compassionate conservatism equals rape?

Somewhere, some how, some place, compassionate convservatism may exist. Don't look for it, however, to emanate from the defense department or the White House.

Score one more for the Bush white house.

Nice try, people, but the very real problems that you speak of are institutionalized, they did not start with this administration, and sadly, they will not end with this administration.

And it matters not a whit what the political persuasion of the occupant of the white house is.

What the hell has militant feminism to do with prevention of sexual assault? It is considered being a serious felony even in the extremely male sexist societies (e.g., the former USSR, where rapists were eligible to severe punishments, from 5 years of labor camps to death penalty( for gang rape that caused serious injuries or death of the victim)). And I do not think that Mr. Rumsfeld justifies sexual harassment, rape and minors' molestation. Even if he is not so much concerned with status of women, moral of the Armed Forces is of his direct concern.
IMO, radical feminists demand privileges for women in framework of the so-called affirmative action, but such a thing is incompatible with principle of equality of all the people.

maxsdadeo- Agree- People can say many things about Bush, but he did not foster this attitude. It has been going on forever. The only difference now, is that women feel secure enough to open their mouths and report sexual molestation.

Some people will say anything to discredit the current administration. Well, you can look at it another way. During the Clinton administration, the same things were going on, but it remained hidden, and now it is out in the open.

If people have problems with Bush, please cite instances that really reflect problems that he has caused. Some people are so hell bent on discrediting the administration, that they would blame the weather on the White House!

Is not the point that there WAS, until 2002, a special body set up and attempting to create the conditions that WILL bring more people (men get raped in the military, and other places, too) forward to say what is happening - and this administration did not support its continuance?

Of course such things were happening under previous administrations, but it sounds as though one - whether Clinton's or a previous one - was making some attempts to address them at the organisational level.

dlowan: yes that is the point

A point the conservatives do not want to recognize.

steissd:

How common is rape in the Israeli armed service?

New Haven - Steissd may not know - the other point is that big, powerful, politically sensitive organizations (and society, too) do not want to look at these things, since they are uncomfortable, look bad and usually reflect well-entrenched beliefs and/or practices - like military bastardization - that those in power have grown up with.

To New Haven: It almost does not happen. Israeli society is not violent in general despite of 50+ years of war. I do not say, however that there are no sexual contacts between male and female soldiers, but this refers to consent sex (in fact, army rules prohibit sex on the territory of the military facilities, but this rule is not enforced too strictly).

I can meet you guys halfway on this.

I think it was admirable for the Pentagon to shift gears on the focus of the committee, to determine ways women could more readily assimilate and rise up within the ranks of the military, unfortunately, as the incidents you site show, we still need a "rape hot-line" committee for the military.

The fact that men and women specifically trained to be violent will commit violent acts in a greater percentage than the population as a whole is not surprising.

It is also not excusable.

I personally wonder how much of the alleged rape was really consensual sex. Lawyers tend to make the whole thing very complicated.

NH it is not complicated at all - no is no more now when the woman says so. It is only some men that fail to understand this issue, I wonder why.

In my past I have presented more than one sexual harrasement cases and won, why - because it is abusive and ugly and obivous. I am not a lawyer just a labor reltaions professional as some call us and these cases were before labor arbitrators but no one had a problem in seeing what was going on and even though there were not eye witnesses their were plenty of ear witnesses and good contract language.

I couldn't be a rapist. My deepest feelings for women run much closer to awe than to rage.

However Joanne, I think to mimimize how confusing man's role is in the woman/man relationship dynamic is counterproductive.

Men are castigated for being obsequious and condescending when we are chivalrous; we are dismissed and characterized as immature louts when we are not. Women use all manner of accoutrement to intice, and accuse men of harrassment if we are not ideal in our reactions. You say such cases are "obvious", yet I have never been able to fully understand why its only considered "harrassment" if the female in question does not find the male attractive. I realize this is not a popular view - but the fine line between "hitting on" a female and 'harrassing" her is sometimes defined by that females very subjective opinion of who she wants attention from. Society and media bombard us with idealized, superficial images of female beauty, and expect us to know what "real women" want.

Please take this in no way to excuse acts of violence by men - when they are "obvious" as you say, of course they should be punished. But is this whole matter of man/woman interaction was something with clear boundaries clearly defined by society, then there wouldn't be such under reporting of woman on man abuse, or woman on man harrassment. I wonder how honest you can be about such double standards.

...that second sentence in the last paragraph should read "...if this whole matter of..."

Well Snood all I can say is that you have to really pay attention to the women. You have to read there reactions. Some want to be touched and fondled and they don't care where. Some don't even like to hear off color jokes. But if you watch you can usually tell by there, the woman's, facial expression and body language how they feel about your attentions and intentions. The cases I refer to above were very awful for the women involved and involved unwanted touching of intimate parts of the body, lewd language, and finally when all of that was rejected it involved retaliation in the form of public humiliation. All of this occurred in the work place of course.

What happens outside the work place between men and women who do not work together well that is a different story. You cannot bring a charge of criminal rape for a statement no matter how antagonistic it is and if the male making the remark is not a male co-worker there is no issue.

For example remember that Navy Lt that was raped at the Tail Hook a few years ago. Well she was raped. But she did put herself in harms way when she went to the gauntlet. Now these Naval Aviators were drunk and out of control. Any woman that does not want that kind of attention stays away. This woman I suspect wanted to be part of the guys, she forgot that even though she was a pilot and an Admiral's aide she was not just one of the boys. Her rape was a crime and the Navy should not have tried to cover it up. On the other hand you would never catch me within 20 miles of a Tail Hook Convention. Women do have to use some sense and stay out of harms way. And it is especially important to tell the male in no uncertain terms what he said or did that was offensive in any situation. Unfortunately many women are so intimidated that they are unable to do that.

There are 100s of thousands of women who have left jobs because they were harassed and never said a word. There are women, say like Monica, who used their femininity to gain access to the oval office.

But again I must reiterate when a woman says no to sex it is no. That is the law of the land.

Joan Dorel:

In thousands of criminal law cases you'll find a woman claiming rape, when in reality it was consenual. For many women, saying "no" does mean "yes".

After the event, these same women become confused, and don't recognize the difference between "no" and "yes".

Must be unique to the place where you live, New Haven.