Comments on: The Navy sex “scandal” – is it about consent or culture?

By: Point missed - Pure Poison

Point missed - Pure Poison — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 04:37:04 +0000

...] Bolt is apparently puzzled by the sex ledger at sea incident being a “scandal”: THE navy is shocked – shocked! – that healthy young men cooped up on [...

By: baldrick

baldrick — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:42:06 +0000

I think that it is appropriate to mention the support and complaint mechanisms that are currently available for serving defence personnel. There are equity officers outside the chain of command who are obligated not to reveal the details of the complaint to the complaintaints chain of command and refer the matter to independent authorities who have very substantial powers of investigation. I myself have had a fellow officer in a regiment (he was an equity officer) inform me that one of my subordinates had made a complaint to him about another of my subordinates. He was a good mate and I naturally asked him who it was that he was talking about and what were the circumstances. He declined and stated that in his role as equity officer he could not discuss it with me. I realised what I had asked him, understood his position, and told him that I respected his role, would STFU about it, and could he please buy me another beer as it was his shout. The mechanisms exist and I think that the fact that this has made the headlines, the system is working. Don’t just assume that because something happens it is endorsed, indicative of a overall culture, or has any support from the people charged with looking after peoples welfare in the ADF.

By: Cassie

Cassie — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 11:27:48 +0000

Morale and trust are too important in a military workplace to be weakened so the ‘boys can have their fun’. Women know when guys are acting creepy and predatory. The agression rolls off them and it makes women uncomfortable. How are you supposed to work efficiently in a work environment like that? Or in a warzone? There have been documented rapes in the army, so where do you draw the line with sexual inappropriateness? If you worked in a professional workplace like a law firm and you thought a group of male workmates were acting predatory you would report it so that you could get on with your job without being subject to crap like that. A professional workplace should promote an attitude of sexual appropriateness, and i wonder if the armed forces can offer that freedom from discrimination to their soldiers. There is a point of view being voiced here that this bet is just a normal healthy expression of something male. Sure it might be, but is that sort of thing appropriate in a workplace? I don’t think that it is, i think this bet is disrespectful and suggestive that as a woman in the army it is acceptable and a given to be prey to men’s power games and prey to men’s sexualities. This isn’t about consenting adults shagging, it about sexual power. If a group of male soldiers got together and decided to bet on who could engage in sexual act with another particular male soldier, would that be different? I’m pretty sure that the target male soldier in question would cotton on pretty quick that he was being targeted and socially victimised and feel anxiety and stress. Men and women soldiers deserve a more professional workplace.

By: Bronwyn Turner

Bronwyn Turner — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 10:12:52 +0000

This sort of thing happens all over society. Guys on campus at the college I went to would put a carton of beer on the heads of the fresher girls at various times during the year, so you didn’t sleep with anyone on campus. But this was uni not a closed environment like a ship.

I agree that a relationship on the ship is corrosive to morale, but I think the main point here was that a book was put on results. this happens and I think as long as nothing happened then only minor discipline should occur.

Face it people sexual harrasement (this is NOT sexual harrassment in my view) happens in the vast majority of workplaces in this country many times a year and often more often. I work in mining which is a partially closed environment and you just have to grow a skin that harrassment bounces off. Though I’ve always had a problem with working out what harrassment is because according to people I have worked with I have been subjected to it, but was unaware of it, probably because I don’t care what people say to or about me and I stand up for myself if someone is going too far.

There is a certain hysteria in relation to this issue that indicates the press in particular is becoming prudish. Let the boys have their fun and make sure that all sailors and officers are aware with examples of what is and is not acceptable behaviour, then discipline, with counselling first before drastic action such as removing them from the ship! Grow up girls this is the big wide world

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:24:00 +0000

baldrick: I agree with you it’s not a culture issue with the military it’s more a culture issue with society at large and where Navy personnel come from.

You hit the nail on the head with the breakup issues. That more than any other reason is why no one should have a sexual relationship with anyone else they are serving with on a ship. It is completely corrosive to morale. When the relationship sours it just destroys efficiency on the ship, but even when it’s going strong you get all the attendant problems of other personnel feeling that X or Y is getting preferential treatment because of who their sleeping with. All in all it’s a disaster.

By: Josh

Josh — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:19:51 +0000

Tee: “During working hours there are rules of course, but not the rest of the day, the 16 hours, which of course makes this problematic.”

What are you drinking mate? At sea on a warship you’re always on duty which is one of the reasons you get extra pay for being at sea. You may not have to be a particular duty station but you are always on call. That’s why you can’t do things like get drunk.

By: Denise Muir-McCarey

Denise Muir-McCarey — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:58:18 +0000

I. Consensual sex isn’t the issue.
2. Power is.
3. Individual counselling and organisational change programs will hopefully help if the ‘top brass’ take responsibility for gender balance and respect. And promote staff accordingly – that is, based on a balance of their technical/theoretical and practical skills in the ADF as well as their emotional intelligence and demonstrated respect for others.
4. The worst thing about all of this is that nothing’s changing for the better given the pretty basic view being publicised. The best leaders/CEO’s I have met/worked for were the ones who addressed any form of unprofessional conduct immediately and made certain that all staff were trained/educated; given an opportunity to ask questions and challenge ‘old hat’ views; and encouraged not to use language like ‘politically correct’ to blatantly disregard a more modern, elegant perspective on life.

Good luck to the ADF in taking this on board – let’s hope some of the very retro and quite limited stereotypes/assumptions get shaken up!

By: Ungulate

Ungulate — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:33:16 +0000

Tee, I’m really struggling to understand your logic here, in particular your focus on the fact that no one had done anything illegal. Are you arguing that employees should be able to do anything they like as long as it’s legal?

By: Ungulate

Ungulate — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:14:58 +0000

“No, but there’s no possible way to stop that sort of thing.”

There’s a pretty good way to strongly discourage it, and that’s to discipline people who engage in that sort of behaviour.

By: tee

tee — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 03:36:27 +0000

Tee, where have I suggested anything about regulating how people think??? What on earth are you talking about “controlling essentially private conversation”? Well that’s what the end result is from the position you’ve taken. There’s no way you can back out of that. I’m afraid acceptable IS the question to be asking. A Naval ship is a workplace. There are all sorts of rules and policies and regulations in place in all workplaces that aren’t solely about legality, they are about creating an environment that people feel safe and comfortable working in, and one that helps people to best do the job they’re being paid to do. During working hours there are rules of course, but not the rest of the day, the 16 hours, which of course makes this problematic. Let’s say they were off duty army personnel instead of sailors and weren’t on a boat would you want to control their time off if they weren’t doing anything illegal? And you’re right, it’s not like any other office. In fact that’s perhaps an argument to be even more careful about behaviour - there’s no escape at the end of a shift. These people are stuck together “24 hours a day”. Exactly, they are stuck there 24 hours a day. This isn’t about controlling morality issues. I’ve already conceded that banning “fraternization” altogether is unrealistic. Yea well, with one hand you give and with the other you take. Hell - let them have off-duty gang bangs, if they’re all up for it. Yes, they’re adults and if an adult decides to partake in consensual sex with multiple partners etc. that’s their issue. This is about women being treated as objects in a sexual game by their “comrades-in-arms”. Yea, and men and women who marry for money too. The point being that it’s impossible to worry about the why’s and the how’s. If the women concerned were all willing participants in this arrangement then maybe there’s no problem, but somehow I doubt that’s the case. You don’t know and even if they were it’s not illegal although morally suspect as we both agree… But it’s not illegal. Again, I ask you: how would you feel having your daughter/sister/wife enlist to be stuck on a ship with those sorts of Neanderthals? Would you be proud as punch over her price tag? No, but there’s no possible way to stop that sort of thing. At least you're not bullshitting on like Tobs has about "organizational problems. FFS