. Maybe the military shouldn’t be policing themselves either. But to say that retired military members from previous generations would be the best people to sit in judgment of people accused of sexual harassment in the modern military culture, just seems like a step backwards not forward.
As I explained in post #12, in the mid90s, serving on an all-male crew, every crewman's career up to that point had been male-only, we were doing sexual harassment training every month, and we had a sexual harassment complaint from one of our officers.
........in an EEOC training session, I related, after dodging around the bush and then having to directly state, how in academics on terrorism, I had put forth assembling the first strike terrorism team from ethnicities traditionally associated with those who worked as custodians. Why? Because to many white collar workers, such people are unnoticed by them and when the police are questioning after the strike, a type of invisibility may be achieved.
It is 'terrible' that there are people like me who think that way.....and many eyes were looking at me in the room.
The leader of the workshop, however, pointed out that it was okay for that type of environment to be like that but probably not so in a non police/security area.....and then he offered a defence to my tactic. Interview the regular custodians as well for they will see, know, remember, who is familiar and who is not.
I say it is wild for that was in a security area where we are suppose to think like that, probe into the dark areas of the mind to attack and defend.........
As I explained in post #12, in the mid90s, serving on an all-male crew, every crewman's career up to that point had been male-only, we were doing sexual harassment training every month, and we had a sexual harassment complaint from one of our officers.
I know; I was an MP and DH was MPI, but there are far too many people (like the poster I quoted) who think the problem is only female.
If women are often hesitant to report it is almost impossible to get a male to report.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
