US Military, be the worst you can be

SLUSK

In a survey about 30% of the female veterans who answered it said they had been raped in the army.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103844570

Heres another story, it says it's fairly common that military recruiters sexually assault females.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/19/national/main1913849.shtml

Manic Moran

Even without referring to past posts in other threads to evidence past history on the matter, simply addressing the difference between what the statistics (s)he references says, and what (s)he thinks they say.

For example, there are several external factors at play which mean that pure figures alone tell very little of the story.

Firstly, and most importantly, ratios. The NPR story simply states that a shockingly large proportion of women have reported some form of sexual abuse whilst in the military. The first, mistaken, conclusion made is that the offender is always military. For the record, we've had one major crime reported on the facility I am currently located, it was carried out by a civilian cook. However, let us move past this and work on the likely basis that the majority of such offenses were indeed carried out by servicemen (and women).

The second ratio of note is the fact that there is a far, far smaller proportion of women in the military. Assuming an equal percentage of persons in the military are the sort to conduct sexual crimes as are found on the civilian street (which is itself not necessarily the case as a past criminal record does not prevent you from being a civilian as easily as a being a serviceman), you now have a much smaller pool of potential victims in a confined area for them to prey upon. With women making just over half of the civilian population, but somewhere just over 10% of the military population (Between 6% of Marines, 20% of Air Force), of course the figures showing the percentage of women reporting abuse are going to be dramatically higher. By a factor of about 5, all other factors being equal.

The third conclusion is that civilians are just as likely to report abuse as military. I have no statistical data to support or refute this allegation, though it may be considered that the sort of people who are going to join the military tend to be of a certain independent and self-confident character which may be a factor in deciding to make a report.

The fourth erroneous conclusion is that 'just because a crime is reported, something must be done about it.' The military, just like a civilian court, is limited by the rules of law as to what it can do about a reported crime. If there is no evidence sufficient to gain a conviction in court, no court-martial level punishment will be imposed. It's logical.

However, tools that the military -does- have which a civilian court does not, are things like non-judicial punishment and written reviews. That there may be insufficient evidence to gain a criminal conviction does not prohibit the entry into a person's record basically an official 'we're watching you' to attempt to deter any such future behaviour. Thus, disappointing though a mere 'letter of reprimand' may be to the accusor, and great 'shock press' though it may be for NPR, it's no worse than the District Attorney saying "Sorry, but there's nothing we can do about it due to lack of evidence."



NTM

GuanYin

I've restored this thread, edited both posts and I'm now asking that posters read the charter of the politics forum (specifically the US politics forum) before posting.

Report a post if you have an issue, if I see someone going outside that route again, I will be forced to issue sanctions.

Stella777

I had a little experince with male military recruiters ages ago during my final semester of college.

My dad was a career army officer, his father a career naval officer, I'm an only child...I decided, what the Hey, might as well at least look into continuing the family tradition. The job offers weren't exactly pouring in. I figured I might get to make use of my foreign languages (Arabic and Turkish) if nothing else.

So I visited an Army recruiting office. Well, I certainly wasn't raped or groped, but the guy was unprofessional and creepy. There were many inappropriate jokes and smirking. When he found out which university I was attending, he made constant "nerd" jokes that weren't quite jokes. When I got a high score on the little appitude test they give you, there were lots of "Little Miss Smarty Pants" comments. On one hand, he very much wanted me to join from the viewpoint of his job as recruiter. I'm sure it would have helped his monthy quotas, particularly as I'm a woman. OTOH, I got the impression that, *personally*, he'd rather I NOT sign-up.

He gave me a lift back to campus and it was 20 minutes of inappropriate stories about his recent dates.

Had I *really* wanted to join, I wouldn't have let him put me off, though. I'm not the over-senstitive type (I imagine that the Army wouldn't be the best fit for over-sesitive types anyway???) Ultimately I realized that were I serious about an Army career, I should have started with ROTC at the beginning of college. Trying to start at that later date meant my only option would have been to join as an enlisted person. The recruiter said that there was no guarantee that I would be placed into an assignment where I'd be using the foreign language skills. According to him, it could just as easily be a cook job. Not sure if that was 100% true, but it's what he said.

Anyway, I think that the problem of rapes and sexual harrassment by recruiters is not particularly a US Army thing, and more about a Little Person who holds a large amount of power over a tiny domain. It gives him the ability influence the the lives of other people and the chance to take advantage is some cases. You see the same thing with correctional officers, college professors, drug dealers, probation officers, certain kinds of bosses and of course, priests.

GuanYin

I had one friend who was on a military scholarship in med school. She got a full free college ticket in return for equal number of years service after graduation. I think she got some automatic officers grade (Lt?) upon signing up and outranked the recruiting officer immediately .

Anyway, I went out for happy hours with her cadet class once and the guys there were perfectly sweet. Nothing any more inappropriate than my own classmates and in fact it seemed just like that, hanging out with college kids, in fact I think one of them called me and asked me out on a date.

She is still serving, I met her a couple of times for coffee when we've been in the same town and you know, she never had anything bad to say about her experience. She wasn't exactly a petite girl as she's probably close to 6 ft, and she's incredibly pretty so I would have imagined that if the guys were a bit wild, she'd have problems. Apparently not.

SLUSK

On American soldier waterboarded his own 4 year old daughter. I don't know if the US army turns people into monster or if they just simply attract monsters.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1249191/Soldier-father-accused-waterboarding-daughter-4-recite-alphabet.html

Overheal

SLUSK wrote: »

On American soldier waterboarded his own 4 year old daughter. I don't know if the US army turns people into monster or if they just simply attract monsters.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1249191/Soldier-father-accused-waterboarding-daughter-4-recite-alphabet.html

I wouldn't mind discussing this in the least if you actually wanted to view it objectively; but frankly SLUSK all you've shown in your posts is a desire to antagonize people and 'get a dig in'.

Manic Moran

Trying to start at that later date meant my only option would have been to join as an enlisted person. The recruiter said that there was no guarantee that I would be placed into an assignment where I'd be using the foreign language skills. According to him, it could just as easily be a cook job. Not sure if that was 100% true, but it's what he said.

Surprised your dad didn't teach you about Rule #1 when it comes to recruiters: Never take anything they say at face value. Army MOS 09S: Officer Candidate. Join as an E-4 Specialist enlisted soldier, with a guaranteed crack at OCS. You pass OCS, you're an officer. Fail OCS, and you remain enlisted for a while. It's how I ended up commissioned. However, there is a half-truth to what he said: There's no guarantee an officer will branch the way he/she wants to, commissions are assigned 'needs of the Army' barring certain specific specialist positions. (Chaplain, doctor, lawyer etc). However, should you go enlisted, you can specify 'linguist' in the contract. eg 35P, Crypologic Linguist or Interpreter/translator 09L.

Corollary Rule #2: If they don't tell you what you want to hear, walk out the door:

more about a Little Person who holds a large amount of power over a tiny domain.

As the potential inductee, you're the one with all the power. Nothing forces you to sign the dotted line, until you do, you own the recruiter.

I think she got some automatic officers grade (Lt?) upon signing up and outranked the recruiting officer immediately

Doctors tend to join as Captains. (Unless she went Navy, in which case the same grade is Lieutenant)

in fact I think one of them called me and asked me out on a date.

Obviously a memorable experience!

NTM

censuspro

Manic Moran wrote: »

The third conclusion is that civilians are just as likely to report abuse as military. I have no statistical data to support or refute this allegation, though it may be considered that the sort of people who are going to join the military tend to be of a certain independent and self-confident character which may be a factor in deciding to make a report.
NTM

The sort of people who tend to join the army/military also tend to be from from a certain socio economic backgrounds. Not just the US but Ireland and UK also.

Stella777

Manic Moran wrote: »

Corollary Rule #2: If they don't tell you what you want to hear, walk out the door:



As the potential inductee, you're the one with all the power. Nothing forces you to sign the dotted line, until you do, you own the recruiter.

Had I decided I was serious about joining, I could have found a way to work around the recruiter's issues and his general obnoxiousness. Honestly, if the guy had told me that I needed to offer sex before he would allow me to sign up I would have burst out laughing. That said, I was someone who was fortunate enough to have options in my life. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the cases mentioned in the above article involved young women from very poor areas who saw joining the military as a way up. I could see how, in their eyes, the recruiter might appear all powerful. As I mentioned in the earlier post, this is not unique to military recruiters, but anyone who holds power over someone else, be it real or imagined. There will always be a few sleazy types who take advantage of this influence.

Manic Moran

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the cases mentioned in the above article involved young women from very poor areas who saw joining the military as a way up

Even if that's the case, there's no need to tell the recruiter that. When haggling, do you tell the seller how much money you have in your pocket or how badly you need something?

NTM

Stella777

Manic Moran wrote: »

Even if that's the case, there's no need to tell the recruiter that. When haggling, do you tell the seller how much money you have in your pocket or how badly you need something?

NTM

No, I don't, not now. The article is talking about enlistees in their late teens or very early 20's, though. At that age how good was your poker face?

BigDuffman

I am neither anti US or anti Military. Nor do I put much weight behind media and damn statistics.

But the "facts" as they are shown in these articles, particularly regarding allegations against recruiters is shocking.

"The Army, which accounts for almost half of the military, has had 722 recruiters accused of rape and sexual misconduct since 1996."

That is a staggering number. Regardless of % of pool or relative civilian sample size those figures cannot be ignored or excused. Particularly relating to a representative of the armed forces in a position that involves interacting with the public.

However regarding in general sexual harassment in the Military, this has to be taken with a pinch of salt.. Despite procedures and policies the military is a mans world (*bracing for a feminist enslaught*). An uber male culture that does little to promote the traditional "female" values. People may enter the military and expect a PC and accommodating equal environment. I'm sorry but that is not really practical. This may come across as harassment ie. ladish behaviour or "derogatory" remarks. This is seen as banter between lads but potentially offensive to a female that may be present.

This will happen in a male environment. If a female is in a predominantly male environment, they may become privy to certain aspects that may be considered harassment. This does not in any way excuse abuse, rape, unfair treatment etc. but (in my opinion) an overly PC mentality does not apply or work in a military lifestyle.

Overheal

"The Army, which accounts for almost half of the military, has had 722 recruiters accused of rape and sexual misconduct since 1996."

That is a staggering number

Out of 7,600 in Active Duty alone. But we aren't talking about all the other sh!t donned on the recruitment officers. Read article for more.

You could be forgiven for looking at Military Recruiters the wrong way. They're put under a lot, have been through a lot, and I'm not surprised that about 2% of them crack. If we want to bring the sexual misconduct to attention, please also look at Suicide and other cases as well.

Stella777

BigDuffman wrote: »

I am neither anti US or anti Military. Nor do I put much weight behind media and damn statistics.

But the "facts" as they are shown in these articles, particularly regarding allegations against recruiters is shocking.

"The Army, which accounts for almost half of the military, has had 722 recruiters accused of rape and sexual misconduct since 1996."

What I gathered from the article is that the sexual misconduct cases included everything from rape to things like a recruiter and potential enlistee dating in a consensual relationship. Obviously the second scenario is highly unprofessional, but I don't think it falls under "sexual abuse" as the title of the article calls it.