This is an outrage. As reported in an investigation by Youth Radio, members of the U.S. Navy’s Bahrain Military Working Dogs Division have been subject to unbelievable abuse by colleagues that involve sexual humiliation, harassment and gay-baiting. And there are FOIA documents to prove it.
It was inside that Bahrain kennel in July 2005 that Petty Officer Joseph Christopher Rocha, then 19 years old, says he was being terrorized by other members of his own division. “I was hog-tied to a chair, rolled around the base, left in a dog kennel that had feces spread in it.”Rocha says that beginning six weeks into his deployment, he was singled out for abuse by his chief master-at-arms, Michael Toussaint, and others on the base, once Rocha made it clear he was not interested in prostitutes. “I was in a very small testosterone-driven unit of men,” Rocha says. “I think that’s what began the questioning-you know-’Why don’t you want to have sex with her? Are you a faggot?’”
“Petty Officer Rocha and another junior sailor…were instructed to go into a classroom by Chief Michael Toussaint, who orchestrated the entire training. And Chief Toussaint asked them to simulate homosexual sex on a couch,” Hogan says.
…Rocha says at the time, he had no gay friends, no male lovers, and wasn’t even fully out to himself about his sexuality. “The fact that I was starting to figure out that I was a homosexual, it was the most degrading thing I’ve ever experienced in my life.” Still, eight thousand miles away from home, he was afraid to report the constant hazing. And Rocha was not the only one.
This sick bastard Toussaint didn’t see anything wrong with this treatment of those he was serving with. And when word started to get out about allegations of rampant abuse of this nature, all talk of it was quashed.
Allegations of abuse across the unit escalated to a point that Navy officials enlisted Marine Corps Captain Brooks Braden to carry out an independent investigation. When Youth Radio reached Braden by phone, he said he didn’t have authorization to discuss “any investigations that may or may not have occurred.” There are a variety of opinions as to what specifically triggered the investigation of the Working Dogs Division. What’s not in question are the Findings of Fact highlighted in the Navy’s report.…Some sailors participated in the culture of hazing as victims, others as perpetrators, or in some cases both. They say the hazing continued because of a series of threats that were also integral to the culture of the unit, which not only tolerated abuse, but also invited it. To prevent them from speaking out, sailors Youth Radio interviewed say Toussaint would threaten to revoke their handlers’ licenses–taking away their dogs and their specialty in the Navy.
How does this cultivate “military readiness”? It makes you wonder what they would do to women who served in this unit? Never mind Elaine Donnelly’s protestations and fantasies of gay and lesbian service members running rampant — she she probably has nothing to say of the persecution of those serving by heterosexual beasts like Toussaint, and those higher up who believe this is appropriate for “unit cohesion.” This has nothing to do with sexual orientation and everything to do with criminal behavior. BTW, did I mention that since the launch of the investigation, the Navy has promoted Chief Michael Toussaint to the rank of Senior Chief.
There is much more in this article that you have to read.
The Palm Center responds to the news:
Rocha was a military police officer with anti-terrorism training who graduated at the top of his military class, and who received favorable performance evaluations throughout his career. His unit mates first suspected that he is gay in 2004 when he refused to sleep with female prostitutes, a practice that was widespread at his base. Rocha did not report the abuse, which continued until 2006, because he feared retaliation as well as discharge under “don’t ask, don’t tell.” According to Aaron Belkin, Director of the Palm Center, “it is very hard for an organization to get rid of abuse as long as discrimination remains official policy.”



52 Comments





Reminds me of my own sexual harassment experiences……at my last command in the Navy, back in 2000. This article triggered memories for me, but not the horrid emotions…thank gawd.
The real reasonThis is the real reason the brass doesn’t want gays to serve in the military. It will be the death knell of all their sophomoric (if not infantile) behavior, because no gay man would ever stand for this kind of crap. It would be the end of the fratboy games.
Joseph’s story is both a tragedy and an outrage…
I heard him tell it in person at a recent fundraiser. That’s him below left with fellow DADT casualties Anthony Woods and Dan Choi.
An article on today’s Politico.com makes it clear that decisions about DADT repeal have
1. been totally left up to the homohating dinosaurs in the Pentagon’s Jurassic Park to control. Congress won’t seriously touch it until the Pentagon gives their permission which despite what they lip sych about supporting whatever the president wants they are as opposed to as they were overturning the ban policy in 1993, and,
2. members of Congress, particularly those up for reelection next year, are running scared. Two Senators, including influential Jim Webb, wouldn’t even give their opinions about repeal. Which means,
3. not just DADT repeal but even serious discussion of it is as dead as Franco for at least another year and a half, unless,
4. we return to telling the DNC that the gay ATM is closed until they DO something we elected them to do. It is shameful that talk of that evaporated after that desperate and hastily put together White House tea party when a couple of hundred “gay leaders” eagerly lined up to be smile fucked by Obama Wan Kenobi yet again.
http://www.politico.com/news/s…
“‘Why don’t you want to have sex with her?”Uh, crabs, HIV, the clap, chlamydia, need I go on?
Feel sorry for any woman stupid enough to marry one of these guys once they get back home.
My letter to Senator Patty Murray (D-WA)Senator Murray is on the Committee of Veterans Affairs and has made a great many loud statements about how much she is doing for American servicemembers. Her refusal to support the recent DADT repeal in the Senate showed very clearly that she only cares about heterosexual servicemembers.
While I fully understandall the reasons why DADT should be repealed, and while I support repeal as fully as possible, it remains a mystery to me why any sane human being (emphasis on human) much less any sane LGBT person would want to be part of an institution where this kind of thing goes on and is tolerated and even encouraged.
And even less than that, I can’t begin to fathom why any LGBT person, sane or otherwise, would continue to support a president who could, with a stroke of a pen, take a big step forward in ending this swinishness but simply can’t be bothered to do so.
Actually you can feel sorry for them now.The likelihood that these men are already married is pretty high. I remember when I was serving that a lot of guys got razed because they wouldn’t sleep with prostitutes or because they didn’t want to talk about “gettin’ some” all day every day and it really didn’t matter what their sexuality was. Because there are as many str8 guys under pressure to commit illegal sexual acts and participate in the sexual harassment of others (which is what this is), simply because they stand out for some reason or another.
But to think about what a mockery this makes of our military and its supposed honor and what reprehensible behavior this would represent to any person who is just coming to grips with his/her sexuality makes this doubly cruel and unusual. It is just one more nail in the coffin of any justification to continue a policy that encourages bigotry, harassment and secrecy all to protect guys like Senior Chief Michael Toussaint. Because it obviously isn’t doing anything to protect the troops under him.
Lots of reasons, QScribeEspecially for kids coming from working class and poor backgrounds, the Armed Forces is a way and a way out. Even if you don’t make it your life’s work.
With my family, for instance, serving in the Army is tradition. Some were drafted into WWII, Korea, and Vietnam but every male in my generation (with one exception) volunteered.
Well…Do you really not see the problem with allowing the strongest military in the modern world to remain a festering boil of anti-queer hate?
The military isn’t just a fighting force, it’s a powerful social institution whose influence spreads far beyond its bases. Despite 8 years of the “War on Terror”, many working class people still see the military as a way to move up the social ladder and keep themselves out of trouble. Sometimes, their military experience is the first time in their lives they ever get close to other peoples and cultures. The social attitudes they pick up in the military become the attitudes they bring back to civilian life.
None of this is going to change on its own. Since we’re not big enough to just smack some sense into the US military, we’re going to have to change their poisonous culture from the inside, one soldier at a time. IMHO, it needs to change and this is the only realistic way.
The bigot bus just keeps rolling on. Clintons DADT, which codified military bigotry, is not going away any time soon. During the late, unlamented Bush years Democrats promised end the war, give us good health care and pass the GLBT agenda. Then they blamed their failure on Bush. Now they’ve changed their tune. “Cry me a river” is out and the Who’s “It’s your turn, step up and take it… If you’ve got the guts to hang on…” is in. Congress insists that Obama push for our agenda and he wants’ them to bite the bullet. And in the meantime the Democrats bus just keeps rollin along.
Democrats have huge majorities in the House and Senate. They won, with a little over a third of the eligible vote, the White House. (The Republicans got a little under a third and the smart people, the ones who gave both parties the finger, got about a third.) The problem is they’re using their victories to advance themselves by advancing the agendas of the looter rich, predatory lenders and the military industrial complex.
They could have dealt with consumer debt caused by predatory lenders by forgiving the debt of the 10 million who’ve lost their jobs in the last year and cutting out all interest payments and stabilizing capital debt payments for everyone making less than 75,000.00 a year.
Instead they bailed out the lenders, guaranteeing their profits come what may. At the same time Obama is union busting, demanding that unions make concession to increase profits.
They could institute a socialized medical system but they won’t. They and the white house are doing exactly what HMOs, Big Pharma and insurance industry giants like AIG pay them to do; sell us down the river to insure profits.
They could have repealed Clinton’s DADT and DOMA, but they haven’t and probably won’t. Both parties and the White House are occupied by bigots or those who cater to them.
They could have ended the Clinton-Bush war but they haven’t and they won’t. They are not concerned with how many GIs die and they display an ugly racist contempt for the lives of civilians from Palestine to Pakistan. Their real concern is the profits of oil companies and military industrial companies like Blackwater (now Xe), Haliburton and US oil companies.
There are indeed very busy screwing working people and GI’s but that’s not the reason they’re blocking our agenda. The reason is that they mirror the Republicans on LGBT issues: with one or two exceptions they’re bigots’ themselves or they pander to bigots.
That includes Obama, Reid, Durban, Pelosi, Frank and all but one or two others.
Indeed…
…and many of the servicemember leaders in the fight against the ban came from military heritage families: Leonard Matlovich is named after his father who was in the Air Force for 32 years; “Copy” Berg was named after his father Vernon, a Navy Commander & chaplain-”Copy” was his nickname because they were so much alike;, Jose Zuniga’s father was an Army officer who used to insist his son watch old John Wayne and Audie Murphy movies with him; both Victor Fehrenbach’s father and mother had Air Force careers…..
Oh, I almost followed the other males in my family…Just before I turned 20, my cousin convinced me that I should join him in the Armed Forces. I was driftless, homeless, aimless and knew vaguely that I needed discipline, so I went on and took the test to get in the Navy.
I got a really, really high score on the test so they gave me an additional test to see if I qualified for the Nuclear Submarine Program-I can’t remember the name of the program (if i remembered correctly, there was a $50,000 bonus if I qualified plus my college education would have been paid for!).
I passed that test and the recruiters would not leave me alone after that; I would get 2 to 3 calls a day.
Unfortunately, a teen episode of asthmatic bronchitis was in my medical records and they didn’t want to take that chance and I didn’t want a simple desk job so I decided not to go after all.
The threat to take their dogs…just made this uglierreminded me of the raping three girls in a group home quoting them scripture.
This needs a F*CKIN Tailhook investigation to the TOP.
Men.
What about us?
Yes a Tailhook type investigation would be nice, but….It just won’t happen.
YOu need a press that is willing to investigate and humiliate the military. It needs to be a huge public outcry. Its just not going to happen.
Get used to it.
Obama is just another pretty face with glib words and a glad hand.
I joined because I could help my family right out of school4 of us actually graduated within 2 years and my oldest sister and oldest brother had both received partial scholarships. We would be the first generation in my family to consider college much less go. But my mother was an alcoholic and my little brother was only 8 years old. With a sister who couldn’t qualify for more than a fast food job at the time, we where in dire straights to not only make our way in the world but to maintain a family home.
My brother put off college for two years but again could get nothing more than a fast food job straight out of High school. I opted to go join the military. Which meant I could immediately send money home to support my family. Of course the military isn’t offering big bucks, but it does include housing, meals, clothing, healthcare, and educational support. So I could help my sister go to college and help my brother save for his time in school.
The military is one of the few options that can offer discipline, honor, patriotism and education right out of school. Just think about all of those kids thrown out of the house because they are gay, or all of the kids who are wards of the state and lose their support the day they turn 18. Gay or straight the military option is a very real decision for so many young people who have little or no options.
Thank youand I hate to make this personal but everytime SciFi Geek refers to DADT as an “elite issue” it just really makes me angry
outrage? sure. war crime? yes.This exactly fits the Federal statute on torture, 18 USC § 2340. It also breaches a number of UCMJ punitive statutes. This should have been an Article 32 (pretrial) investigation, not a staff report.
Anyone have the figures…I’m wondering how many people, since the institution of DADT have been fired for asking. Cause…that’s part of the policy too, right? And I’m pretty sure “Are you a faggot?” qualifies. Dishonorable discharge him already.
it’s more than that, evenThere’s enough in here to put the perpetrators away in the brig for years, if not decades, under the UCMJ and Federal law. Dishonorable discharge would be part of the sentence, but a number of years at Ft. Leavenworth would be also well-merited here. Let’s see what a court-martial thinks of this.
I’m finding it a bit peculiar that Washington can’t bring itself to try those who tortured foreign prisoners. If they can’t try those who tortured US soldiers — and I’m thinking also of the sexual harassment and rape going on against US servicewomen — then we’re in a hell of a fix.
good post, that would place these witch-hunters on the side of ruining their careersHow many straight women who turn down a man, are asked if she’s a dyke?
I trust you’ve heard about those contractors, right? If not –Latest FaBlog: Fait Diver — “A Serious Breach of Security and Discipline”
Well …I can’t speak for Pollyanna, but I, too, was thinking “Men!” What is it about our sex that we are prone to committing extraordinary abuses, violence, terrorism, destruction, murder, genocide, war etc.? Is it nature (in utero brain formation and testosterone)? Nurture (cruel parents and macho shithead indoctrination)? Culture (increasing temptations and lack of consequences associated with male privilege and power)? A combination?
The Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that for the ten year period ending 2005, 89% of homicide offenders were men. 11%, women. In 2008, 7% of the prison population was female; 93% male. Of course there are all kinds of problems with the criminal justice system and with statistics, but ya gotta start somewhere. It was of interest that as I cruised the BJS site, except for the murderer breakdown by gender, I could not readily find a breakdown of other categories of crime by gender. But there was a great deal of analysis by race. I guess it is just such a “given” that males will statistically be the offenders by far, that it barely deserves notice or mention.
But it does deserve notice and mention, big time. How do we evolve out of this? Beginning steps might include acknowledging how incredibly phucked up we are overall as a gender. That makes room for analyzing causes and coming up with solutions.
HuffPo is also carrying this storyThat should give this sh*t some very broad attention
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
KUDOS to you, Kudo!!!It’s excellent and so life-affirming that you put your siblings in front of yourself in this!!! Well-deserved pats on the back for you!!!
I don’t think it’s truly an issue of gender.Women have repeatedly shown that they can be just as vicious given the opportunity. It’s just that they’re not as frequently given the opportunity. What about those of us who wouldn’t even consider doing these things? Why should we be held responsible for our entire gender?
Me too.For folk who enlist for the non-Officer ranks, enlistment is often an opportunity thing.
I know one of the reasons I joined was I had no job skills, and I wanted to develop some. In large part, it was to just have a job.
unbelievableThe military won’t tolerate gays but it tolerates this sicko hazing and prostitution? Unbelievable. As is the POTUS’ reluctance to end such policies.
I’ve always found it difficultTo criticize the military. I know from experience there are a LOT of Toussaint and similar types serving, but if I ever open my mouth I worry about insulting the actual, amazing servicemen I respect. My best friend’s father is currently serving, uh, at home (I don’t know what you call that? It’s not active duty at least. I think.) and he’s been like a stepdad to me in the brief year I’ve known him.
People like Toussaint, though? Pigs. Complete, total and immature pigs. People seem baffled whenever I side with my female friends in discussions involving ‘guys are jerks’ despite being one myself. Well, here’s just another piece of evidence to add to the trash pile. I’m also curious as to what makes us do these sort of things, and it disturbs me greatly.
you should see some of the comments @ Huff PostWow, you should see some of the comments over at Huff Post. Mind blowing:
This one is quite insightful:
HorribleI’m reminded deeply of one of my favorite ex-soldiers, who was coerced into sex/ raped by a fellow soldier, who threatened to out her.
Her story was a slap of reality right in the face and it still resonates.
My deep sympathies to all who have suffered silently, in angry frustration and fear.
A lot.Even in other natins armed forces, but it doesn’t do the same kind of damage that such an allegation does in the US
There have been gay people in the military going back generations.And the military has been perfectly well aware of it. Read Coming Out Under Fire, for instance. Has that changed the military from within?
Our service people have been serving side by side with openly gay service men and women form the UK, Australia and any number of other countries since the Iraq war began. Has that changed the military from within?
Exactly when is this change from within going to start? On the available evidence, I’d say the US military’s “boys will be boys” culture is doggedly resistant to change of any kind, from outside or inside. But since President Fierce is unwilling to lift a finger, we won’t know for sure any time soon.
Respectfully disagree.I’m responsible for my own behavior, as you are for yours. We are both gentle men, as I would bargain most male Blenders are, whether G, B, T, or S. I’m not saying we’re responsible for the behavior of our entire sex.
But I think we should acknowledge what our gender as a whole is capable of and has done; and that there is a devastating problem of physiology, nurture, and culture here that continues to turn innocent boy children into maladapted, violent, destructive males in numbers that dwarf the population of maladapted, violent, destructive females. Both sexes are capable of the same atrocities, but a cursory look at some stats shows that one dominates by about 8 or 9 to 1. If all the good men are either married or gay, then there is a surfeit of good women. How come that?
I disagree that it is a question of opportunity. Women know where the knife drawer is and could murder just as often as men do. And god knows they probably have more reason to. But they don’t. They could join or create their own terrorist groups as men do. But terrorist groups are male dominated in the extreme. Armed robbery? A crime as accessible as a gun.
If we analyzed and discovered the factors that keep women from perpetrating crime at the same rate as men, and consider how to apply those factors to the male population, this could become a vastly safer and more peaceful planet.
Whether it is the socialization of cooperation (vs. competition) during childhood, or an earlier or deeper development of moral sensibilities, or hell, even if women are disempowered by patriarchy from acting in violent ways, we need to figure out the details. Hormonal/cultural aggression may have been adaptive behavior for males as the various homo species were evolving, but in modern society, it is a poison. We can and must raise more good, gentle, smart men.
We know what those factors are.It’s the patriarchy that’s as old as civilization. We can’t very well apply it’s effects on women to men.
Official statistics have little meaning because crimes committed by women are grossly underreported. Look at domestic violence. Women are abusers almost as often as they are abuse, but you won’t find that in the official statistics because most men are shamed out of reporting and even the few that aren’t get shamed out of pursuing it.
We as men don’t have to take responsibility for the circumstances that led to this anymore than women have to take responsibility for Mary Kay Letournou. Blame their actions. Blame their personalities. Blame their upbringing. Those are all valid things to look at, but blaming their gender does us all a disservice.
If this had been reversed and a poster had just said WOMENwhat would have been the response?
There have been vile stories of the Mom who drowned her five kids, and blamed it on mythical Black guy. The scripture reading couple, had the wife inserting objects in the youngest girl reading the bible. The G*D DAMN hateful sh*t Ann Colture, Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingram, Steven L.Anderson’s wife Zsuzsanna actually was calling for Obama’s death in November….so when I don’t just say “WOMEN”, and smear you all with the same broad brush, doing it to men is just as OFFENSIVE.
I have read elsewhere male posters straight/gayCommenting that they left PHB because they were made to feel unwelcomed or chased away.
“MEN” comment isn’t helpful.
It’s another Catch 22…It’s getting harder and harder for young working class men and women to make it. Unemployment is increasing and obstinate. Older workers are putting off retiring. All of us, and especially the young are indebted to predatory lenders and sucmbag corporate lawyers. For the most part they’re denied access to health care, good housing and free education by class and/or racial discrimination. That’s especially true of minority and openly gay youth. In times like these “last hired, first fired” kicks in with a vengeance.
Nevertheless when they consider enlistment we have to point out that they’re making a mistake. A terrible mistake.
If they’re LGBT youth Clintons codification of bigotry, DADT, is going to expose them to additional dangers. If they’re women they going to be exposed to high levels of sexual harassment and violence. On Mar 17, 2009, the CBS Evening News ran a story titled Sexual Assault Permeates US Armed Forces.
And beyond that there’s the indisputable fact that the military brass, the military industrial complex, Congress and the White House, whether Democrat or Republican, thinks of them as expendable. Hamburger. Causalities in waiting.
Worst of all, far from defending the US, they’re being used in illegal, racist wars of colonial conquest to make the rich richer.
QScribe is exactly right. We should demand the repeal of Clinton’s DADT and we should also do everything in our power to convince people not to become part of the military murder machine.
We should do all we can to support and encourage the growing GI antiwar movement. http://www.ivaw.net/ http://www.vaiw.org/vet/index.php These are people who’ve been thru the ringer and are working their asses off to save their fellow soldiers. Anyone thinking of enlisting or re-upping should be given those links.
Liberals! Gender has nothing to do with it.
Growing up in a dog eat dog capitalist society has everything to do with it.
donal1944, I agree with youBut what else do you suggest to help these kids (of all races) escape from poverty?
That’s why I am a big advocate of DADT. Why should my straight nephew be able to exercise the option of joining the military (because he kinda wanted too, not because he had to) but my gay nephew (who is continually caught up in a series of dead end jobs and is struggling to get through school) doen’t really have that option.
I am glad we are discussing this aspect of getting rid of DADT, by the way. What do you propose doing for these minority and openly gay youth? (I know your ideas, by the way)
Autumn…I’m interested in your take on this, as regards the chain of command. The reason is that I posted this piece on my brother’s Facebook page, and he’s in the Navy, IT2(SW). First of all, he’s known among his peers for being extremely gay-friendly and sympathetic to the problems caused by DADT. But his initial reaction was that we’re not getting the whole story, and that protocal was most likely not followed here.
Just a couple of samples of his (lengthy) comments:
“i GUARANTEE if this kid’s commanding officer was made aware of this before the press heard of it, that chief would be packing his bags and heading home to pick up a job as a mall cop.”
“yes, i understand what you’re saying about DADT, BUT trust me on this – he wouldn’t have to reveal his sexuality in order to report this guy…that shit’s wrong no matter what makes you come. and what makes me angry is that there are like 10,000 people stationed in bahrain…to say that nobody could’ve been his advocate in this matter is BULLSHIT.”
“trust me on this – any investigation through PROTOCAL would’ve been conducted by NCIS. i’m willing to bet brooks braden JUST MIGHT be a PR investigator.”
“btw – if you’re having an issue, you can go outside your chain to other sympathetic service members who will advocate for you (ie – if some kid told me his chief was harassing him in this way, I could raise some shit and it’d never leave the command & still be dealt with). don’t think there aren’t gay chiefs out there who wouldn’t be willing to get involved…”
“i’m sorry, but i just don’t believe it. for one, we dont answer to the Marines – they answer to us. so calling in a marine special investigator doesn’t imply stepping up the chain. it implies damage control. i’m sympathetic, but i’ve seen it done and i don’t believe this kid employed the proper methods of reporting. NOT AT ALL. besides – you can request a meeting with your CO, no matter what. no CO is going to take this type of accusation lightly.”
“i think what happened to this kid is wrong, but i really don’t think he went through the proper channels to resolve this issue. i truly don’t. and it hurts us as a service to have shame brought upon us. it doesn’t mean that we should sweep things under the run, but there is such thing as judicial punishment without everyone else in the world talking about what pieces of shit we are.”
Anyway…that’s what he’s said so far. Like I said, he’s an ally to gay servicemembers, so I’m just interested in persepctives about this from within the military.
___
http://breaktheterror.blogspot…
We have to fight for the essentials. In this case it means a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing a minimum wage of $25.00 an hour and union benefits with similar incomes for students, the disabled and retirees.
Passing a law mandating jail time for exporting jobs.
To ease unemployment we need a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing 30 hours work for 40 hours pay with heavy penalties for overtime. That alone will create millions of jobs.
We also need a few trillions to implement the American Society of Civil Engineers laundry list of emergency infrastructure improvements. Who knows how many Katrina’s are waiting to happen.
We need to invest even more trillions in greening industry and transportation and for providing socialized medicine.
We need a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing free education through university.
We need a law forgiving all interest payments on credit cards, mortgages and other predatory loans for people making less than $100,000.00 a year or who face foreclosure, loss of credit or repossession.
None of that is utopian, all of it is needed and all of it can be paid for by recalling the bailouts, with the same interest rates they charge credit card holders, and taxing profits after costs and research and all stock dividends at the easy to remember rate of 100%. Other sources of income can come from taxing the cults and confiscating their wealth. Etc.
Fighting for a program like that and demanding those kinds of concessions from congress and the White House is far more productive in the long or short run than voting for hustlers like Obama or McCain.
In an unequal society where women are marginalized, it’s not the same…I’m a dude and I wasn’t offended. I know I am not responsible for other guys’ behavior. (But if I collude, minimize it, deny it, etc., then I am perpetuating the culture of male aggression and general asshattery.) And it seems really clear to me, even undeniable, that although all humans are capable of terrible evil, men perpetrate far more frequently than women. (Though as a child I had direct experience of this from both sexes.) I can acknowledge that I am a member of this disproportionately aggressive group and also know that although I have my angry days, fortunately I did not become a perp myself. I do not abuse or otherwise harm. We live in a patriarchy; men still have more power, wealth, and privilege. A woman saying “Men” [eye roll], does not have nearly the negative power of a man saying “Women” [eye roll]. My response to the former is, “Yeah, we’re kind of dickish, aren’t we?”
Whites can acknowledge white privilege and power and the worst behaviors of others from our pink-skinned tribe. Christians can acknowledge their privilege and power and the worst behaviors of their faithful. Straights, the same. I don’t see what the difference is here with men acknowledging the privilege we are born into and the ways that our gender continues to dominate and abuse disproportionately. Seems like the same dynamic to me. I am of the group, but I am not my group. If my logic is flawed, I’d be interested in others’ POV.
To me civility needs to be afforded equallyOr admit it excludes one sex, or excludes one color, or excludes one orientation, or excludes one cis/trans status.
The MEN comment also fails to acknowledge those people abusedwere also men.
^^
Nice you admire your brother so much …
…and, normally, I would not criticize someone I’d never met, but, frankly, he sounds like an arrogant asshat, speaking from the position of heterosexual privilege and power-no matter how “gay friendly” he is.
Rule # 1 In or Out of the Military: DO NOT BLAME THE VICTIM.
The key word there is NOT “proper” but KID. Joseph was NINETEEN and petrified of being punished for not obeying as any young inductee would be PLUS having the additional fear of being outed.
I doubt your brother is 19, and as he’s straight he has NO F-ING right to pontificate about what a gay person in the military, of whatever age, “should” or “should not” do when faced with any situation related to their sexuality…let alone this nightmare.
Then there’s his arrogant pseudo omniscience that
trust me on this – he wouldn’t have to reveal his sexuality in order to report this guy…
TECHNICALLY, that’s true, but there are plenty of DOCUMENTED abuses. AGAIN, look at this through the eyes of a 19-yr. old emerging gay vs. a hetero authoritarian parallel universe where too many are still pathological obsessed by a medieval concept of masculinity and power.
As I indicated, I recently met Joseph, and even now, older and having escaped this horror movie, he is the kind of gentle spirit that ANIMALS like these love to prove their “Real Men” superiority through by victimizing. It was not HIS responsibility to take on this culture, let alone “by the book” but that culture’s responsibility to weed out ahead of time such psychopaths.
Perhaps you should suggest your brother read those official reports before rendering his verdict.
Perhaps you should direct your brother to the stories of the brutal murders of gay sailor Allen Schindler by another sailor and presumed-gay soldier Barry Winchell by another soldier…BOTH under commands that ignored homohating harassment that they had gone through [and reported] prior to their heads being crushed like overripe pumpkins. In Winchell’s case, even his First Sgt. described him as a “faggot” to another soldier who “took the unusual (and professionally risky) step of reporting [him] to the post’s inspector general [and] the company commander. ‘It was basically blown off…I filed a formal complaint. Nothing was done about it’.” – Rolling Stone.
The number of years that have passed since their murders is beside the point. The fierce and dishonest opposition to lifting the ban that persists today is all the proof one needs that the military is dominated and driven by a cabal of homohating dysfunctionals.
What part of
does your brother not understand?
Well, a start is to consider just how much of the Federal budgetis spent on the military.
Instead of allowing the military to hand out college scholarships etc, to entice young people to join, how about simply have the Federal government make that money available, separate from the military, via other means? In return, those who get that scholarship and education money, can “pay back” society in other ways, say by working as public teachers / doctors / whatever, maybe at reduced pay or for a required duration of service time, ways that do not involve the military and war.
The money, the jobs, the education, that the military “gives” and “offers” to poor kids, does not belong to the military. The housing, meals, clothing, healthcare, and educational support that the military “offers” does not belong to the military. It belongs to society. It comes from society. The military isn’t some saint offering it’s own money to help poor kids. The military isn’t helping poor kids escape from poverty. It is simply taking advantage of poor kids, with money that comes from society.
Instead of seeing the military as some type of saviour, some type of friend, it should be seen as a parasite that drains resources from society.
Redbaiting is so lame, and you never seem to get it right. I’m not a maoist. They’re as theoretically challenged as liberals.
Yes, they’re that bad.
Interesting observationsThough, I assure you that he’s not simply speaking from a place of heterosexual privilege. He’s one of the good guys, one who has been known to speak up in defense of gay servicemembers in the past.
I’ve just found it curious ever since he went into the Navy, just how much of the discrimination that goes on depends on who’s in your chain of command, etc.
But what’s interesting, and something he said that I didn’t post, is that he pointed out that the actual PROTOCAL errs on the victim’s side, so it’s not about blaming the victim, but I think his point is that all too often, civilians comment on things happening within the military without actually understanding how the military works. Look, we’re all on the same page here on the need to repeal the stupid damn law.
I’m going to try to get him to register and comment.
I agree with the sentiment but I think education should be free, including a college or university education. With a stipend for living expenses. Well, except for lawyers, those with business and ROTC majors and other parasites.