Iowa State NROTC

7422

New Member
Any ideas on how seven Iowa State NROTC students can post explicit photos on an ISU NROTC Facebook page and not get disenrolled? See article here. I have some connections to this Unit and have heard that some of same students involved in this scandal also cheated on a Naval Sciences exam last November and weren't disenrolled at that time. How is this not a major conduct violation under the ROD?
 
Any ideas on how seven Iowa State NROTC students can post explicit photos on an ISU NROTC Facebook page and not get disenrolled? See article here. I have some connections to this Unit and have heard that some of same students involved in this scandal also cheated on a Naval Sciences exam last November and weren't disenrolled at that time. How is this not a major conduct violation under the ROD?
The article doesn't say if the photos are of the students themselves or of the opposite sex. If it's the latter and no action is taken, it'll just reinforce the thought that the military is tone deaf to misogynistic actions.
But you raise a good question. Haven't ROTC kids been kicked out for drinking under age? Posting explicit photos would seem to be at the same level. Maybe someone's parent has influence here.
Thanks for posting.
 

kinnem

Moderator
5-Year Member
Hard to say without seeing the photos. What does explicit mean in this context? Hard to tell. Perhaps a reprimand was sufficient.
My own guess is it was photos in extremely poor taste while everyone was clothed that still depicted something "explicit"... buut we're all just guessing what the photos were. I agree if they depicted something misogynistic that the action is almost certainly not sufficient.
 

Jcc123

5-Year Member
But you raise a good question. Haven't ROTC kids been kicked out for drinking under age? Posting explicit photos would seem to be at the same level. Maybe someone's parent has influence here.
Considering underage drinking is against the law, I don't think these are exactly on par. Posting explicit photos is certainly ill-advised, especially given the current climate, but it's not a criminal act if all parties were consenting.
 

7422

New Member
It is my understanding and belief based on what I have been told that the NROTC students took pictures of their genitals and forwarded them to another NROTC student who posted the photos on a Facebook group for the ISU NROTC Order of the Sextent. If what I was told is accurate, would you expect the students to be taken to a PRB and disenrolled?
 
Do you know how many things could be considered major conduct violations under the ROD? Without knowing specific details, you can't pass judgement. Like every NROTC unit, the CO is an O-6, and they certainly have the experience and judgement to make the appropriate decision based on the facts.
If they were kicked out, would they owe back tuition?
 

Jcc123

5-Year Member
it's not a criminal act if all parties were consenting.
It's not even apparent there were multiple parties in the photos.
Well, there is the "party" in the photo, and the party who posted them. So at least two, if I read correctly. Honestly, if you take a pic of your junk and send it to someone, you've given up the right to privacy over that picture. Not sure if your consent is even needed at that point.

Once again, very glad to not have had internet and Facebook in my youth!
 

kinnem

Moderator
5-Year Member
it's not a criminal act if all parties were consenting.
It's not even apparent there were multiple parties in the photos.
I suppose they could have been selfies, but I didn't get that from the article.
It was hard to get much from the article other than they were "explicit".... I'm thinking along the lines of some young man turning a telephone pole into a phallic symbol, but there is no way to know from the article. It might very well have been something that needed consent.
 

Jcc123

5-Year Member
it's not a criminal act if all parties were consenting.
It's not even apparent there were multiple parties in the photos.
I suppose they could have been selfies, but I didn't get that from the article.
It was hard to get much from the article other than they were "explicit".... I'm thinking along the lines of some young man turning a telephone pole into a phallic symbol, but there is no way to know from the article. It might very well have been something that needed consent.
Post #8 above seems to have some inside info. That's the scenario I was commenting on, but dont know how acccurate it is.
 
Well, there is the "party" in the photo, and the party who posted them. So at least two, if I read correctly. Honestly, if you take a pic of your junk and send it to someone, you've given up the right to privacy over that picture. Not sure if your consent is even needed at that point.

Once again, very glad to not have had internet and Facebook in my youth!
Jeez. He really said "junk" on SAF. Never thought I would be reading this here..
 

Jcc123

5-Year Member
Well, there is the "party" in the photo, and the party who posted them. So at least two, if I read correctly. Honestly, if you take a pic of your junk and send it to someone, you've given up the right to privacy over that picture. Not sure if your consent is even needed at that point.

Once again, very glad to not have had internet and Facebook in my youth!
Jeez. He really said "junk" on SAF. Never thought I would be reading this here..
She, not he. I'm pretty hip for an almost 50 year old mom, but if you prefer, I could try to be more...anatomically correct.
 
Top