Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF
- Thread starter bossi
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 130
Sorry . . . I see no humour in the joke. It may seem harmless but if that is the case I challenge anyone to say that joke in the workplace and see how harmless it is taken. The joke is misogynistic plain and simple and the reason why some may find it funny is they cannot put themselves in the place of the person the joke is aimed at (women).
WRT it is not a CAF problem but a societal problem . . . I agree and disagree. Because we recruit from society we expect intolerant d-bags to get through the screening the process and for the most part they are dealt with by the system as they crop up. However there are many who fly below the radar because we tolerate such "harmless humor" and tell women to grow a thick skin if they want to fit in with the boys. That is a wrong attitude and one the CAF should be above. We may have inherited societies problem, but we also represent Canada to the country and the world writ large so we should be held to a higher standard. So societie's problem . . . yes but, it is also a CAF problem and one that needs to be stamped out less we look like fools.
Sexual harassment/misconduct is alive and well folks . . . my 23 year old niece spent five weeks at St Jean being casually hit on by instructors, sexual innuendo being tossed around in the form of harmless jokes by other students all within earshot of smiling instructors. When she complained she was told . . . don't let them get to you they are just testing your mettle to belong in the CAF. Seriously . . . she had to prove she belonged? She quit before I had a chance to talk to her. Nice . . . very nice.
Andraste
WRT it is not a CAF problem but a societal problem . . . I agree and disagree. Because we recruit from society we expect intolerant d-bags to get through the screening the process and for the most part they are dealt with by the system as they crop up. However there are many who fly below the radar because we tolerate such "harmless humor" and tell women to grow a thick skin if they want to fit in with the boys. That is a wrong attitude and one the CAF should be above. We may have inherited societies problem, but we also represent Canada to the country and the world writ large so we should be held to a higher standard. So societie's problem . . . yes but, it is also a CAF problem and one that needs to be stamped out less we look like fools.
Sexual harassment/misconduct is alive and well folks . . . my 23 year old niece spent five weeks at St Jean being casually hit on by instructors, sexual innuendo being tossed around in the form of harmless jokes by other students all within earshot of smiling instructors. When she complained she was told . . . don't let them get to you they are just testing your mettle to belong in the CAF. Seriously . . . she had to prove she belonged? She quit before I had a chance to talk to her. Nice . . . very nice.
Andraste
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 715
- Points
- 1,110
There can probably be a whole thread on the goings on in St Jean alone.Andraste said:
Some, not all, but some, view that place as party central. Lots of stories to be told about what goes on within those walls but that's a little off topic.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
Andraste said:
It's unfortunate that that happened to her. That's the problem with the way that St. Jean is staffed... we should be sending our best examples of leadership, ethics, and deportment there to instill in our future Officers and NCO's what we expect. Instead, we allow people like those instructors to socialize the new persons, who are EXTREMELY impressionable, to believe that harassment and often outright stupidity are just "part of the system". To me, that's where we start with Op HONOUR- send the best we have to recruit schools to set the future up for success. If that means a unit loses a "star" than so be it- units need to see the big picture too
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Andraste said:
Just want to point out you say 'women' and 'she'...it is a two way street, maybe not the same amount of traffic on both sides, but there are two sides. The sole case of sexual harassment/assault I was involved in years ago, to the SIU level, was a male victim. I believe Puckchaser pointed out something along the line that 50% of the calls or something along that line, to date have been males.
Although it was almost a decade ago now, I was once staff at CFLRS and was surprised by many things that seemed 'okay' up there. I wasn't unhappy to leave when my OT came in. Places like CTC and other TEs, the behavior I witnessed and tried to correct where I could, particularly at the MCpl level, would have been met with some consequences. I'd hoped that things had changed since my time there but...it appears not.
- Reaction score
- 3,458
- Points
- 1,160
Just to put the context to the "50%" number, here's where I got the data, starts on page 10:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/assets/FORCES_Internet/docs/en/caf-community-support-services/sexual-misconduct-progress-report-en.pdf
Quick summary:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/assets/FORCES_Internet/docs/en/caf-community-support-services/sexual-misconduct-progress-report-en.pdf
Quick summary:
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 130
Hey Puck Chaser,
To put a bit of context to the statistics quoted, the last line of summary "numbers do not necessarily represent those directly experiencing sexual misconduct". So while the numbers indicated approximately a 50/50 split in caller gender it is not clear what percentage (in either case) actually experienced sexual misconduct. The follow on statistics "Top Reasons for Contact" one of the top reasons was for information purposes only (close of 50 percent). As such, the statistics are not conclusive in either direction . . . that is the problem with descriptive statistics, they never really tell the whole story just a quick summary with little bang for the buck.
Cheers
Andraste
To put a bit of context to the statistics quoted, the last line of summary "numbers do not necessarily represent those directly experiencing sexual misconduct". So while the numbers indicated approximately a 50/50 split in caller gender it is not clear what percentage (in either case) actually experienced sexual misconduct. The follow on statistics "Top Reasons for Contact" one of the top reasons was for information purposes only (close of 50 percent). As such, the statistics are not conclusive in either direction . . . that is the problem with descriptive statistics, they never really tell the whole story just a quick summary with little bang for the buck.
Cheers
Andraste
- Reaction score
- 3,458
- Points
- 1,160
Which is why I posted the context and actual data when I was able to find the link.
I'll just be happy when they stop assuming I'm a rapist lying in wait just because I'm male.
I'll just be happy when they stop assuming I'm a rapist lying in wait just because I'm male.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 5,709
- Points
- 1,160
[quote author=Andraste]
Sexual harassment/misconduct is alive and well folks . . . my 23 year old niece spent five weeks at St Jean being casually hit on by instructors, sexual innuendo being tossed around in the form of harmless jokes by other students all within earshot of smiling instructors. When she complained she was told . . . don't let them get to you they are just testing your mettle to belong in the CAF. Seriously . . . she had to prove she belonged? She quit before I had a chance to talk to her. Nice . . . very nice.
Andraste
[/quote]
It sounds like some people there deserve a punch in the face.
Can you speak with your niece and have her report them to the sexual Misconduct hotline so it ideally won't continue to happen to other candidates?
Sexual harassment/misconduct is alive and well folks . . . my 23 year old niece spent five weeks at St Jean being casually hit on by instructors, sexual innuendo being tossed around in the form of harmless jokes by other students all within earshot of smiling instructors. When she complained she was told . . . don't let them get to you they are just testing your mettle to belong in the CAF. Seriously . . . she had to prove she belonged? She quit before I had a chance to talk to her. Nice . . . very nice.
Andraste
[/quote]
It sounds like some people there deserve a punch in the face.
Can you speak with your niece and have her report them to the sexual Misconduct hotline so it ideally won't continue to happen to other candidates?
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 130
Hey Jarnhamar,
Unfortunately the experience was so upsetting that she lost complete faith in the CAF to do anything about it. She was hoping for a career in the CAF and now she wants to get as far away from it as possible. I'll keep trying but I am not crossing my fingers.
Cheers
Andraste
Unfortunately the experience was so upsetting that she lost complete faith in the CAF to do anything about it. She was hoping for a career in the CAF and now she wants to get as far away from it as possible. I'll keep trying but I am not crossing my fingers.
Cheers
Andraste
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Andraste said:
Incidents like this, if they go unreported and are never investigated, will just pro-long the time it takes to make change. I hope she at least follows thru to some level...
- Reaction score
- 2,541
- Points
- 1,260
Indeed, and until more change happens, it'll only take a vocal few to be able to keep this accusation going ...Eye In The Sky said:
PuckChaser said:
- Reaction score
- 3,458
- Points
- 1,160
Eye In The Sky said:
Completely agree. Yes, she's uncomfortable with the CAF for letting this happen, even feeling betrayed. However, she can help make the changes required so instructors at St. Jean are appropriately dealt with. Any sexual remark/action or romantic connection between instructor and student is unacceptable and those members need to be held to account. That only happens when a student comes forward, or another instructor who hears about someone bragging about it reports it.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 130
Hello Puckchaser,
Should she come forward? Absolutely and I keep trying to convince her of doing so.
Unfortunately, she was so saddened by the chain of command’s response (i.e., her instructors) that she was reticent to go higher because she was afraid what their response would be.
However, the salient point is that this should never had happened and no person (woman or man) should be put in position where they are denigrated by sexual, racial or harassing comments/misconduct which are silently condoned by those in charge (in this case the instructors). This was kind of my point about the original OP joke (larger navy ships) not being funny. It may seem harmless but it identifies an insipid undertone of “it’s okay to make light of issues such as this” and it is up to those who it effects to grow a thicker skin. The act in of itself IMHO is counterintuitive to the ethics of the CAF which we should all aspire. Even more damaging is when those in leadership positions do nothing to prevent or stop this kind of behavior. Personally, I will call anyone out (man or woman . . . regardless of rank) who makes comments which are harassing in nature irrespective of the target group. That is my job as a leader and if all leaders did so, then the issues we face today would most likely not exist.
Those of seniority (either by rank or position) should not let any harassing behavior slide. When those new recruits saw those instructors smiling and silently condoning their behavior what kind of message was given to them? The instructors should have shut that down immediately and sent the right message. It is not up the individual to resolve the problem of the system as the system (for the most part) still paints those who come forward as “problem children” or the complaints are seen as spurious and vexatious. Don’t get me wrong it is getting better but I think we can all agree the sentiment still exists in some circles. So when you have young troops in a position of potentially being sanctioned or ostracized for coming forward, it takes a lot of courage to blow the whistle in an environment where it is not always welcomed. So saying the victims should step up and help resolve the issue while true is not always an accurate reflection of the environment in which the behavior was condoned (in this instance a power imbalance . . . student/instructor). The institution needs to ensure the culture is conducive to coming forward without the potential for personal or professional ramifications. Conversely, the institution also needs to ensure that complaints are investigated without becoming a witch hunt or immediately sanctioning the member whom the complaint is lodged against (i.e., innocent until proven guilty). Once investigated if the member is truly at fault then the appropriate level of sanction should be taken. However, if the complaint was found to be vexatious then IMHO the complainant should be appropriately sanctioned. Vexation and spurious complaints do more damage than good. They could potentially ruin the career of one person and they also denigrate the experience of those who were truly victims.
So we are now at a point where change is being forced on a culture where an undertone of condoning that same behavior (e.g., sexual misconduct) may still exist for some in leadership roles. My salient point is that we should never had reached this point as leadership should have stepped up long ago and put this garbage to rest rather than just laugh along with the funny comments.
Cheers
Andraste
Should she come forward? Absolutely and I keep trying to convince her of doing so.
Unfortunately, she was so saddened by the chain of command’s response (i.e., her instructors) that she was reticent to go higher because she was afraid what their response would be.
However, the salient point is that this should never had happened and no person (woman or man) should be put in position where they are denigrated by sexual, racial or harassing comments/misconduct which are silently condoned by those in charge (in this case the instructors). This was kind of my point about the original OP joke (larger navy ships) not being funny. It may seem harmless but it identifies an insipid undertone of “it’s okay to make light of issues such as this” and it is up to those who it effects to grow a thicker skin. The act in of itself IMHO is counterintuitive to the ethics of the CAF which we should all aspire. Even more damaging is when those in leadership positions do nothing to prevent or stop this kind of behavior. Personally, I will call anyone out (man or woman . . . regardless of rank) who makes comments which are harassing in nature irrespective of the target group. That is my job as a leader and if all leaders did so, then the issues we face today would most likely not exist.
Those of seniority (either by rank or position) should not let any harassing behavior slide. When those new recruits saw those instructors smiling and silently condoning their behavior what kind of message was given to them? The instructors should have shut that down immediately and sent the right message. It is not up the individual to resolve the problem of the system as the system (for the most part) still paints those who come forward as “problem children” or the complaints are seen as spurious and vexatious. Don’t get me wrong it is getting better but I think we can all agree the sentiment still exists in some circles. So when you have young troops in a position of potentially being sanctioned or ostracized for coming forward, it takes a lot of courage to blow the whistle in an environment where it is not always welcomed. So saying the victims should step up and help resolve the issue while true is not always an accurate reflection of the environment in which the behavior was condoned (in this instance a power imbalance . . . student/instructor). The institution needs to ensure the culture is conducive to coming forward without the potential for personal or professional ramifications. Conversely, the institution also needs to ensure that complaints are investigated without becoming a witch hunt or immediately sanctioning the member whom the complaint is lodged against (i.e., innocent until proven guilty). Once investigated if the member is truly at fault then the appropriate level of sanction should be taken. However, if the complaint was found to be vexatious then IMHO the complainant should be appropriately sanctioned. Vexation and spurious complaints do more damage than good. They could potentially ruin the career of one person and they also denigrate the experience of those who were truly victims.
So we are now at a point where change is being forced on a culture where an undertone of condoning that same behavior (e.g., sexual misconduct) may still exist for some in leadership roles. My salient point is that we should never had reached this point as leadership should have stepped up long ago and put this garbage to rest rather than just laugh along with the funny comments.
Cheers
Andraste
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
devil's advocate here... Let's say we completely stamp out all discrimination and prejudice in the CAF. Turn it into a SJW utopia of perfection.
What happens when the soldiers who made it though without ever having to deal with discrimination/prejudice make contact with external entities?
How do we prepare them for what they will experience when interacting with other cultures/nationalities. I'm not advocating for tolerance of prejudice or discrimination, but asking if we have a plan to harden our troops against the effects of it outside of garrison.
What happens when the soldiers who made it though without ever having to deal with discrimination/prejudice make contact with external entities?
How do we prepare them for what they will experience when interacting with other cultures/nationalities. I'm not advocating for tolerance of prejudice or discrimination, but asking if we have a plan to harden our troops against the effects of it outside of garrison.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 130
Hi C Canuk,
To be clear I am not advocating any form of utopia as that is not plausible. Unfortunately humans are biased, prejudiced and whatnot and we can never control for that. What I am saying is that when it comes to aberrant behavior, as the forward face of Canadian society around the world, we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Harassing behavior/attitudes in any guise (e.g. sexism, racism) needs to be addressed by the chain of command at all levels right down the section commander because it erodes teamwork and creates a poisoned environment for everyone irrespective who you are.
What you are advocating is what is referred to as "inoculation theory" in that we (the CAF) should allow a bit of this to toughen troops for when they face it in the real world. As a counter to that, by the time we get an individual in the CAF she/he will have already had at least two decades or more of living with societal intolerance, prejudice and discrimination for whatever their perceived difference is. They will already be toughened. We the CAF need to create an environment where it doesn't matter because you need to count on people irrespective of who they are to help you do your job be it a fire team partner or the clerk that processes your claims. Condoning bad behavior on any level regardless of the reasoning lessens us as an institution IMHO.
Cheers
Andraste
To be clear I am not advocating any form of utopia as that is not plausible. Unfortunately humans are biased, prejudiced and whatnot and we can never control for that. What I am saying is that when it comes to aberrant behavior, as the forward face of Canadian society around the world, we need to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Harassing behavior/attitudes in any guise (e.g. sexism, racism) needs to be addressed by the chain of command at all levels right down the section commander because it erodes teamwork and creates a poisoned environment for everyone irrespective who you are.
What you are advocating is what is referred to as "inoculation theory" in that we (the CAF) should allow a bit of this to toughen troops for when they face it in the real world. As a counter to that, by the time we get an individual in the CAF she/he will have already had at least two decades or more of living with societal intolerance, prejudice and discrimination for whatever their perceived difference is. They will already be toughened. We the CAF need to create an environment where it doesn't matter because you need to count on people irrespective of who they are to help you do your job be it a fire team partner or the clerk that processes your claims. Condoning bad behavior on any level regardless of the reasoning lessens us as an institution IMHO.
Cheers
Andraste
- Reaction score
- 3,458
- Points
- 1,160
We'll never have that environment when we pick people to join based on perceived imbalances in gender or ethnic minority representation. We tell people to identify themselves as different, give them a spot at the head of the line, and then expect them to forget about all that once they get through the system and join? Setting us up for failure right from the get-go.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Andraste said:
Actually, I did not advocate for anything of the sort. I literally wrote " I'm not advocating for tolerance of prejudice or discrimination, but asking if we have a plan to harden our troops against the effects of it outside of garrison."
After accusing me of advocating for inoculation theory, your answer essentially boils down to literally we plan to do nothing.
We have some rudimentary indoc for persons going to various regions with clashing cultural ideals, I'm asking if we plan to do more.
Part of our job is to be able to shrug off this sort of thing from outside entities. What are we going to do to ensure we have that ability. Are we engaging with the psychiatric community to see what can be done to harden the troops against it?
My biggest problem with this whole thing is not the big picture of handling actually sexual misconduct. It is the idea that everyone is such a fragile flower that a dirty joke or perhaps an advance from a co-worker will send then in to a withering spiral of depression, etc.
I remember being told, "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me" and to stand up to bullies or they will walk all over you. Now we are helping to create a culture of victims. We should be tougher than the average and part of that is learning to deal with people who say or do mean things.
Rather than coddle those who can't handle a little adversity, we should empower them to deal with it themselves as much as possible. And it should go with out saying that any cases of rape, or the like, should be dealt with in the harshest possible manner.
I remember being told, "sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me" and to stand up to bullies or they will walk all over you. Now we are helping to create a culture of victims. We should be tougher than the average and part of that is learning to deal with people who say or do mean things.
Rather than coddle those who can't handle a little adversity, we should empower them to deal with it themselves as much as possible. And it should go with out saying that any cases of rape, or the like, should be dealt with in the harshest possible manner.
Similar threads
