3 USNA Football Players Face Sexual Assault Probe

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christcorp said:
WOW!!! This thread sure has taken one hell of a twist over the last 24 hours.

Some concerns I have:


If they didn't consider it rape, then why is anyone else considering it rape. Reminds me of when I was young in the air force and a female captain overheard me call a female airman "Sweetie". She "Tried" to nail me to the cross through Social Actions for sexual harassment. That lasted until the O-6 in charge of Social Actions discovered the Female Airman was my fiance. Basically, I wonder how many charges are brought up, when the "VICTIM" doesn't consider themselves a "VICTIM", until someone else "CONVINCES" them they ARE a Victim.
Click to expand...

We really don't disagree here. These statistics are contrary to my experiences, and I have a hard time believing the accuracy of the statistics being reported about SA in the military. However these studies are the basis of much of the discussion about this issue in our society, and we should at least acknowledge them in our arguments and try to understand where this data is coming from.
 
Christcorp said:
. . .

The "KIDS" that apply to the military academies are the SAME "KIDS" that are applying to every other university in the country.

. . .
Click to expand...


Kids that applyto SAs are special in many ways. One difference is that either they want to serve in the military or they don't realize that they have to serve in the miltiary after the graduation.

Something I haven't consider before, but my guess is that there will be no significant statistical difference in social class of sexual predators. Majority of SA cadets/midshipman are from middle to upper classes of the society.
 
MemberLG said:
Kids that applyto SAs are special in many ways. One difference is that either they want to serve in the military or they don't realize that they have to serve in the miltiary after the graduation.

Something I haven't consider before, but my guess is that there will be no significant statistical difference in social class of sexual predators. Majority of SA cadets/midshipman are from middle to upper classes of the society.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd say the kids are "Special in Many Ways". Yes, it is very commendable and admirable to serve your country in the military. But I don't believe this makes a young man/women any more moral. Many consider christians and other religious people to have high morals and values. Yet, I know plenty of atheists in the world and those who don't attend church or any religious activities, to also be very moral and doing the right things in life. There are many athiests who don't drink, don't do drugs, don't commit crimes, don't rape, aren't promiscuous, save their virginity til marriage, etc... Same with kids who do not choose to enlist or attend the academies/ROTC.

There are a lot of reasons kids apply to the academies. I "WISH" all of them applied for the reasons you believe. I wish all of them attended because of selflessness, their desire to serve their country, patriotism, protect the constitution, etc... But that's simply not the case. There are many of kids who apply and attend the academies for the free education. They know from day 1 that they will leave after their 5 year commitment. There are some that come in because the academy was the only school that offered them the full ride scholarship. Believe it or not, the last study I looked at, "Granted it was a couple years ago", showed that at least 25-30% of those applying to the academies, it wasn't their first choice. Why do you think they have to offer 1700 appointments to get 1200-1300 acceptances??? Because 400 kids GOT THEIR FIRST CHOICE. And it wasn't the academy. Well, there are indeed many at the academy that DIDN'T get their first choice.

And while the majority of the cadets are from middle/upper classes of society, that's probably because 49-50% of society is considered "Middle Class". Add in another 5% for the upper class, (Those making over $200,000 per year), and you're at close to 55%. But my experience has shown that while "Class" has some bearing, it's the educational level of the parents who impact a kid's future. If you say the majority of academy kids are from middle/upper classes, I'd say that that is also 100% accurate for all kids that attend college. That the majority are from the middle/upper classes. Basically, I'm saying that the demographics of the academies are probably about the same for the demographics of college as a whole. Albeit, the academic standards for the academies are closer to those of the top-100 schools compare to the rest. AND, there isn't as much leniency for acceptance to the academies.

But don't anyone read my post that I'm saying that academy kids aren't special. They are. Especially the 50% or more who do actually want to serve their country and they turned down big name schools and scholarships to accept an appoint. "One of my candidates this year who just got an appointment, turned down some pretty impressive scholarships". But our cadets/appointees are not any more special than most college kids when it comes to their personalities, morals, values, etc... I think you'll find similar students as our cadets in colleges all across the country.
 
Christcorp said:
Why do you think they have to offer 1700 appointments to get 1200-1300 acceptances??? Because 400 kids GOT THEIR FIRST CHOICE. And it wasn't the academy.
Click to expand...

To be accurate, in many cases the reason for declining an academy appointment is that their "first choice" was a different academy, not a civilian school.
 
Perfect:thumb:

I call it the "10% Jerk Factor" in that no matter how spectacular a group or organization is the likelihood is that 10% of the people who make up that group are jerks. I'm really not a pessimist...just an informed optimist.

Christcorp said:
Not sure I'd say the kids are "Special in Many Ways". Yes, it is very commendable and admirable to serve your country in the military. But I don't believe this makes a young man/women any more moral. Many consider christians and other religious people to have high morals and values. Yet, I know plenty of atheists in the world and those who don't attend church or any religious activities, to also be very moral and doing the right things in life. There are many athiests who don't drink, don't do drugs, don't commit crimes, don't rape, aren't promiscuous, save their virginity til marriage, etc... Same with kids who do not choose to enlist or attend the academies/ROTC.

There are a lot of reasons kids apply to the academies. I "WISH" all of them applied for the reasons you believe. I wish all of them attended because of selflessness, their desire to serve their country, patriotism, protect the constitution, etc... But that's simply not the case. There are many of kids who apply and attend the academies for the free education. They know from day 1 that they will leave after their 5 year commitment. There are some that come in because the academy was the only school that offered them the full ride scholarship. Believe it or not, the last study I looked at, "Granted it was a couple years ago", showed that at least 25-30% of those applying to the academies, it wasn't their first choice. Why do you think they have to offer 1700 appointments to get 1200-1300 acceptances??? Because 400 kids GOT THEIR FIRST CHOICE. And it wasn't the academy. Well, there are indeed many at the academy that DIDN'T get their first choice.

And while the majority of the cadets are from middle/upper classes of society, that's probably because 49-50% of society is considered "Middle Class". Add in another 5% for the upper class, (Those making over $200,000 per year), and you're at close to 55%. But my experience has shown that while "Class" has some bearing, it's the educational level of the parents who impact a kid's future. If you say the majority of academy kids are from middle/upper classes, I'd say that that is also 100% accurate for all kids that attend college. That the majority are from the middle/upper classes. Basically, I'm saying that the demographics of the academies are probably about the same for the demographics of college as a whole. Albeit, the academic standards for the academies are closer to those of the top-100 schools compare to the rest. AND, there isn't as much leniency for acceptance to the academies.

But don't anyone read my post that I'm saying that academy kids aren't special. They are. Especially the 50% or more who do actually want to serve their country and they turned down big name schools and scholarships to accept an appoint. "One of my candidates this year who just got an appointment, turned down some pretty impressive scholarships". But our cadets/appointees are not any more special than most college kids when it comes to their personalities, morals, values, etc... I think you'll find similar students as our cadets in colleges all across the country.
Click to expand...
 
Tigger said:
Perfect:thumb:

I call it the "10% Jerk Factor" in that no matter how spectacular a group or organization is the likelihood is that 10% of the people who make up that group are jerks. I'm really not a pessimist...just an informed optimist.
Click to expand...

Sometimes when something ugly happens at my daughter's Catholic high school, a parent will corner the principal insisting that he explain how such a thing could happen at a Catholic school. The principal's response is, "Mr. or Mrs. So-and-So, there are Catholics in jail."
 
Tigger said:
Perfect:thumb:

I call it the "10% Jerk Factor" in that no matter how spectacular a group or organization is the likelihood is that 10% of the people who make up that group are jerks. I'm really not a pessimist...just an informed optimist.
Click to expand...

I will go with that and add, assume you have 1000 kids find the 100 jerks and throw them out, get another 100 to replace them, throw out the 10 jerks replace them, throw out the 1 jerk and you then will graduate 1000 good kids.
 
pathnottaken said:
I will go with that and add, assume you have 1000 kids find the 100 jerks and throw them out, get another 100 to replace them, throw out the 10 jerks replace them, throw out the 1 jerk and you then will graduate 1000 good kids.
Click to expand...

You accept 1000 kids so you can throw 300 of them out.

The beginning of the Mission of the United States Coast Guard Academy is... "to GRADUATE young men and women with sound bodies, stout hearts and alert minds..."

Not to "accept them".

Academies allow for the fact that they'll have jerks. Some of those jerks will get kicked out. Here's the shocker.... some will graduate.... some may even make admiral or general.

You don't need to graduate the same number you accept, you just need to accept the right number to graduate your target number.
 
pathnottaken said:
I will go with that and add, assume you have 1000 kids find the 100 jerks and throw them out, get another 100 to replace them, throw out the 10 jerks replace them, throw out the 1 jerk and you then will graduate 1000 good kids.
Click to expand...

It doesn't quite work that way. Every year the major service academies will appoint 1000 ( the number is actually higher), and of those 1000 you will have those who will leave the academy for any number of reasons. But you do not directly replace them, rather they leave and then you end up graduating as many as you have who have left. Then the next class will enter and the process repeats itself.
 
falconfamily said:
It doesn't quite work that way. Every year the major service academies will appoint 1000 ( the number is actually higher), and of those 1000 you will have those who will leave the academy for any number of reasons. But you do not directly replace them, rather they leave and then you end up graduating as many as you have who have left. Then the next class will enter and the process repeats itself.
Click to expand...

True. The two "minor" service academies just don't accept enough jerks. Jerks are attracted to the "major" service academies.
 
pathnottaken said:
I will go with that and add, assume you have 1000 kids find the 100 jerks and throw them out, get another 100 to replace them, throw out the 10 jerks replace them, throw out the 1 jerk and you then will graduate 1000 good kids.
Click to expand...

The problem is also that all the jerks do not conveniently have "JERK" tattooed on their forehead to make it easy for the PTB to cull them out in four years.

Stealth_81
 
LineInTheSand said:
True. The two "minor" service academies just don't accept enough jerks. Jerks are attracted to the "major" service academies.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you went there. No slight intended, but sometimes I think USCGA types are just a bit too sensitive about their standing among the national Service Academies. Though I think you are underestimating the number of jerks who come from the "minor" service academies, while the numbers might be smaller, the ratio appears to be the same.
 
falconfamily said:
Not sure why you went there. No slight intended, but sometimes I think USCGA types are just a bit too sensitive about their standing among the national Service Academies. Though I think you are underestimating the number of jerks who come from the "minor" service academies, while the numbers might be smaller, the ratio appears to be the same.
Click to expand...

Ah, you're right! about the sensitivity...

Like when i say "the oldest three service academies" or the "first four academies".... Or I comment that the fly over planes at the last AFA graduation all earned their stripes before the AFA, or AF even existed They had a better claim to fly over AF's big daddy (Army) graduation at West Point. Or if I say "the four branches of the military, Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Coast Guard." The omission is glaring when it's your buddies being omitted.


Assume USCGA types will be sensitive when someone refers to the three DI academies as the "major academies." Coasties were graduating from the Coast Guard Academy while LeMay's mother was still wiping his butt. Long before he was a twinkle in his daddy's eye.

We've all been to enough All Academy Balls, and experienced enough joint operations or activities to realize the "jerk" ratio between academies are not equal.
 
Last edited:
Stealth_81 said:
The problem is also that all the jerks do not conveniently have "JERK" tattooed on their forehead to make it easy for the PTB to cull them out in four years.

Stealth_81
Click to expand...

For the issue of these cadets it may not be tattooed but it is at a minimum written across their forehead with magic marker.
 
pathnottaken said:
I will go with that and add, assume you have 1000 kids find the 100 jerks and throw them out, get another 100 to replace them, throw out the 10 jerks replace them, throw out the 1 jerk and you then will graduate 1000 good kids.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "Jerks"? As I know plenty of "Jerks" that graduated from West Point.
 
Thought provoking article, written by a USNA alum (2004).

http://truth-out.org/speakout/item/16823-rape-culture-at-the-us-naval-academy

None of the legislation under consideration helps provide an institutional framework in which the academies can confront the seemingly inconsequential, day-to-day instances of sexism that underpin a culture that condones rape. Take the use of "WUBA," for example. Each time the staff entrusted to train and discipline midshipmen tolerates or disregards the use of the acronym, they send a subtle yet powerful message that it's OK to dehumanize women. Midshipmen are harshly disciplined for tardiness and poor grades; they should also be seriously disciplined for casual sexism.

In addition, confronting service academy rape culture means reevaluating how we train military officers. Annapolis and other service academies vehemently promote a "take the pain!" approach to adversity which equates succumbing to physical or mental anguish with weakness. Undoubtedly, the incredible pressures placed on midshipmen and cadets to "suck it up" and "push beyond the hurt" discourages the reporting of rape and sexual assault by victims and witnesses alike. Self-sacrifice and discipline are important tenets of good soldiering, but officers-in-training should not embrace them to the exclusion of self-care and the cultivation of safe workplaces. In short, cadets and midshipmen need to learn that there is a difference between embracing resilience and tolerating rape.

Military leadership also needs to take more seriously the dis-incentives involved in reporting assault at service academies. The potential pitfalls of reporting are especially overwhelming at Annapolis, where women who disclose having been assaulted not only face intimidation and shaming, but also alienation from the social networks that facilitate survival in such a challenging environment. Midshipmen depend on one another to make it through each day, whether that means helping a roommate with their engineering homework or training with a shipmate struggling to prepare for an upcoming physical readiness test. The ostracism that comes with reporting sexual assault threatens to cut victims off from their most valuable survival mechanism: their peers. Academy leadership must keep this in mind when they receive reports of assault, and understand that coming forward involves serious risk (not to mention incredible courage). Given the potential consequences, it's difficult to imagine any female midshipmen fabricating a rape accusation. This is not to say that we should do away with alleged victimizers' right to a fair trial, but rather that those tasked with responding to the situation must seriously consider and account for the pressures faced by a victim willing to come forward.
Click to expand...
 
I just don't believe there is a culture at service academies that condones rape. Sorry, I just don't.

Yes there is a "suck it up" mentality, but honestly, in the one rape case at CGA while I was a cadet, people rallied around the known victims and broke off communications with the offender.

I would suspect USMA, USNA USAFA and USMMA are the same. I don't know that for a fact, but I would suspect it.

I drove to the Metro in DC last week and heard a Youtube video meant to empower women, on a radio station. The audio was what you'd expect (also, based loosely on Lean In)... "here is why I feel held back and why I fear"..... "here is what I would do if I wasn't afraid"....... :::Start motivational music::::: "I'm not afraid anymore.::::


And I sat in the seat of my car, enduring I-270 traffic in Maryland (driving in Maryland makes me afraid), and all I could think was "when did women become SOOOO afraid?"

My mother has never seemed afraid. My mother-in-law has never seemed afraid. My grandmothers never seemed afraid. My female classmates, at CGA and in grad school, didn't seem afraid. My female boss doesn't seem afraid.

So where is this new fear coming from? Across the board, the women in the Youtube video were from my generation, so I decided to ask my wife. "Are women really afraid these days?"

And her answer.... "it's B.S." She is paid no less for her work than a male of equal experience in her line of work.

Where did these fear come from? I have no idea. I suspect interest groups with an agenda. I suspect varying degrees of sensitivity to issues that are more in focus now. I don't know though. For all the fear I hear about, I never see if in the people I work with, the people I learn with or the people I love.

I read the stuff Luigi posted above and I think "in what alternate universe is this going on?"

I was on an all-male ship. The language was, well, colorful. It wasn't "anti-woman". Just lots of F-bombs.

As I was leaving, a few female officers were headed to the ship, and the guys were told to tone down the profanity.

I think inappropriate things are said at work, often, but not just in the military. I think there are bad actors out there who do bad things, and there's little you can do to stop the first act.


That said, I don't see where this culture is that I keep reading about, and I have found very few, if any, woman who live "in fear" of just about everything.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top