117 replies to this topic

[Casilla]

Semantics. Expressing an opinion of distaste is an implicit request to stop.

Implicit request is not the same as explicit. In the former, he has he defense that it's not disobedience.

Give up on your witch hunt, Joe.

[Nymh]

He can express an opinion of distaste, but he cannot ask someone senior to stop, as this can be construed as a command.

I could never be I the military. A request is not a command.

For the record, I agree with Joe. Expressing that you don't condone a behavior when you feel it to be wrong couldn't possibly be against military law, and I think that's all he was trying to say. I don't know why law and commands are even being thrown around. Perhaps I am just as ignorant of military protocols as Joe is, but it doesn't seem to me that stepping onto a ship strips you of your individuality nor does it remove your ability to express your opinions about behaviors you feel to be wrong.

[Josh]

For the record, I agree with Joe. Expressing that you don't condone a behavior when you feel it to be wrong couldn't possibly be against military law, and I think that's all he was trying to say.

I already addressed this:

There's a difference between expressing your opinion and telling a senior crew member to stop. The first is acceptable under military law, the second is not.

[Sweeney]

Right.

I asked if Josh got involved and asked crewmembers to stop homophobic behaviours.

He said no.

I said that was cowardly.

He said it's because he'd get in trouble.

I said that was even more cowardly.

Then he said he did get involved after all, he just didn't realise that I was including that type of getting involved in my question.

I clarified.

There is yet to be a straight answer to what is, really, a very simple question. Which smacks of avoidance.

[Mishelle]

The military is an entirely different culture. Out and about on the street if you tell someone "hey can you cut that out?" it probably won't be taken as a command, but instead as a request. But in the military which thrives on a culture of respecting your seniors, taking commands, and following the rules then that could be taken as a command and hurt your career.

I have a multitude of problems with the military and military culture but in situations like these the lower you are the less you have the power to speak on anything really. That's why if you want change you have to start at the top.

Edited by Mishelle, 22 September 2012 - 09:16 AM.

[Josh]

Right.

I asked if Josh got involved and asked crewmembers to stop homophobic behaviours.

He said no.

Do you get involved and ask them to stop, Josh?

I do what the military has laid out for me to do.

To answer your question: Yes, I get involved by going to my chain of command, as has been trained on several occasions. Do I ask them to stop? If it's a junior person, I use positional authority to reprimand them for what is clearly hazing. If it's a senior person, I may express my opinion on the matter, but I do not directly ask or tell them to stop.

[Frizzle]

Typical military meat-heads, will follow orders regardless which is why it probably appeals to those who are relatively, quite stupid.

[Sweeney]

To answer your question: Yes, I get involved by going to my chain of command, as has been trained on several occasions. Do I ask them to stop? If it's a junior person, I use positional authority to reprimand them for what is clearly hazing. If it's a senior person, I may express my opinion on the matter, but I do not directly ask or tell them to stop.

Congratulations! You're not quite as shitty as I thought you were!

[Casilla]

Right.

I asked if Josh got involved and asked crewmembers to stop homophobic behaviours.

He said no.

I said that was cowardly.

He said it's because he'd get in trouble.

I said that was even more cowardly.

Then he said he did get involved after all, he just didn't realise that I was including that type of getting involved in my question.

I clarified.

There is yet to be a straight answer to what is, really, a very simple question. Which smacks of avoidance.

He's answered your question multiple times AND explained the situation he's in. He's not avoiding anything. You are reaching, and frankly, I am disbelieving because I have never remembered you acting so obtuse before. You are not in his situation, you obviously cannot comprehend military society, but calling him a coward for something YOU do not understand is... well, ignorant.

Josh wouldn't change anything, he wouldn't help the victim in question, and the homophobes wouldn't get punished if he acted like you say he should. The ONLY way to get results in the military is to follow COC.

[Galadriel]

Congratulations! You're not quite as shitty as I thought you were!

And the award for best mod goes to...

[Sweeney]

He's answered your question multiple times AND explained the situation he's in. He's not avoiding anything. You are reaching, and frankly, I am disbelieving because I have never remembered you acting so obtuse before. You are not in his situation, you obviously cannot comprehend military society, but calling him a coward for something YOU do not understand is... well, ignorant.

Josh wouldn't change anything, he wouldn't help the victim in question, and the homophobes wouldn't get punished if he acted like you say he should. The ONLY way to get results in the military is to follow COC.

It's odd that you should say that, Lindsay, since Josh has just said that, as it turns out, he does act like I think he should.

And the award for best mod goes to...

?

[Nymh]

I already addressed this:

You said you can express your opinion but not TELL them to stop. Casilla (which my phone corrected to Cadillac) said that you can't even ASK them to stop because that could be construed as a command. Why does asking = commanding? Are you not allowed to request anything without that being considered a command? Where does the line stop? If you ask for someone to pass the beans at the dinner table, do you have to make sure it's a junior to you? Asking someone to do something is different than commanding because it gives the askee the freedom to choose whether to fulfill it.

[Casilla]

You said you can express your opinion but not TELL them to stop. Casilla (which my phone corrected to Cadillac) said that you can't even ASK them to stop because that could be construed as a command. Why does asking = commanding? Are you not allowed to request anything without that being considered a command? Where does the line stop? If you ask for someone to pass the beans at the dinner table, do you have to make sure it's a junior to you? Asking someone to do something is different than commanding because it gives the askee the freedom to choose whether to fulfill it.

Ahaha! Cadillac! I quite like that.

And to answer your question - because asking to pass the salt at the dinner table is a neutral, non-emotional situation. No one's going to throw a fit about it. If you have a situation where someone is making fun of or insulting a homosexual crewmate, and you say, "Hey, I don't think it's cool that you're doing that", well, they won't be too pleased at you, but it's just your opinion. You're kind of close to the line already. You might catch some shit later from them, but probably nothing is going to come of it. Whereas, if you asked them to stop, that could potentially create a situation where they see you, a subordinate, reprimanding and ordering them in front of their other subordinates or even their own seniors. And that creates drama.

So. Let me give you another example of this.

In corporate work, there might be men high up in the totem pole who don't act very respectful to their female coworkers - or just certain ones. If this is your boss, then it creates a similar situation. You could create a little drama by asking them to stop - which they might see as insubordination or disrespect, which lands you in the dog house but doesn't help the woman out. OR, you could go to HR. HR has processes set up to deal with these situation, AND has the authority to deal with him, and they can at least pound it into that idiot's head that acting like that is going to get them sued. It may not change his mind about women, but that wasn't going to happen anyway. The goal was always to get him to stop the behavior.

Furthermore, most businesses have certain procedures you are supposed to follow when it comes to behavior like that. If you don't follow procedures - if you create drama in the workplace, and make people take sides - then it hampers their ability to actually enact change.

And remember, poor behavior doesn't always mean the person in question hates homosexuals or women or whatever. Some people honestly don't know how to act. They are intimidated or nervous, and their method of dealing with that is to make inappropriate jokes or comments - maybe because that's how it's always been, maybe because they think that's how they SHOULD act, etc. HR, or COC, or whatever have the authority and the knowledge on how to handle these situations so that everyone comes out a little wiser about how their behavior affects others, and their workplace. They could train someone who doesn't know how to act how to behave properly...and if someone really DOES hate women or homosexuals or whatever, then at least they can intimidate them into shutting up. And then a little mark goes into their files, and if this keeps happening, then they get the boot.

[redlion]

On the whole, I've agreed with Lindsay throughout this thread. I didn't read the post directly above mine though. Sorry, you went into corporate america.

We've gone from sports, to military, to corporate fascists. I have to declare this thread stupid.

So, you condone it implicitly by your inaction.

This is a straw man. I really, really hate you for using it.

The fact that women are being forcibly circumcised in parts of Africa, and the fact that I'm doing nothing to stop it, does not mean that I implicitly condone it through inaction.

I will echo Casi - stop the witch hunt. Josh is on your side of the issue.

[luvsmyncis]

The fact that women are being forcibly circumcised in parts of Africa, and the fact that I'm doing nothing to stop it... *other stuff*

PATRICK HOW COULD YOU????

[redlion]

I know, I know. Personally taking responsibility for the entire world's woes seems like something I'd do, doesn't it?

[Nymh]

I know, I know. Personally taking responsibility for the entire world's woes seems like something I'd do, doesn't it?

Something that you don't agree with which is happening right in front of your eyes is a little different than something you don't agree with that is happening halfway across the world.

I agree with you though, silly thread indeed.

[redlion]

Something that you don't agree with which is happening right in front of your eyes is a little different than something you don't agree with that is happening halfway across the world.

Not really. Inaction is exactly that; neither condoning nor condemning. If I implicitly condone something then I agree with it in principle, but not enough to say it explicitly.

That's not the same as having enough tact to refrain from disagreeing with a superior officer in front of other personnel. Sometimes there are other priorities, e.g. the navigation and maintenance of a nuclear submarine.

[Nymh]

Not really. Inaction is exactly that; neither condoning nor condemning. If I implicitly condone something then I agree with it in principle, but not enough to say it explicitly.

That's not the same as having enough tact to refrain from disagreeing with a superior officer in front of other personnel. Sometimes there are other priorities, e.g. the navigation and maintenance of a nuclear submarine.

Why would it have to be in front of anyone?

[redlion]

Why would it have to be in front of anyone?

Because that's Josh's situation. How often do you think you're alone on a submarine? Some amount of protocol is necessary for unity of command.

This is all in a military setting, which is why I think Sweeney is particularly unqualified to call someone a coward.

[Frizzle]

There is a huge difference between being inactive in something you have little/no control over and something that happens directly in front of you.

[Romy]

Jesus.

This isn't going to end until someone tells Sweeney that he won and gives him a pat on the back.
(Though clearly he doesn't understand military protocol.)

Maybe if we explain it in pokemon terms he'll understand...

Josh is a Pikachu.
The hazer is a Rhydon.
The homosexual crew mate is a Rattata.

Pikachu sees the Rhydon using "Tail Whip" on the Rattata.
Pikachu knows it's mean to lower Rattata's defenses but cannot use "Thunder" on the Rhydon since it isn't effective.
Instead Pikachu goes and tells Mewtwo that Rhydon was bullying the Rattata.
Pikachu can only hope that Mewtwo puts an end to Rattata's abuse.

Pikachu COULD have used "Thunder" on Rhydon but since Rhydon is immune to it, Pikachu would have just gotten the sh*t beat out of itself and sent back to the PC only to never see battle again.

Game breaking only happens in the Anime. Not in real poke-life.

Edited by Ivysaur, 23 September 2012 - 01:22 AM.