Posted on 12/07/2004 4:36:16 PM PST by heye2monn
Air Force Academy Blamed for Sex Scandal Dec 7, 5:33 PM (ET) By JOHN J. LUMPKIN
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Pentagon's inspector general says a series of commanders at the Air Force Academy failed to recognize and deal with reports of sexual assaults against female cadets on campus, officials said Tuesday.
"We conclude that the overall root cause of the sexual assault problems at the Air Force Academy was the 'failure of successive chains of command over the past 10 years to acknowledge the severity of the problem,'" Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz wrote in a Dec. 3 memo to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, quoting his own report.
"Consequently, they failed to initiate and monitor adequate corrective measures to change the culture until recently," Schmitz wrote.
Last year, nearly 150 women came forward with accusations that they had been sexually assaulted by fellow cadets between 1993 and 2003. Many alleged they were punished, ignored or ostracized by commanders for speaking out.
Schmitz's full report was not released. A summary blamed - but didn't name - eight Air Force officials for their roles in the program that oversaw sexual-assault reporting at the academy.
In a press conference, David Chu, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said the Pentagon would soon implement a new military-wide policy protecting the confidentiality of people who report being sexually assaulted.
"First and foremost, we want victims to come forward for help," Chu said.
Outside investigations concluded the culture of the academy created conditions that contributed to the problem. That included lingering resistance to having female cadets at all: Last year, a survey of cadets found 22 percent did not believe women belonged at the academy, more than a quarter of a century after they were first admitted.
Academy officials say matters have improved since the assaults came to light.
Schmitz's report said academy leaders should have been better role models and should have kept a closer watch on their commands.
The Air Force also released a second report, from its own inspector general, finding that formal investigations of sexual assault at the academy were generally handled properly.
Chu, however, said, "The problem is deeper than handling of individual cases."
Gen. Michael "Buzz" Moseley, the Air Force's vice chief of staff, noted that all senior leaders at the academy had been replaced since the allegations came to light.
The military has had to deal with sexual assault issues across the services.
In May, a Pentagon task force found that victims of rape and other forms of sexual assault in the military have too often suffered additionally from a lack of support from commanders, criminal investigators and doctors.
The report, ordered in February by Rumsfeld after a number of sexual assaults against soldiers in the Iraqi theater came to light, described inconsistencies throughout the military in the treatment and investigation of such assaults.
IF the Individuals in the Military training are Trained as "Officers of the US Military," then they are TRAINED to regard "Human Females" as SACROSANCT!!
They are TRAINED to PROTECT HUMAN FEMALES at all costs, short of the LIVES of their Unit!!
There can be NO "Legitimate excuse" for treating ANY Females as less than "Protected Ones."
NO "Service Academy Harrassment" of ANY Females is EVER acceptable!
The Reported Incidents represent a SERIOUS BREAKDOWN of Military Discipline & Doctrine.
Doc
Much the same can be said of, say, Texans. Would you therefore want to keep Texans out of combat? And yes, I know Audie Murphy was a Texan, but heros are a military oddity who almost never make any difference in the outcome of the war.
Glad to hear you are so tough.
It is still rare to see women pilots in the USAF - at least in fighter squadrons. The ones I've met were...average.
The question is, "Do the women bring enough value added to combat to justify the extra effort needed to place them there?"
What extra effort? Well, the USAF has had a bunch of sexual assault cases. Most run like this: A coed group gets very drunk. A drunk female and drunk male split off and go to her room. They drink even more. They have sex. The next morning, she says it was rape. He says it was consentual. Both were probably too drunk to know what they were doing anyways. No witnesses.
And no, women don't have the same upper body strength men have. That is why a number of maintenance tasks require more women to accomplish than if done by men. It also is a factor when there is an emergency - for example, in the Navy with a fire on ship. Can you carry your fellow sailor to safety? The number of women who can answer yes is dramatically smaller than the number of men.
You also introduce the whole fraternization issue. I've seen some ugly problems arise out of that.
Hate to break it to you, but if politics were removed from the equation, women would NOT be in the military. They cost twice as much to recruit, leave in much higher percentages, and are a mixed blessing as a worker.
BTW - my daughter is in the Marines, and she would agree with what I've written. One of the things she has learned, she says, it that she cannot compete equally in physical tasks with the average male Marine. It comes from weighing 115 pounds - she tries harder, but when you give up 80 pounds in weight, it is tough being equal.
Coed military academies are a ridiculous JOKE
"These toads must feel their macho egos are threatened by having females there that can do everything they can do. What little sissies they are!"
In what alternate universe can these woman "do everything" the men can do?
Where have you been the last 30 years? The standards were lowered UNTIL woman could perform "up to standard".
I've seen zero indication this is true. In the limited sample I've seen, it was not.
Agreed! Young people at the peak of their drive and at the nadir of their common sense.
The larger problem here is the emasculation of the military. It is a process that has been going on for many years. The academies are insecure about there role in society (I say this as a West Point graduate) and in order to maintain favor with politicians who control the purse strings, they are always at the forfront of their respective services in integrating women into their organization.
The men see the double standard and are disgusted by it. Political correctness has run amok and soldiers, sailors and airmen who were once very loyal to their services and to the nation are tired of putting up with the bs.
Remember how Elaine Donnelly of the center of military readiness exposed the double standards designed to create women fighter pilots in the Navy? She was litigated ad naseaum by the feminist military lobby. One man, in uniform, could never stand up against the imposers of "women in the military," he would be toast the minute he raised his head.
Now all the guys just go along to get along. But there exists a lot of resentment.
I think women actually had quite a lot of power before they were able to vote. Maybe not authority but they certainly had power.
I notice this with the 'lowly' housewives in my extended family. They are often at the apex of power, getting things done bullying all the men but this happens in a partitioned manner. In my observations this seems to work quite well. They usually have their political orientations (with respect to area of interest, not affiliation) in one direction, the men the other.
I think these women represent the central core of a healthy society, with men in a secondary position as worker ants scurrying about doing this and that.
Sure fire way to get a soldier to cry when in captivity is ask him about his wife.
10% or more of female troops are pregnant in country at any given time. This means they are rotated. Is it possible they have found a way out ?
Mrs. Donnelly has written to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warning that the military is becoming a haven for single moms. She said fiscal 2002 statistics show that the Navy reassigned to shore duty 2,159 pregnant women, or 12.3 percent of 17,543 enlisted women on ships.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040615-115647-8125r.htm
please look at my post, number 51
Have separate academies. If the women who want to join the military really want to do it for the right reasons, they shouldn't mind a bit if they're not among the men. They can even claim separate, but equal. I say 'claim' because I don't believe that women ARE capable of the same physical or emotional fortitude as men. It's just the way we're designed.
If women want true 'equality' in a military setting, perhaps they could show themselves to be up to the challenge and quit using accusations of harrassment to 'achieve' whatever it is they're seeking.
Flame away, ladies and gents. :o)
I tend to agree with you. Over the past several years I've witness girlfriends twice go though the death of one of their children. Their strength was unbelievable. They were the ones that held their families together.
Men and women will never be equals. We are gifted in different ways. For the military not to tap into these gifts is just plain ignorant and to try to prove us absolute equal is just plain deadly.
I was there when they first brought women into the Academy, into UPT and into PIT - and there were some who didn't measure up. But there were some who did - and when we started having honest-to-god female distinguished graduates (voted on by us line pukes with NO pressure from above whatsoever), your POV seems pretty narrow.
So we get to the real issue - what the heck is going on with these sexual harassment allegations at the Zoo? For the life of me, I can't understand why the women didn't reject these 'unwelcome' advances in the first place, so I'm a little suspicious that some of these allegations were cases of 'buyers remorse' the morning after. But just as I would argue that Clinton's disparity in power/command over his intern was disproportionate and could mitigate Lewinski's consent, an upperclassman who took advantage of an underclassman in his chain of command faces the same issue to a lesser degree. Clearly, the command structure was slow to comprehend the seriousness and scope of these charges/allegations and I was not surprised to see the ensuing purge.
I won't either, but his initials are William Jefferson Clinton. Was that too much of a clue?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.