• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ship Commander Fired After Harassment Claims

Navy Pride said:
I don't know how you figure that but no one should be sexually harrassed..............They did discharge a lot of gays for sexually harrasing straight guys.....I was never harrassed but I was involved in several court martial that kicked Gays out for doing it.
Click to expand...

So rather than punish people who commit sexual harassment against others, just get rid of all of the women? Yeah, that makes sense. :roll:

I will never understand the 1950's level of misogyny that is going on with some people in this country right now. It's 2012 and this crap is still going on.
 
Navy Pride said:
I might add its a whole different ball game between a bird farm and a destroyer.......On a carrier it like a city......You have plenty of room for the crew and all the conveniences of home.........On a destroyer you have none of that....You work in very close quarters.........
Click to expand...

The Chiefs berthing on a carrier has more people in it than your destroyer did. Just sayin.
 
Redress-
hope you have lots of bullets and remember, it will be a two way range, mos-tic. You HAVE to know us Army Pukes LOVE that song!

I do like the 'my tin bucket was more crowded than your tin bucket' stuff.

Bit off the topic though.

I love NP's 'logic', if a Naval Officer agrees with the current policy of females onboard he is a kiss-ass looking for promotion. Only the Mavericks have a shot at telling the truth. :roll:

Even though NP has tried to make this a discussion of females on ships in general, it really is about poor judgement on a Commander's part.
 
Hatuey said:
It's like far right wing Conservatives don't expect the military to have the same standards of professionalism as the rest of us. ****, I travel and work with beautiful women AT LEAST once a month. I've worked with women who physically could run circles around my wife and still I've never ever had the urge to cross the line of professionalism. Not once - not only out of respect for my wife but out of respect FOR MY JOB. But Navy Pride apparently thinks our military is not smart/good/professional enough to do just that.
Click to expand...

It's not. He's right.

Women that want to do something honorable with their lives shouldn't join the US military where they'll just be groped, harassed, and used as tools for oil cos. They should serve their country instead.
 
This is good news. I'm so glad he got canned. Maybe he'll learn that he should keep his hands to himself. I mean, really, that is something that even most little boys know.
 
solletica said:
It's not. He's right.

Women that want to do something honorable with their lives shouldn't join the US military where they'll just be groped, harassed, and used as tools for oil cos. They should serve their country instead.
Click to expand...

So the US military is not smart. But they manage a massive conspiracy where anyone who does not rape women is kicked out on harassment charges to protect the cabal? This is just like truthers claiming that Bush is a stupid ape who also masterminded a most spectacular fraud.

You can't have idiots performing the greatest scams in world history.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
So if it's a man and a woman, then sexual harassment "takes two to tango."
But if it's a man and a man, then there's just one guilty party?
Click to expand...


Being a straight man I can tell you that straight men have no interest in sexually harrassing gay men.....My experience it is the other way around.
 
ecofarm said:
So the US military is not smart. But they manage a massive conspiracy where anyone who does not rape women is kicked out on harassment charges to protect the cabal? This is just like truthers claiming that Bush is a stupid ape who also masterminded a most spectacular fraud.

You can't have idiots performing the greatest scams in world history.
Click to expand...

You... made sense of that statement?
 
notquiteright said:
Redress-
hope you have lots of bullets and remember, it will be a two way range, mos-tic. You HAVE to know us Army Pukes LOVE that song!

I do like the 'my tin bucket was more crowded than your tin bucket' stuff.

Bit off the topic though.

I love NP's 'logic', if a Naval Officer agrees with the current policy of females onboard he is a kiss-ass looking for promotion. Only the Mavericks have a shot at telling the truth. :roll:

Even though NP has tried to make this a discussion of females on ships in general, it really is about poor judgement on a Commander's part.
Click to expand...

Here is our guns firing:

new-jersey-firing.jpg


I think we can handle that two way range...
 
Navy Pride said:
Being a straight man I can tell you that straight men have no interest in sexually harrassing gay men.....My experience it is the other way around.
Click to expand...

I've gotta ask: Are you being deliberately obtuse? Simon's drawing a parallel to the reasoning you used a couple of pages ago. You asserted that that "it takes two to tango," thus implying that heterosexual sexual harassment is partially the fault of the woman involved. Simon was making an analogy. If it takes two to tango with respect to sexual harassment, it follows that when a gay man sexually harasses a straight man, it is at least partially the fault of the straight man.
 
solletica said:
It's not. He's right.

Women that want to do something honorable with their lives shouldn't join the US military where they'll just be groped, harassed, and used as tools for oil cos. They should serve their country instead.
Click to expand...

Oh


my



god


..........
 
Aderleth said:
I've gotta ask: Are you being deliberately obtuse? Simon's drawing a parallel to the reasoning you used a couple of pages ago. You asserted that that "it takes two to tango," thus implying that heterosexual sexual harassment is partially the fault of the woman involved. Simon was making an analogy. If it takes two to tango with respect to sexual harassment, it follows that when a gay man sexually harasses a straight man, it is at least partially the fault of the straight man.
Click to expand...

I believe I answered him my left wing friend......
 
mac said:
The Chiefs berthing on a carrier has more people in it than your destroyer did. Just sayin.
Click to expand...

As and E6 on the USS LEXINGTON CVT-16 I had my own stateroom........

Yeah and its much bigger to.......
 
notquiteright said:
Redress-
hope you have lots of bullets and remember, it will be a two way range, mos-tic. You HAVE to know us Army Pukes LOVE that song!

I do like the 'my tin bucket was more crowded than your tin bucket' stuff.

Bit off the topic though.

I love NP's 'logic', if a Naval Officer agrees with the current policy of females onboard he is a kiss-ass looking for promotion. Only the Mavericks have a shot at telling the truth. :roll:

Even though NP has tried to make this a discussion of females on ships in general, it really is about poor judgement on a Commander's part.
Click to expand...

Until you have walked in someone shoes you have no clue what its like............Spend 90 days at sea with and all male crew and come see me........
 
Redress-
First I don't think they make propellant for those anymore and the last time one fired it killed it's gun crew. Thinking it won't need to be a two-way range.

Second lugging those around must be a beyotch.

Third is I would have flashed one of those Vulcans, far more target appropriate and flexible. Sometimes overkill is just showing off... ;)

NP-
You are not so unique that someone must walk in your shoes to see as deep as they can stand into your mindset. Your every post gives it up.

A commander used extremely bad judgement, blaming females and trying to use your stalking horse young enlistees as justification for removal of females from ships because men are so weak... LMAO, first women are so weak and now men are weak.

Now if the women hot bunked with men in co-ed berthing halls and took showers together I can see men being weak.

But wait! This is about one Naval Commander showing very poor judgement....

Dude there isn't enough foot powder in Walmart to get me to try on your shoes.
 
ecofarm said:
So the US military is not smart. But they manage a massive conspiracy where anyone who does not rape women is kicked out on harassment charges to protect the cabal?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: there is no konspiracy and you got it all wrong. You have to understand the difference between on the record and off the record.

On the record, the USN has a zero-tolerance policy on rape. It advertises that in order to get (gullible) women to join, since it's always in need of manpower (female or otherwise).

Off the record, rape and harassment are permitted by senior officers, as long as those senior officers efficiently execute all orders by their superiors.

The only time reports of harassment are ever acted upon are when one of those senior officers doesn't suck up to his superiors in cases where the failure to suck up cannot be easily identified as insubordination and prosecuted fast in a court martial.

At that time, and only that time, the harassment reports on that officer are dug up and he is removed for sexual harassment.

And that was likely the case w/the officer in the OP. He screwed up in his job, and so the military got rid of him by nailing him on harassment. OTOH, if he was a ruthlessly loyal, efficient officer, what incentive would uncle sammy have to remove him?
 
Navy Pride said:
As and E6 on the USS LEXINGTON CVT-16 I had my own stateroom........

Yeah and its much bigger to.......
Click to expand...

Then you didn't have to worry about it. Since when does a First get a stateroom?

NP, a Nimitz class (which I was on) carrier has close to 7k people with the CAG embarked. It doesn't get much more crowded than that.
 
Navy Pride said:
Being a straight man I can tell you that straight men have no interest in sexually harrassing gay men.....My experience it is the other way around.
Click to expand...
The implication being that when it comes to a woman being harassed by a man she is partly responsible because "she wants it" whereas with you and a gay guy, you don't want harassment so it's different?
 
Hatuey said:
It really must suck to live a life that is misguided by religious homophobia.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything in the article about religious homophobia, would you care to explain exact that you're talking about?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom