Hot Mic

Omakase

Amazon Search
«  
  »

Catfight

By lex, on January 4th, 2010

Over at the USNI blog.

Bring popcorn.

Share
January 4th, 2010 | Tags: | Category: Military

30 comments to Catfight

  • AW1 Tim
    January 4, 2010 at 4:44 pm

    I had no choice but to comment. The field was fertile, and needed to be plowed.

  • ProwlerAMDO
    January 4, 2010 at 4:58 pm

    If a woman comes onto a man it’s called getting lucky. Provided she’s at least a 5 or 6 or above, depending on preference. If she’s less than that it’s considered a training opportunity. If a man comes onto a woman it’s called assault. Unless he’s Brad Pitt.

    (Necessary PC disclaimer, this is a joke and not excusing the Army WO’s behavior towards to Captain, nor commenting on that situation.)

  • CitadelGrad
    January 4, 2010 at 5:05 pm

    Outstanding ability on Defense Springboard’s part to derail the thread. Great job picking it out.

  • virgil xenophon
    January 4, 2010 at 5:19 pm

    This is but another chapter in the never-ending “the King has no clothes” saga. Officialdom pretends. We all know what is wrong, but some of us don’t (to mix metaphors) want to put our heads in the sand to avoid having to take note of the Elephant in the living room.

  • virgil xenophon
    January 4, 2010 at 5:21 pm

    eliminate “don’t”….looks like I’ve eliminated proof-reading, too.

  • Stephen
    January 4, 2010 at 5:33 pm

    Virg, In regards to the elephant; I can see haze of “enlightenment” obscuring the view from time to time, but that HUGE steaming pile of dung Dumbo left behind is hard to explain away. Don’t get me wrong, one of my favorite female bloggers is an ex-secret squirrel pilot and has my utmost respect, yet, acting surprised when these types of things happen is just plain stoopid. stephen

  • SteveC
    January 4, 2010 at 5:55 pm

    And the answer to the problem is: Put ‘em together on submarines. So we can’t see or hear the shananigans, I suppose. Until later.

  • RetRsvMike
    January 4, 2010 at 6:26 pm

    wow. that’s a classy joint over there at USNI…

    ..they’ve made it all the way to 14 comments and still nobody has called anybody else a dick.

  • Mongo
    January 4, 2010 at 6:27 pm

    This whole subject is beginning to bore the daylights out of me with all its flailing about and endless lecturing. There has been entirely too much disregard for and disobedience of the fraternization regulations, along with as much silent tolerance and a ‘turning a blind eye’ towards existing violations. From the top down it needs to be made clear “You want to play house in my Navy? I’m going to make it very, very painful, and we’re not talking just an AdSep here.”

    While watching the PBS series “Carrier” (USS NIMITZ, Persian Gulf deployment, 2005)the subject was brought up, and openly admitted to that fraternization exists, that people know it’s against the rules, but it happens anyway because {fill in the blank}.

    CNO is the one, IMO, who needs to take this bull by the horns and administer a severe ass chewing to the entire Service. He needs to be as big a hard a$$ about this with the entire Navy, as he has ever been about anything. Same gig for the Commandant; zero tolerance for fraternization, just as there is for drugs. Zero excuses. Zero tolerance.

    As Lex pointed out the other day, we hang horse thieves not for the stolen horses…
    IMO, Bad Conduct Discharges for all parties involved in any violation would not be too harsh. Make. It. Hurt…

    • Chaps
      January 4, 2010 at 9:29 pm

      Never happen as CNO says diversity, not discipline, is the Navy’s highest priority. Also, women will never, and I mean never, be held accountable in fraternization cases… no matter who intiated the affair nor who is senior. Women will always be exempt.

  • Byron
    January 4, 2010 at 6:46 pm

    She Who Must Be Obeyed at USNI will give you one warning and then you get banned if you don’t play well. You can disagree…but you must be polite. I know…I got the Warning.

  • CW4, USA
    January 4, 2010 at 8:28 pm

    First, I could not resist dropping a quarter into the slot and pounding out a few thoughts. I don’t know if I would push for a BCD or a DD. Is it bad conduct or a lack of honor? Tough call, but as was said: Make. It. Hurt.

    I hope the web wench at USNI is not offended by me referring to myself as a horses ass. Gee, most of the wardrooms I recall had spirited discussions, but then it was before wymyns were assigned to ships, so it was just manly men going to sea with other manly men to do manly things….ha ha ha. But then, most of the Officers in the Navy I dealt with were snipely types, so I guess all bets are off.

    CW4

  • Joe in N. Calif
    January 4, 2010 at 9:50 pm

    How about bringing back flogging?

    Oh….

    wait…

    Never mind.

  • MaxDamage
    January 4, 2010 at 11:43 pm

    What strikes me in this whole debate is the matter of personal honor has not been broached. Each was married. Hence each broke their *oath* to their partner. Now maybe in These Modern Days a quickie on the side and oh it’s not serious and hey we have needs isn’t a big deal, but where I come from breaking your oath, your vow, is a big deal. We swore an oath to our spouses, failure to abide by it costs us coin and real estate and standing among our peers. We swore an oath to the Constitution. Failure to abide by it makes us fall somewhere between oafs (or politicians, take your pick) and traitors depending upon the deed.

    If you can’t keep up an oath to a person, how in the hell are you going to keep an oath to your shipmates or to the overall rule of law your country was founded upon?

    It’s not merely a breach of UCMJ or regulation, it’s proof by example that these folks have no moral authority to be respected, to be leaders, or to be trusted. The chain of command was broken, they were the weak link.

    Or, I dunno, maybe I read too much into this whole “my word is my bond” thing. But I was always taught that leadership started with providing an example worth emulating. I’m not seeing it here.

    – Max

  • Curtis
    January 5, 2010 at 12:35 am

    Have any of you who comment ever been there? Done that? This is a story about shore duty so let’s put it in a navy shore duty context in say, Iraq or Kuwait. The case is as described and is brought to the attention of command. Command offers both parties an Art. 15. Both refuse. Command takes one of his/her overworked staff officers and appoints as JAGMAN Investigating Officer (Court martial is now presumed so the Rules of Evidence are required from this point on)-on top of other assigned duties. Execute all the legal bumff, take statements from those as willing to give ‘em (witnesses who witnessed these violations). Collate, assemble all the facts and present to command with charge sheet. JAG/SJA review to make sure all i’s dotted, t’s crossed. Return to command. Convene Special Courts Martial for both parties who are represented by legal counsel while the JAG makes the case to the SCM which may mean 6 or more other officers taken out of the line of duty for duration of cases – usually very brief but hassle getting them all together in time/space (3 officers/SCM). Case was a Slam Dunk! Both parties found guilty and get the BCD! Command now has two gapped billets that WILL NOT be filled prior to the end of the deployment. Remaining officers get to pick up their load in addition to other duties.
    Somebody has phoned Senator Boxer’s hotline and alleged sexual discrimination and harassment. Somebody also called the DOD IG and reported the same thing! Somebody called the Type Commander IG’s hotline and reported the SAME THING! Three additional Investigating officers are appointed from the staff/wardroom to conduct preliminary investigation into these allegations. 3 IG’s expect their reports by COB Friday. One will be hearing from all 3 IGs…..often and forever.
    Members appeal to CA and get relief. Months later charges dismissed because the Court Martial made a procedural error or failed to correctly comply with the Rules of Evidence.
    This is one giant huge enormous futile pain in the butt. Now rinse and repeat, again and again and again.
    I think someone mentioned that male/female interactions are driven by human nature. Discipline is a shiny vision of what should be. It doesn’t necessarily translate into the everyday/everynight world of long deployments away from home.
    You know what the alternative to all that is? Why command administratively sends one or the other parties home! How’s that for a savage low blow to everybody else’s morale? Usually the girl gets sent home. Do wrong, go home to family and no more 20 hour days in 120 degree heat surrounded by desert and mean people with attitude.
    I think I’ve pretty much dispensed with the idea that the UCMJ is of much use in these type cases when it comes to instilling and maintaining good order and discipline. (That’s just in my own mind! I’m not saying that I’ve made any kind of case for dispensing with the UCMJ in this context.) Now a blanket party or two administered very very sternly by their peers and repeated as required? That might work out better all around. Command couldn’t be a party to that. It’s certainly more effective than a butt chewing and the issuance of an MPO which just gets ignored and adds the charge of “disobeying a direct order” to the mix when one finally does accept that it is time to shoot two officers in the head and bear up for the remainder of the deployment without anybody to fill their billets because one was forced to initiate the MCM process leading to the BCD and their departure from Theater.
    You should see why command would usually rather walk a mile barefoot through broken glass than engage this sort of behavior with the JAGMAN and MCM. As tools for Good Order and Discipline they are broken and pretty much useless.
    Just my tuppence.

    • virgil xenophon
      January 5, 2010 at 4:23 am

      Curtiss, I am in total agreement with everything you have said both from a nuts and bolts pov and with your conclusion as well–your brief only serves in MY mind to reinforce the belief that my pov is the correct one–that women should be kept to a minimum in the armed services, Yes, I know, ain’t gonna happen soon (as in NIML) and it’s small satisfaction in saying “I told you so” and yes, the trend is all the other way (I see the latest news is that the RN is going to put women on submarines)
      but it’s a crying shame, and while I guess I’m resigned to the fact–am enough of a “trained political scientist” (ha) to realize that the PC political bow wave of sociocultural trends is well neigh unstoppable at this point–it doesn’t make the running sore in my psyche go away even tho
      these are, as my wife constantly reminds me, “other peoples problems” now–except ultimately THEY ARE NOT. I, even in my retired, rum-soaked state have to depend on the force as presently constituted to defend me and mine and the rest of this nation as long as we are alive.

      So, to say that the “sight-picture” presented by current leadership and conditions “on the ground” in the force going forward does not make me optimistic and hardly inspires
      confidence is an understatement of huge proportions. Sadly, unfortunately, such problems as we are discussing will not be solved within the force anytime soon. It will only come from political change which itself depends entirely on cultural change.

      Good luck with that.

      Spleen vented. Yet again…

    • Tuna
      January 5, 2010 at 11:16 pm

      Curtis- all good points. CM is a big PITA for the command no matter when or where, but you forgot one point. You can’t refuse NJP on sea duty.

  • Jim Collins
    January 5, 2010 at 10:57 am

    Except for you not mentioning the threat of a phone call to ABC or some other 3 letter propaganda agency, I agree 100% with you Curtis. Back in the early 80′s, I know of at least three times a junior officer in a RAG squadron got a female enlisted pregnant. The deal was that he married her to avoid his punishment and she was given a “needs of the Navy” discharge. Three months later she was back on base as Mrs. Ltjg or Mrs. Lt. So and So.

  • flightlevel69™
    January 5, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    i don’t know (nor do i tell) but serving next to women in combat, or even non-combat, makes me nervous. i would not want women in my foxhole. i would not want a woman rio or nav or refueler. i would not want to have to share a shower with a woman, even if she was waiting outside. sound familiar?

  • MaryR
    January 5, 2010 at 6:05 pm

    The snarkiness and juvenile behaviour is,at a minimum, supremely annoying. And Byron is right, I have fired a warning shot.

    Sigh…ugghh…

  • Justthisguy
    January 5, 2010 at 11:43 pm

    Once you’ve rubbed mucous membranes with another person, your social relations with that person are forever altered. Further, the both of y’all’s social relations with everybody else are also forever altered.

    Hell, even _I_ know this, and I hardly ever get laid!

  • Justthisguy
    January 5, 2010 at 11:55 pm

    P.s. As a wise astronomer told me when I was a young callow co-op at MSFC back in the early seventies, “Don’t get your meat where you get your bread and butter!”

    (I was kinda sweet on a secretary who was damn’ near twice my age, and thought I’d concealed that. Obviously, I failed at the concealing.)
eXTReMe Tracker

View My Stats