Originally posted by Twilight_Ninja:YES
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:I’m not saying that there wouldn’t be an increase in sexual activity. I’m just saying why does it have to be problematic? Ppl in the military are adults. They would be expected to behave as such in shared—even bathroom//shower areas— bunking quarters just as much as in other gender-mixed situations.
So just to get this straight—when I stated that showering together in the military would be problematic, you disagreed, but when Ung stated that it would be problematic, you agreed wholeheartedly? Do you even know what you’re saying?
, I know very well what I am saying. But, it appears that YOU
don’t. It seems that you have greatly misunderstood what I said there. If you will notice. My position on showering together as not being problematic is completely assumptive in nature. This is indicated by my statement being a QUESTON
: I’m just saying why
does it have to be problematic?
I made the comparison of the mixing of genders in the military to that of colleges, but where sexual abuse isn’t similar to that of the military.
AND, you quite adequately address that when you said: …especially under the high stress conditions of basic training, is courting disaster. I was going to post something similar that went even further in stating that—in particular—the combat troops obviously have a much higher stress than other parts of the services.
But, they all have one thing in common. Even though job 1 of the military is to ensure PEACE
(Strategic Air Command motto: Peace is our profession), it is very obvious that it is a case of: speak softly but carry a big stick.
I think it is the responsibility of carrying that stick that puts a military person into a thinking mode that puts the individual in (unconsciously?) touch w/ their primal (Freud’s ID) nature. It activates the “fight or flight” mode. But, the military is to use “flight” as a very last resort.
We civilians experience this when someone threatens us…even in a mild way. A good example would be “road RAGE” and some of the very serious results of it. However, most of us are adult about it and opt for the “flight” part by “venting” ourselves away from the conflict via just flipping them the bird or pounding the steering wheel or cussing a blue streak. Regardless, stress is produced. I well image the stress level of military personnel is significant in degrees that reflect each individual and the kind of position they hold.
Per the bolded statement, people in the military might be adults, but they don’t always behave as such.
Neither do civilians. I don’t even know why you would make such a statement? But, if you mean that ppl in the military don’t behave as adults in a greater amount than civilians…very likely so; as I pointed out above.
However, it is my (belief?) hope that the stringent training that should be used in the military would include using the very meaning of homo sapien: the thinking Man. This would mean that one of the very integral components of the military, DISCIPLINE, would cause the THINKING individual to overcome//deal with the stress I spoke of above. But, maybe not.
I still believe it could. The reason it isn’t is the same one that has kept women’s military opportunities very limited from the very beginning. That being: the machismo aspect of combat. Men basically don’t believe women should “act that way” or even consider it. Look at how today, even though we consider ourselves to be “socially highly evolved”, we still experience negativity in forms from mild reluctance right on up to outright & covert strong resistance…the debate on women in combat.
I have been part of “blue ribbon panels” that investigated & made recommendations on this problem in our local fire & police departments. Hell, I remember when Fed mandates first removed blocking women from holding civil servant jobs. “On March 23, 1973, the Nixon administration’s Department of Justice, Department of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Civil Service Commission issued a joint memorandum titled ‘State and Local Employment Practices Guide.’”
“The current scope of affirmative action programs is best understood as an outgrowth and continuation of our national effort to remedy subjugation of racial and ethnic minorities and of women — subjugation in place at our nation’s founding and still the law of the land within the lifetime of “baby-boomers.” Some affirmative action efforts began before the great burst of civil rights statutes in the 1950s and 1960s. But affirmative efforts did not truly take hold until it became clear that anti-discrimination statutes alone were not enough to break longstanding patterns of discrimination."
Even Rosie-the-riveter (very expressive images) was expected to return to the kitchen after WWII. Discrimination against women was often subtle. I remember when there were WOMEN doctors. The reverse was: MALE nurses. The concept of women in the workplace runs the gamut from mild right on up to near outright (but usually covert) hostility….all depending on the nature of the work.
To specifically address rape in the workplace, most of us have heard that rape isn’t about sex. That it is mostly about the violence. Well, most date rapes aren’t that violent. So, I think there is some “power issues” involved, too.
This tends to support my theory. Notice the psychologists & sociologist have differing explanations. I, like the author, think rape includes both…and maybe even “others”.
The sociologists include this: “Feminists believe that men rape women as an expression of male dominance over women, which is a result of society’s long time sexual inequality.” This supports my position that in jobs where men (maybe misogyny?) strongly feel their “manhood” is “threatened” by a woman being able to hold their job resort to various manner of sexual abuse.
Hopefully, in the near future…(as in Star Trek), we will be able to truly be “the thinking Man” and manifest appropriate behavior—not only in the area at discussion in this thread—in all areas of our social life.