I remember watching some news retrospective thing about the soldiers who had been captured by Iraqi forces in Desert Storm. They asked one of the women about being raped in captivity and she answered kind of angrily along the lines of, "Well, that didn't just happen to me. It happened to all of us, and yet I'm always the only one who's asked. Captured soldiers get raped, period."
I would just like to note that I'm not the one who sent this in! But yeah, not a surprise, although having GQ write a feature article about it sort of is.
Related: my HS BF who went into the Navy related that, during basic training, one of the other guys in the barracks was masturbating in his bunk every night, apparently to the disgust of the other sailors*. The [drill sergeant] gave more or less explicit approval to beat the shit out of the guy to teach him a lesson. Essentially as seen in Full Metal Jacket.
Point being, sexual mores in the military are beyond fucked up.
*or is there some other term for an enlistee not yet through basic?
Last night's Frobtline about Nigeria and the response to Boka Horam was also a big downer. The videos were sickening. Don't want to derail the thread, but I felt so helpless watching it.
Also, I'm now waiting for Ogged to point out that it's not a betrayal of masculinity to exhort men to be on their guard around people they don't trust. Rapists are a fact of life, after all.
What the fuck is 6 supposed to mean? How would "being on guard" have helped any of the people in that story?
What is wrong with people?
Everything.
6: Well, at the very least, they shouldn't drink while on shore leave. It's only reasonable.
7: Callback to this:
In addition to fostering a culture of intervention among men and women, if we're not going to allow people to publicly make the case that women shouldn't get shitfaced around guys they don't trust (and I understand why--inevitably that becomes the basis for victim-blaming) can we at least tell them that privately? Criminals, rapists, tornadoes, and earthquakes exist: prudence isn't a betrayal of feminism.
It looks kind of inhumane next to stories from people who have actually been assaulted, doesn't it.
And I'm just being disagreeable. Without any intended sarcasm, prudence is a valuable trait for everyone at all times.
This is an appalling problem: members of the US armed forces are only supposed to be committing brutal and degrading acts of violence against other people, not each other. (My sympathy, let me show you it.)
Prudence is a virtue, a virtue is a grace,
And Grace is a little girl who doesn't wash her face.
The military is an institution explicitly devoted to the destruction of life and property.
14: I honestly didn't expect someone to come out with "bitch had it coming" quite this early in the thread.
14, 16: Hopefully, I'm misreading this. But if these are intended to state or imply "These rape victims joined the military, which is a bad thing to do, so fuck 'em" I am appalled. My only cousin who's any fun was in the Army a while back. My favorite niece just got out of the Marines. My daughter who wants to be an astronaut (yes, realism, but what do you do) is thinking about the Air Force. I have friends who are or have been in the military. And even if I had no personal connection whatsoever to the military, they're still people.
5 to 14 and 16.
Crossed with Ajay, who I couldn't agree with more.
15: My paternal grandmother was named Prudence. There are many family stories about how absent-minded she was. Dad's favorite is how she left him at a gas station in Kansas while on a cross-country drive (she had his two siblings).
20: Two out of three something something.
20: And they raised him at the gas station until he was old enough to go out on his own.
17, 18, 21: I don't know why you'd be surprised by such sentiments. We are, after all, a couple of decades into the age of "Anything bad that happens to Americans/white people/people richer than me/etc. is well-deserved and, moreover, inevitable in a balancing-the-cosmic-scales-that-I-don't-believe-in way."
18: I won't speak for 14, but it's not 'joining the military is bad, so people who join deserve to be raped', rather it's precisely what I said: "The military is an institution explicitly devoted to the destruction of life and property." It's a shame, for example, when gangs brutalise their own members, but they're gangs. Brutalising people is more or less what they do.
Prudence is a virtue, a virtue is a grace, And Grace is a little girl who doesn't wash her face.
Somehow Hawaii learned the little saying (which I'd never heard) "Dry cleans up wet, wet cleans up sticky," and she sort of chirps it as she goes to get her napkin damp or goes to find a burp cloth or something.
25, 26: This seems to me to give the impulse too much credit as directed toward military personnel, who aren't on average particularly rich or disproportionately white. My niece, e.g., was in the Marines largely because her perceived other option was to continue to manage a Pizza Hut.
28: Sticky cleans up dry, if you have a Swifter.
14, 27: I'm going to lie down quietly now.
That's how we make the cat helpful.
27: I remain appalled. Were you cynically rolling your eyes at every story about American military misconduct in Iraq, because it's just what militaries do, so there's no sense getting upset about it?
it's precisely what I said: "The military is an institution explicitly devoted to the destruction of life and property."
Which is not actually true. And, in context, if you didn't mean it in a "bitch had it coming" way, then it was a staggeringly tin-eared thing to say.
The richer people do deserve it.
This is what we've been saying all along.
33: Honestly, yes. I mean, I was already upset, so the misconduct wasn't really reason to be *more* upset.
33: There are two distinct things here: there's being upset that people are being vicious and sadistic toward one another, and there's being upset that our military is being vicious and sadistic. The first upsets me a lot. The second upsets me only to the extent that it's contained within the former.
15:
The one I heard from my grandmother was:
Patience is a virtue, a virtue is a grace, and both put together make a very pretty face.
Patience is a virtue. Possess it if you can. It's seldom found in women and never in a man.
But she was also fond of saying, as we would say goodbye: "Don't do anything you wouldn't do on a bicycle." I don't know where that one came from.
"Don't do anything you wouldn't do on a bicycle."
Be a fish?
33: Like most things military-related, I'm deeply concerned about what it does to the people perpetrating or aware of the violence as well as horrified for the victims. LB is right about who's getting drawn into the military and they're really not people who need to suffer more already.
I think the gang metaphor seems about right. And as far as 33 goes I think the fact that the members of the US forces actually volunteer to be part of the organization (devoted explicitly to, say, killing people and taking their stuff) has some small effect on things. If two countries with volunteer armies decided to send them up against each other to do horrible things to each other then, yeah, I'm not going to feel too bad about it. If actual civilians, or people who had no choice in the matter start getting seriously hurt then that's the bit where I start to get a bit more upset.
It's bad that people are being assaulted in the military, but as far as priorities go it's pretty damn far down the list. Once sexual assault stops being a problem for people who didn't volunteer to go out and hurt other people, in the exact setting where that harming people happens, then I'll start being more concerned.
Don't do anything you wouldn't do on a bicycle
Is this a euphemistic way of telling you not to have sex?
It seems to also preclude eating from a plate with utensils.
right. I don't think it was explicitly sexual or about how good girls act, because she said it to grown male members of the family too.
And she definitely wanted her married dons to have children.
33 - while cynical eyerolls may be taking things a bit too far, the kinds of abuses that took place in Iraq were the predictable (and predicted) outcome of the invasion because that's what armies of occupation do.
42: you may be under the illusion that explaining yourself in this way makes you sound like less of a prat. Let me disabuse you of this misapprehension.
The people entering the military are largely innocent/ignorant of the crimes of the military. They are not the decision-makers, and they have received a ton of positive propaganda, and are generally joining in order to better their own lives and/or be good citizens.
42: Jesus wept. I hope anyone in a position to help you or sympathize with you ever first considers every decision you've made in your life that they might find morally questionable, and carefully sets their priorities to worry only about the most innocent subjects first.
But the people who join the military should be aware that the very first time it hits them, they should get out. We should avoid judging them for the circumstances that led them to join, though.
50: With a dishonorable discharge? Or serve their one enlistment and then go do something else?
(devoted explicitly to, say, killing people and taking their stuff)
Why do you think your hands are clean? They do that stuff for you, so you can enjoy your cheap gas and cheap clothes and shiny gadgets and continue to support our class of political leaders. Their paychecks come out of your pocket. It seems so heartless to reap all of these benefits, pass all of the costs on to a small set of not particularly privileged people, and then pat yourself on the back for thinking the bitch had it coming.
I've never seen the "Military personnel: are they evil or good?" discussion go anywhere productive. It may be better to focus on what the military does to people, as an institution. Namely, is it possible for an externally violent institution not to have pervasive internal violence as well? Also, maybe it would be better to think about ways we could not have violent institutions at all...?
ffeJ, that may be true, but I don't think you would have much of use to add because you don't seem to know much about the subject.
Re: this thread and the Ray Rice thread.
Is everyone grumpy because it's getting to be Fall?
OT but on the bright side: here in MA, even though he didn't win, Don Berwick got over 20%, which is way above his polling. John Tierney was defeated. Cuomo got a bad scare from Teachout. Some good news!
It also seems like a really pointless discussion to launch into in the context of military personnel who have been sexually assaulted. In other contexts, the decent parts of our society have put a lot of work into trying to make it clear that your opinion of the prior moral value of a victim of sexual assault doesn't have any weight in determining whether the assault was wrong. I'd like to enforce that norm across the board.
everyone grumpy because it's getting to be Fall?
Why, yes! There are no substantive reasons to be grumpy about the things being discussed!
Wow, two pretty ugly threads in two days. People must be feeling cranky that they can't get their new Apple Watches until 2105.
My polling place was moved somewhere weird and hard to find - I was wondering if that was coincidence, pro-Cuomo machinations, or anti-Cuomo machinations.
I'd like to enforce that norm across the board.
This one I'm down with! Prison rape is unacceptable. Military rape is unacceptable. Sexual assaults are unacceptable. HOORAY!
There are no substantive reasons to be grumpy about the things being discussed!
But people are grumping at each other. It seems different from, say, grumpiness in November 2004.
Why do you think your hands are clean?
Because 28.
Because grumping at someone about their problematic views around sexual assault is not as justified as being grumpy about politics. Got it.
It also seems like a really pointless discussion to launch into in the context of military personnel who have been sexually assaulted.
I completely disagree. The sexual assault rate in the military is sky high. If this is in fact a largely unavoidable consequence of the military being an inherently violent institution, then nothing is more relevant.
In other contexts, the decent parts of our society have put a lot of work into trying to make it clear that your opinion of the prior moral value of a victim of sexual assault doesn't have any weight in determining whether the assault was wrong.
Not sure where you got the idea I thought otherwise. I've tried to be careful and talk about institutions here, and not individuals and what they may or may not deserve.
This was one of those posts where I almost wrote "I can't imagine what we'll argue about, seems pretty cut-and-dried" but I didn't bother because my intuition is generally 180° off on such things.
Also fall makes me happy. But not rape.
The whole point of having a military is not so much to deal out death and destruction but to threaten to deal out death and destruction. With notable exceptions (usually officers in no danger) you'll find that military people are among the most reluctant to actually start or join in wars. Politicians and civilians are the ones who seem to get off on it most (Bush 2, Obama with his drones come to mind).
While it's also true that gangs of young men tend to engage in some amount of violence against each other, the military is supposed to be more civilized. To say "Oh well, it's inevitable that they will fight each other and rape each other" is useless throwing up of hands. It's not inevitable.
Hey maybe we should roll military suicides in here, while we're at it. It is World Suicide Awareness Day! So, military suicides: good or bad?
If this is in fact a largely unavoidable consequence of the military being an inherently violent institution, then nothing is more relevant.
And if not, then it is completely fucking irrelevant.
The whole point of having a military is not so much to deal out death and destruction but to threaten to deal out death and destruction.
Oh come the fuck on.
Actually, I guess it's "World Suicide Prevention Day" technically, but let's not be too hasty, says I.
I've tried to be careful and talk about institutions here
Generally, when talking about sensitive subjects, and especially when saying controversial things about sensitive subjects, I think it's a good idea to be maximally explicit, and rely on conversational implicature as little as possible, because you can't count on your audience going where you meant them to even if you think it's obvious.
Your initial comment had, literally, no connection to sexual assault, the topic of the thread. Readers had to guess at what connection you intended it to have. You may not have meant it the way it was read, but I think it makes sense for you to now be very explicit about what you do mean (rather than what you don't mean) and what you're arguing: possibly it's nothing that will excite particularly strong disagreement.
I'm kinda fighted out, but it's always sad when people who didn't initially seem to be morally reprehensible morons turn out to be morally reprehensible morons.
can't get their new Apple Watches until 2105
Talk about your extended roll-outs.
I'm kinda fighted out
Word. The weather's too nice for this shit.
74: That does it. Halford! I'm out of here! Please redact 43.
Oh, I didn't sign 43. I guess it doesn't matter then.
The weather's too nice for this shit.
IS NOT.
Well, this thread is going well.
Israel/Palestine: thoughts?
78: Is too, and the trout have been active and there's a touch of color change in the mountains.
Turtle CPR! That's got to cheer everyone up!
What about sexual assaults at second tier colleges in red states that offer generous financial aid.
83: between football players in ROTC
80: Good point. How about Derek Jeter? Overrated, or greatest baseball player ever?
Israel/Palestine: thoughts?
All my rage lately has been consumed by the Salaita affair. Surely we can work up a huge acrimonious blog brawl about that?
LB, program on bbc radio 4 today re Dorothy Sayers, featuring a posh Jesus, former head of MI5, peripatetic and aimlessly grasping maiden aunt and a repudiated illegitimate son. Conversational dynamic between the two guests provides fascinating subtle suspense resolved by warm-hearted generosity. Check it out!
Is that the guy that looks sort of like The Rock?
Salaita had it coming. Any college professor who uses Twitter will be fired.
Re topic of thread, if institutional reform of military is your priority then knock yourself out! But at a minimum might want to ask yourself whether strenuously heartless victim blaming of markedly disadvantaged volunteer enlisted people will get you further to your goal!
I wasn't sexually assaulted, and wasn't aware of any cases close to me. On the other hand, that something like that might happen, which would never have occurred to my 18-year-old self before the Army, was one of a large number of possible events I became aware of then. It was certainly the coarsest company I've ever been in, and I once held a physically demanding job were everybody else including the supervisor was an ex-con.
Some of that coarseness was performative, was theater. And the clownish aspects of physical intimidation, and ritual and over-the-top verbal abuse could be discounted to some extent because it was impersonal--everybody received some of it. Now I was physically large, and had enough situational awareness not be picked on, but others weren't so lucky. And the general lack of privacy was probably a mitigating factor in limiting assaults of all kinds, because too many people saw absolutely everything.
The novels of James Jones are remarkably frank about sexual assault and intimidation in the Army, and homosexual violence is a constant theme in his writing. Considering that From Here To Eternity was published in 1949, was a huge best seller, and met the decency standards of the time, that was quite an achievement.
Although actually the ten day forecast looks promising. I'll believe it when I see it, though. It always seems like these things get revised upward.
Oh FFS, 64. Way to miss the point and simultaneously feel righteous. Good for you.
In case 90 addresses me: I've said too much, and say this now only because my real name is semi-transparent, but all my comments here throughout clearly blame militarism and not victims within the military. I suspect they've been construed as victim-blaming largely because my position got conflated with that of MHPH at an early stage.
92 is how a non-moronic exploration of the issue of the relationship between military culture and sexual violence might have started. I'm still kind of stunned at how gross and weird 42.2 is, the only real counterargument that's appropriate is "write a letter to your parents and ask them where things started to go wrong for you." But anyhow let's move on. Remember when we were talking about natural history museums?
Mostly because you came into the conversation with something elliptically anti-military (that is, the anti-military nature wasn't elliptical, but the relevance to the conversation was) immediately after MHPH's victim-blaming. If you've got something specific to say about reforming military culture, eliminating the military entirely, or whatever, you can certainly go ahead and say that.
It was certainly the coarsest company I've ever been in
This was in the draft era, wasn't it? Or am I making you older than you are?
Actually, knowing what I do about the whole draft deferment process, I'm not sure whether I'd expect coarser company in the drafted army or the volunteer one.
On a humorous note, my HS friend liked to joke that, since sailor is a byword for coarseness, he had leave to be as coarse as possible without opprobrium: "Pass the fucking salt."
70. That's a great counter argument.
95: g'wan, what was your point, then?
Although actually the ten day forecast looks promising.
I love that your "promising" forecast is like 90 degrees and 70 percent humidity. To tie all the threads together, living in Texas is to be in an abusive relationship with weather. The questions are, can we criticize Texans for staying and do they kind of deserve it for volunteering to live there?
Not fair. I don't see the humidity listed anywhere on that link.
Plus, Texas promised to change the climate.
96 -- I was thinking of mhph, not you. (I personally think your point bout militarism could use some more nuance, especially in context, but it's definitely in the 'normal blog argument' zone, not 'morally reprehensible moron' zone).
104: If you click on the "details" on any given day it'll give the humidity.
reforming military culture, eliminating the military entirely, or whatever
I must say, everything I've read about the modern Air Force suggests to me that it should be disbanded on purely cultural grounds, even if Farley didn't make a decent argument on strategic* grounds. The Christianist indoctrination, what seems to be a worse than usual sexual assault culture**, and, afaict, a greater institutional commitment to "exterminate the brutes" than the other branches all argue in favor of root and branch elimination of the institution.
Now that I think of it, if cultural arguments were part of the process, there might be a bit of salutary pour encourager l'autre as well. We need a cunning group of senior sailors and soldiers to use a massive exposure of the poisonous USAF culture (much of which, surely, isn't all that different from the Army & Navy) to discredit and devolve the Air Force, accompanied by a major overhaul of the other services (culture-wise).
Utter pipe dream, but it's nice to imagine.
*strategic doesn't quite capture his argument (as I understand it; haven't read the book, but I've read a lot of his stuff on the topic), but what I mean is "why you'd do this even as a supporter of war-fighting".
**although maybe it's just been publicized a bit more?
I'm not sure whether I'd expect coarser company in the drafted army or the volunteer one.
I was wondering about that. (Counting 'being in the army for a couple of years is a broad social norm even if you weren't drafted' as the draft army).
My sense of my father's military experience (after Korea (although he was literally in Korea, just not doing anything conflicty), before Vietnam) was that neither he nor most of the people he was interacting with were terribly invested in the military, barring a layer of intensely frustrated and annoyed career officers at the top. But (a) I'm not sure how that would affect internal violence, and (b) of course my sense of my father's military experience is shaped by the fact that all I know about it is the stories he chose to tell his kids (and I suppose (c) that as a large, athletic, naturally not inclined to getting into conflict kind of guy, his experience of anything was likely to be less shaped by violence than most people's).
but it's definitely in the 'normal blog argument' zone, not 'morally reprehensible moron' zone
I would like blog software that evaluates all comments and graphically places them in the appropriate zones, please.
If you click on the "details" on any given day it'll give the humidity.
Oh, so it does. Today's humidity is only 40%, though.
Jesus, look I never said it wasn't sexual assault, or that the person doing the assaulting wasn't acting badly. But of course the fact that the victim of the assault voluntarily surrendered their autonomy to join a violent authoritarian organization is going to affect the extent to which I sympathize with their being a victim of violence. The problem with victim blaming isn't that we shouldn't sympathize with some victims less than we do with others. The problem is that as a society we tend (strongly) towards doing that in an immoral way - taking things that are genuinely irrelevant to make a big difference, or even taking some assaults not to be assaults at all as a result of irrelevant features of the situation. And I think that voluntarily joining violent authoritarian organizations does make in fact make the person deserve less sympathy when they end up assaulted by someone else looking to exercise power or control over them in a violent way.
Arguments about the poverty draft have some weight here, sure, and I'd have even less sympathy if they didn't apply. But every one of them applies just as much to someone who joins a violent street gang so I don't think they're strong enough to justify any more sympathy than you'd give someone in that case.
But ok fine I'm a moral monster for being less sympathetic to the plight of members of the armed forces than I am to other people and I'll let it go.
110: And details on the ratios. Possibly even a 10-day forecast!
109: because you might correctly believe people other than me think you're an ass, and hope to attempt to correct that? But sure, fair enough, you be you. OMGLOL.
Oh FFS, 64. Way to miss the point and simultaneously feel righteous. Good for you.
I... wait, what was the point? (I really don't know what the point was, I'm not trying to make some other point in disguise.)
112: I really don't want to restart Ferguson talk, but do the non-morally reprehensible morons around here generally assume that the lives of gang members are just worthless and no one should care what happens to them? I'd guess not.
107 - agree. Also worth noting that the whole reason why independent branch air forces started was to provide an independent lobbying arm for "strategic bombing," which, in general, was both a crime AND a mistake. Also, my sister, who works in military oversight and is even more prone to calling people morons than I am, says the Air Force is just plain the stupidest branch, and obviously and overwhelmingly so.
just not doing anything conflicty
Well of course, he was thousands of miles from your mother.
112 _ seriously, write a letter to your parents and ask them where things started to go wrong for you. You may learn something.
97.last: no, but I am happy to start. There is going to be a new mathematics gallery at the Science Museum in London and it looks pretty good. Some hedge fund guy gave them £5m.
115: I think JRoth's initial point was that he perceived the last few days' threads as characterized by even more bad feeling than could reasonably be attributed to the substantive nature of the threads, and that this excess of bad feeling seemed unusual by local standards. (I don't think I agree with him about that, but it's an inoffensive point). I think Blume misunderstood that as implying that any level of emotional heat or negativity wasn't justified because sexual assault isn't a big deal, JRoth was offended by the misunderstanding and failed to straighten it out, and now everyone's cross.
This seems like a fine time to haul out "Can't we all be siblings?" or a conflict-resolving kitten or something.
"Can't we all be siblings?"
Because only children are generally bad at conflict management.
120: That's a great museum. I took the kids there when were in London a couple of years ago, and was restraining myself from kicking small children out of the way so I could play with the stuff.
97.last: I just signed Nia and Mara up for a Girls in Science program at ours. I'm hoping they can do a lot of the events unsupervised (though probably not since they can't read as well as fully grown children) and then I'd be able to let the baby just play in the baby-zoo part of the children's museum and read a book or something. They love our natural history museum and were very proud to give tours to friends with younger children, though I'm not sure whether they really believe there's a dead body in the astronaut suit or were just trying to make it sound more dramatic in preparation for the actual mummy.
115: The point was, most decidedly, not to compare the relative importance of elections and rape, although that's clearly the plainest reading of my comment.
The point, I suppose, was that just because we've discussed unpleasant/depressing things before, it hasn't always devolved into this sort of nasty/grumpy thread. Or maybe it has, and I'm applying some sort of misty nostalgia*.
I'm not advocating a hands off approach when somebody says something wrongheaded, certainly not in the name of some sort of civility or chumminess. It's just noteworthy to have 2 of these in close succession, which is why I wasn't the only person to note it.
*although I should note that I didn't read any threads here at all in 11/04; I was too depressed, and took a 2 week break from the entire internet
114 certainly does show me to be the ass here.
I will start posting kitten pictures.
Someday I want the meet up with Thorn and her kids at the Rosicrucian museum. That would be so awesome.
121.1 is a helpful explainer. What was the "by comparison to November 2004" part about, if not to argue that sexual assault (and opinions on sexual assault) are inherently less emotionally freighted than discussions of imminent political events? And why the specific mention of Apple products in the initial comment? My assumption was to (gently) mock the emotional heat of those engaging in discussions of sexual assault, but maybe I misread!
127, 130: May I suggest that the two of you go fight by email or something?
131: They're all Rosicrucian, if you understand the subtext.
I didn't know that either. Cool! And I even have a relative to stay with if I do ever get out there. Actually, maybe that's not where he is anymore. I don't even know. We're not flying to California any time soon is the point.
Yeah, the London science museums are so great. We lived there temporarily when I was 8 and the earthquake room (IIRC simulating the '60s Anchorage quake) was the best, I hope they still have that. Also, the Imperial War Museum, whose curators should be allowed to be raped with impunity according to some, was so awesome.
My assumption was to (gently) mock the emotional heat of those engaging in discussions of sexual assault
Yeah, that's a totally sound assumption. When don't I mock things related to sexual assault? It's the funniest yet least important topic imaginable.
So yeah, "why bother?" was directed to someone who evidently views me as a giant asshole who thinks sexual assault is a laff riot, which is someone I don't feel particularly obligated to engage with. LOL.
My kids just about revolted when they found out that my dad had, without asking anyone, switched our plans from an afternoon at Coney Island to an afternoon at the Math Museum. But then they turned out to like it, so much so that Iris was saying days later, "I thought that would be horrible, but it was awesome!"
Oh baby is there ever and it is just as fabulous as you imagine. BEST VOLUNTEER TOUR GUIDES EVER. Of course it may be wrong to speculate about the motivations of polyester suit clad 20-somethings with an apparent abiding devotion to the Ancient Mystical Order Rosae Crucis but not going to stop me!
This seems like a fine time to haul out "Can't we all be siblings?"
As long as you're not my kids.
132: I promise most of my discussions along similar lines are kept to email or IM. But...
Yeah, that's a totally sound assumption. When don't I mock things related to sexual assault? It's the funniest yet least important topic imaginable.
So... what the fuck were you doing? Really. There was a thread about sexual assault -- on the heels of another thread about violence against women -- and you asked if those threads got heated because people were jonesing for a fucking fashion accessory. The "plainest reading" of both of your comments was that you were being kind of belittling and kind of a jerk. Now, as it happens, I don't actually think you're a belittling jerk, at least not intentionally, but what I think isn't really apposite here, as you point out. What inspired me to engage is that that you got all fucking snippy in response when Blume called you out based on what you acknowledge is the plainest reading of your own comment.
So! Back to mutual ignoring and back-channel sniping, if you agree.
Natural history museum nerds should visit the newish Hall of Paleontology in Houston:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/us/texas-gets-prehistoric-with-two-new-fossil-halls.html?ref=texas
The rest of the museum is pretty silly, but you can easily spend 4-5 hours just on that exhibit.
Leaving aside whose kids, the other problem is it would create a non-trivial amount of incest.
In keeping with the Egyptology theme.
You know what's also fun? Imagining that the Pitbull song "Fireball" is about people welcoming a giant all-consuming fireball destroying the earth. That's kind of my personal kitten photo or calming manatee.
Is there some kind of tetchiness epidemic going on? It seems to be happening all over. I blame the supermoon.
Meticulously embalmed kittens also go here.
Has everyone seen Positive Self-Esteem Shark? I like that one.
I feel like one of the things I'll never understand about the world is that there's a rapper named "Pitbull" who is known for his neat, flat-front khakis.
143 looks great. Please tell me that "Wyrex" is named after Sam Wyly.
146 is right. An all-consuming fireball would be much more efficient than Escalades. And to think that an asteroid named Pitbull just missed its chance last weekend.
147: Personally, I'm more overloaded right now with both home and work responsibilities than I've ever been in my life, so much so that I've resorted to wasting my now extraordinarily precious time in acrimonious blog-spats.
147: Maybe there's a big fight at Crooked Timber. That would explain it.
"I'ma make it big with this country-folk act called 'Savannah Gentle'! All acoustic, lotta Peter Paul & Mary covers... our big gimmick is we take shits on stage and cut ourselves!"
156 confused the hell out of me until I realized I should be reading it as a continuation of 150.
I see my attempt to troll the blog with the Salaita affair failed.
On a related note, my "can't we all just get along?" inclinations regarding comment threads on unfogged sit oddly next to my deep and growing distaste for the bullshit push for "civility" that university administrations across the country seem to have adopted in a suspiciously concerted manner recently.
Some aspiring activist needs to declare a national Fuck Civility day; I would definitely sign on (as distinct from a national Fuck Civily day, which I would also probably support).
I think years ago when we were talking about the Iraqi winter soldier hearings, I pointed out that it is almost impossible to criticize the military without it devolving into an argument about whether or not individual members are going to heaven. (so here we are) Also some prime: everyone both in and out of an institution are equally complicit in the institutions behavior arguments, which inevitably are another normal feature of these arguments.
As to the actual post, this has been a well known problem in the military for at least that last 15-20 years and they they seem utterly opposed to doing anything meaningful about it. I actually think this is a rare situation where general unfair smearing might work. If people made the same awful jokes about the military as they do prison, it might be enough of a PR nightmare to get them to fix the problem.
38: I'll go with "Funny Grandmother Sayings" instead of the very tense main thread. Mine sends me a check on my birthday and when I call to say thank you, she says "don't spend it all on wine, women, and song" pretty much every time.
switched our plans from an afternoon at Coney Island to an afternoon at the Math Museum
For a diversion from the rancor: my daughters called me, breathless, one day this summer after their second ride on the new Thunderbolt at Coney Island. If I'd been there, I probably would have been cajoled into riding so as not to be a pussy like the Times reporter, then endured ten seconds of OMFGOMFGOMFG before dying of a massive cardiac arrest. (If I'd insisted they go to the Math Museum instead, they'd have killed me, so either way, death.)
The women, of course, as providing the song.
I pointed out that it is almost impossible to criticize the military without it devolving into an argument about whether or not individual members are going to heaven.
I know what you are getting at, but I don't think this is actually true -- or, more precisely, people who are actually familiar with the military generally feel just fine criticizing it, and there are tons of informed discussions to be had (and that people are willing to have). But framing the discussion immediately as "the army=militarization=rapes so that's just how it is" or the way worse and more unfathomable "hey we have a volunteer army so do we really give a shit if people who are signing up for it get raped" plays immediately into the hands of people who want to frame any intelligent discussion or criticism of the actually-existing military as an assault on individual soldiers.
Right. It seems perfectly plausible to me that there are aspects of the actually existing US Army that make internal sexual violence more likely that could be addressed, and are not inherent in the nature of being a military organization. It's not something I know anything at all about, of course.
One time she said something like "well I guess you wouldn't do that." This may have been after I moved in with a non-woman.
But it is precisely something discussed in the linked article, go figure. Also the highly problematic role of hypermasculinity as a cultural ideal, something that directly contributes to the mindless vaporization of both the military and individual soldiers.
167: I thought you were committed to describing roommates as cats or non-cats.
167: Sanctity of off-blog communication!
168: Did I miss the actual article? All I saw was a long string of quotes from people who had been assaulted.
Also the highly problematic role of hypermasculinity as a cultural ideal, something that directly contributes to the mindless vaporization of both the military and individual soldiers
With one typo, a comment veers headlong into supervillainy.
Ooooo! Super villainess status!
Once, when my grandmother was in the middle of late-stage Alzheimer's,* and we came to visit her, she started shouting "Queen Victoria was right!" Who knows.
*early stage Alzheimer's turned her from a New Deal Democrat to a hardcore Clinton-impeachment-supporting Republican, for real. Everyone wondered what was going on for a few years and then we got the diagnosis.
Actual article explicitly discussed all that and more.
Thank, LB, for the self-esteem shark. Just what I needed.
Is there a gif in which it eats kittens anywhere?
Hit the links in 132 and 149 alternately in quick succession?
"Non-woman, Non-cat" is my favorite Reggae song.
Why, yes, this is the internet of course there are thousands ...
180: I did not expect anyone else to have come up with the same earworm, there.
I can't catch up with all these nasty comments, but in case anyone hasn't said this: Underneath MHPH's boringly foolish point about relative sympathy for sexual assault victims, there's an interestingly foolish point about the appropriate nature of public regard for the military.
In ogged's ongoing quest to discover The Problem With Liberals, I'd argue that the search is over with ffeJ's 16 et al, and MHPH's 112, for example.
Judged as institutions, I am pro-police and pro-military, and I don't think there's a legitimate counter-argument to be made. Yet many of my fellow liberals seem to disagree.
Of course, particular military and police institutions have enormous problems, as we see with the US Armed Forces and the police departments of all the different Fergusons in this country. But the most important institutional problems for those organizations are actually bigger than the organizations themselves, and are a result of operating in a society that's really fucked up. And as fucked up as they are, an honorable job can be done within any of these organizations.
Beyond that, DB asks the right question: "Who has clean hands?" Speaking for myself, I operate in a profession that's pretty fucked up, and I have worked in particular organizations that were really fucked up. But I think I've done an honorable job, by-and-large, and I'm neither going to cast stones nor cheer anyone else who wants to.
what you acknowledge is the plainest reading of your own comment.
Holy shit, sarcasm, how does it work?
"Who has clean hands?"
I just washed my hands.
Hi there! Not dead yet, more's the pity, though this bad Texas weather day might kill me. If I get through this, fall will be here.
1) Seems to me, could be, that the underlying grouchiness above, on this eve of Obama bombing somebody again again, is a level of discomfort some of us have with the socially-approved bright line drawing between state-sanctioned and structured violence (military, cops, football) and anarchic illegal individualized violence.
2) Really really hard to talk about this stuff, isn't it, just as hard (harder! Harder!) as to talk about sex (especially women's sexuality and queer or non-conformist sexuality) in sexually repressive and patriarchal societies like the Victorians or fundamentalists of varying persuasions. (Or not fundy. Been studying slash/yaoi this week. If I wrote a slash piece about Halford, D2, and gwift, would you FP it? Just kidding, can't handle all the adjectives)
3) Well, maybe that's because the repression and taboos are not at, but actually are the core of social control and "discipline" States monopoly for legitimating sex..oops, violence, this isn't a gay marriage thread.
4) As a guy dude, I don't think I can't see how the gears work quite as well for my kind, so what I mostly see is the structures and mechanisms of social conditioning, internalized patriarchy, and dynamic everyday norms of categorizing and regulating sex and violence repress and control women.
Cause lets face it, violent men are bad and wrong (outside of the proper context), violent women are nearly unthinkable.
"Men can't be raped" is othering both gay and women's sexuality, gay and women's violence.
On the margins, on a wink-wink look the other way let's not think too much...men* do have permission to be violent, both officially and extralegally.
*I could say "white men" but that is far from true globally or even in America depending on context. The contexts are very complicated, but I do think it is useful to understand the ways and places the marginal, minorities, the subaltern, and women have less permission to express rage.
Yeah, well, I do not necessarily want more violence, although honestly I think I would enjoy more expression depending on the agents and targets (Punched that sexist banker in the nose).
In my fetid asocial heart, I do have trouble arguing against more permission and autonomy.
Oh thank God, we were hurting for lack of bob's input.
Is their anything less important than the exact level of disdain politically powerless people have for the actions of the US military.
We had a thread a long time ago that turned into a discussion of how hard we would all snub George W. Bush if we encountered him socially. That may have been less important.
It's really hard to choose. There have been so many heated arguments on matters of very little importance.
Then my stepdaughter watches youtube video rants about how Sonic the Hedgehog looks different in later video games. They even had the nerve to change the color of his eyes!
In my fetid asocial heart, I do have trouble arguing against more permission and autonomy.
Say what you will about the content, that's highly iambic.
Dude this blog was where I blew open the Big Lie that is Yellowstone Park Visitor statistics. Tell me that wasn't important.
192: You just wait until somebody points out to her the three inconsistent character art styles in Final Fantasy VII.
At the risk of actually thinking about the OP. Since this is primarily work-place sexual harassment and assault, a logical first step would be to pass a federal law allowing soldiers to sue the government the same way that we allow private employees to sue their employer. Like the private work-place in the 90s, once checks start getting cashed, my guess is that the leadership of the military will start taking this stuff much more seriously.
To LB's point, I'd like more analysis in an article too. Must be criminologists who know something.
||
USAF going all Nehemiah Scudder.
|>
