Why are Army leaders failing so abysmally to implement a successful SHARP?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 21:10:50 -0400

The bottom line is that a very small percentage of victims trust their chain-of-command enough to report a SHARP violation. Furthermore, when victims actually do report an incident, they are further victimized by the reprisal they experience by their chain-of-command, as 62% of victims report receiving reprisal from their chain-of-command after they file a report. Why are we failing our Soldiers?

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Mar 20 at 2016 10:00 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:00:43 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member Does the military really understand accountability and responsibilies?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2016 10:06 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:06:00 -0400

As a male soldier who has spent the majority of my time in a combat engineer company, take my thoughts with a grain of salt if you must, but here they are...

SHARP training as it stands is a joke. If the Army wants to change the culture, I believe that we must focus, on right/wrong, the Army values, etc., not an hour or two hour long lecture on what constitutes sexual harassment, and what is sexual assault. Forget the niceties about "Quid pro quo," and focus on the fact that such behavior is incompatible with who we are as soldiers! There are forms of sexual harassment that a soldier could commit innocently, through carelessness, or ignorance, but most violations DO NOT occur because a soldier doesn't know. It's because they don't care, or believe that they are above the rules. Or because they're drunk.

We've had a lot of talk on RP about Army leaders who are looking out for number one, toxic leaders, etc. I believe that the majority of the 62% falls into that category. Leaders don't want bad news on their watch, and some will do what they need to to cover it up, or try to make it go away.

The one company I was in that had females, had such a bad environment that I wouldn't have blamed anyone who didn't trust leadership enough to report a SHARP incident. In fact I said so on the command climate survey. The fact is, every bit of news traveled in that company. Good leaders squash gossip.

My takeaway: Revamp SHARP training, with a much sharper focus on the ethics, and promote leaders who lead, promote an environment of trust (kill gossip) and many of the problems will solve themselves with time. Focusing on SHARP, EO and other IMPORTANT issues, instead of focusing on the environment that CAUSES those issues kills morale, and causes the cycle of low quality leaders and poor environments to continue.

Sometime I should put my thoughts together, and try to find some research to back this up, but for now that's my thoughts.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2016 10:32 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:32:59 -0400

Easy, because the Army does not want an independent body to evaluate the issue and they rely on the immediate chain of Command. Canada, where I live, has the same exact problem but now they are moving toward an independent commission which is what many victims wish was available. The system is still broken but they are working toward a solution.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/canadian-forces-sexual-misconduct-response-team-promises-change-1.3067418

Gen. Tom Lawson, chief of defence staff, called the report disturbing and said the Canadian Armed Forces' ability to work well depends on trust. Lawson told reporters at a press conference Thursday the military has accepted two of Deschamps' 10 recommendations outright and the other eight in principle.

Here are the report's 10 recommendations:

1. Acknowledge that inappropriate sexual conduct is a serious problem that exists in the CAF and undertake to address it.

2. Establish a strategy to effect cultural change to eliminate the sexualized environment and to better integrate women, including by conducting a gender-based analysis of CAF policies.

3. Create an independent centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment outside of the CAF with the responsibility for receiving reports of inappropriate sexual conduct, as well as prevention, coordination and monitoring of training, victim support, monitoring of accountability, and research, and to act as a central authority for the collection of data.

4. Allow members to report incidents of sexual harassment and sexual assault to the centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment, or simply to request support services without the obligation to trigger a formal complaint process.

5. With the participation of the centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment:

Develop a simple, broad definition of sexual harassment that effectively captures all dimensions of the member's relationship with the CAF.

Develop a definition of adverse personal relationship that specifically addresses relationships between members of different rank, and creates a presumption of an adverse personal relationship where the individuals involved are of different rank, unless the relationship is properly disclosed.

Define sexual assault in the policy as intentional, non-consensual touching of a sexual nature.

Give guidance on the requirement for consent, including by addressing the impact on genuine consent of a number of factors, including intoxication, differences in rank, and the chain of command.

6. With the participation of the centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment, develop a unified policy approach to address inappropriate sexual conduct and include as many aspects as possible of inappropriate sexual conduct in a single policy using plain language.

7. Simplify the harassment process by:
■Directing formal complaints to COs acting as adjudicators in a grievance
■Reducing emphasis on ADR.

8. Allow victims of sexual assault to request, with the support of the centre for accountability sexual assault and harassment, transfer of the complaint to civilian authorities; provide information explaining the reasons when transfer is not effected.

9. Assign responsibility for providing, coordinating and monitoring victim support to the centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment, including the responsibility for advocating on behalf of victims in the complaint and investigation processes.

10. Assign to the centre for accountability for sexual assault and harassment, in coordination with other CAF subject matter experts, responsibility for the development of the training curriculum, and the primary responsibility for monitoring training on matters related to inappropriate sexual conduct.

'Not the Canadian Armed Forces I joined,' says Maj.-Gen. Whitecross

The highest ranking woman official in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) was in Winnipeg Friday to discuss the formation of a new response team dedicated to addressing sexual misconduct in the Canadian military.

Response by Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 12:46 AM

Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:46:18 -0400

I'm currently only an AROTC cadet so take this with a grain of salt but it reflects the kind of people going into the army's leadership so I think it counts. We've had to do SHARP training here and quite frankly everyone treats it like a joke. There is almost nobody who takes it seriously to include the Army personnel in charge of us cadets. Its hard to make us, male and female, take it seriously because the training is so laughably bad. Its usually just a female officer reminding us that sexual assault, rape, and harassment are bad, which we already know. It just becomes harder and harder to take it seriously as it goes along. This might be solved by having it become a JAG program so that its outside of the chain of command and it could be made more anonymous but I just know that my classmates, who will make excellent Army officers in every other way, are not being properly trained to handle these kinds of issues because they are more complicated than can be taught in a classroom along with all of the other subjects that are also being taught.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Mar 21 at 2016 6:38 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 06:38:50 -0400

I feel our approach is wrong. We can't treat this like marksmanship training. This isn't a skill to improve, or a college class. It's about who a person IS, at a fundamental level. Sexual Harassment/Assault is not an Army issue, it is a parenting issue. Good, decent, well raised human beings do not require training to know that these behaviors are wrong and morally reprehensible. If they need to be taught that at this stage, there is nothing we can do for them. They are broken, defective human beings.. Their formative years have been wasted. All we can do is identify them and remove them from the service.

There is no amount of training that will undo 17 + years of bad parenting.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 21 at 2016 7:37 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 07:37:58 -0400

What I'm about to say is going to make me sound cold hearted. end caveat.

The "Service" (et al, as an Organization) doesn't care about Individuals. It cares about Mission. People within the Service care about their troops. The closer you are to the People under you, the more like you care. There's a bond or a relationship. The farther away, the more "machine-like" the bureaucracy becomes.

SHARP is "grit" in the machine. Identify and remove. Perpetrators and Victims alike from a "bureaucractic" standpoint. Managers (as opposed to Leaders) don't want it mucking up their finely tuned and oiled machine. They just want it gone.

Now, we much look at the issue realistically as well. Are we going to END "SHARP" violations? No we are not. Anyone who says we are is smoking something and needs to report for an immediate piss test. Of course the (unrealistic) GOAL is to end violations, however the real goal is to reduce them continuously, and get 100% reporting.

My "opinion" is that the Military (unlike the Civilian world) has been getting better at the reporting side. This accounts for "some" of the increases we see on our side of the fence. Better reporting in a smaller subset makes for larger %.

Now as for "further victimization." We get into real Subjective territory here because of the Investigative Process which requires the Victim "to relive the events" however that is necessary as part of our Justice system. It creates a "perception" of further victimization, without defining what that victimization is. I'm not saying other things aren't happening, but we need to clearly define them before we make assumptions. There are clear policies in place, and whether the policies are proactive or reactive in nature plays a heavy role as to whether or not they are function correctly.

Some of the Preventive Training isn't worth the paper it's written on, while the Reactive Investigative and Punitive parts are limited by the UCMJ.

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Mar 21 at 2016 7:46 AM

CPT Mark Gonzalez — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 07:46:11 -0400

A few points:
1. A commander has a dual responsibility to both the victim and alleged perpetrator (if a SM). This makes things tricky.
2. SHARP has become too broad and is including very low level harassment claims, it isn't just sexual assaults. The reality is with a lot of harassment claims after you do a thorough and fair investigation there just isn't enough to substantiate it. The substantiated ones their career is ended, but the other ones what can you really do, when the evidence isn't there?
3. If reprisal is occurring the commander should crush it or be relieved.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 8:44 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 08:44:14 -0400

Over the course of my career, I have conducted 6 AR 15-6 investigations over SHARP violation allegations. In every single case, when the truth came out, the alleged perpetrator was innocent and the alleged victim was upset over some perceived slight and filed a BS EO/SHARP complaint in an attempt to damage the career of the guy she got mad at. Not saying SHARP violations don't occur, but until people stop filing bogus accusations any complaint will be viewed with a heavy grain of salt.

Response by CSM David Heidke made Mar 21 at 2016 9:36 AM

CSM David Heidke — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:36:35 -0400

I've seen where the chain of command pushes to have the SHARP complaint resolved quickly, almost to the point of "brushing" the complaint. I have seen undue command influence used against commanders to this end. When this stops, then you'll have an effective SHARP program, and not when you have half of every drill dedicated to SHARP training.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Mar 21 at 2016 10:06 AM

SGM Erik Marquez — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:06:07 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member You asked a great question.... before I respond form mw retired fox hole . with a Lady Vet standing at my side for the last 24 years..so her experience as well.... . I d ask you the same.... as one of the newest members of the US Army (couple of years now, but still relatively new)
Having gone though likely countless SHARP briefings now, perhaps even given one your self... What are YOUR observations?

Response by SSG Richard Reilly made Mar 21 at 2016 10:25 AM

SSG Richard Reilly — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:25:03 -0400

OPINION:
62% of victims reporting receive reprisal...what % of those actually are victims. There are deeper stories here. Do I believe there is sexual harassment in the military yes. Do I believe it is wrong yes. But how many guys report the fact that they were also drunk the night they had a one night stand that wasn't super awesome. I believe this is a one sided sword that yes there are some victims but I believe there are also fake victims. I believe the reprisal may actually be punishment for false reporting. punishment for and against is very hard. If you report and you were a victim then you have to be a witness against the other person. If you aren't a victim and you accuse someone that person has to defend against a heavy handed anti sexual harassment Army.
Then we get into what I call "No Good Witness" ("NGW") as a victim your past is slightly protected however if you were sleeping with 5 guys(or girls) in one night and the fourth guy(or girl) you were too sure about...kind of hard to make a great case.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Mar 21 at 2016 10:35 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:35:47 -0400

As I have said repeatedly, we keep putting a band-aid on a sucking chest wound. Get an unbiased commission (if that is possible) to discover why this has gone on so long and consistently for a few decades. Any time you have a systemic problem like this one, in the civilian world, you first get to the root cause of the problem and take action to fix it. Unfortunately, that could be detrimental to those with an agenda.

Response by Sgt Jay Jones made Mar 21 at 2016 11:02 AM

Sgt Jay Jones — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:02:47 -0400

The question is a very simple one to answer. When leaders are also the perpetrators, it makes it hard to push downward. Just take a look at 2015, how many leaders have been fired for inappropriate relationships. One of the first things I learned about leadership is that you cannot push a rope. If you want to lead you have get out in front and lead by example. Also, as a leader you have to be above reproach. That is a challenge especially when you consider that male/female attractions are a basic need on Maslow's Hierarchy of needs.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Mar 21 at 2016 11:18 AM

Capt Mark Strobl — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:18:01 -0400

Problem #1: Too often the accused and the victim are in the same chain of command. Then, what to do with the accused after the case hits the CoCO's desk? Include the 1stSgt, platoon commanders, the platoon sgts... etc. Everyone circles the wagons to protect their respective service member. Now let's introduce the "EEO Officer" (or, whatever the tittle may be). That person probably had a BBQ last weekend with one of the accused/victim chain of command as well. Oh yes, this EEO billet is probably collaterally assigned to someone who works in the -1 or -3 shop. In the civilian world, such cases would simply be turned over to law enforcement --an effective (and very detached) third party. Due to structure & mission, the military simply is not well equipped to deal with sexual harassment.

Problem #2: "Sensitivity Training" Everybody calls it something different. But, we used to call it a waste of our day. Twice a year, we filled a classroom, dimmed the lights, and took a nap as "Death by Powerpoint" took center stage. The presentation always reflected obtuse scenarios. Those that listened didn't need to hear it. Those that needed it said to stared at their watches. The command dutifully checked the requisite box... and we were released.

Why don't victims trust their chain of command? Unfortunately, they've been trained NOT to.

Sorry, CPT Private RallyPoint Member, I'm only addressing the symptoms. Real solutions happen when we address the cause.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 11:42 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:42:09 -0400

I don't think the Amy is failing. I moved from a line unit 1SG and with little experience leading or interacting with female soldiers I was given a BDE HHC. After fourteen months at the helm my commander and I had zero SHARP, IG, or EO complaints with 231 officers, warrants, and enlisted assigned. I attribute our success to having and building leaders that care and invest time and effort into their people. Making time for an effective NCO/Soldier development program that is dynamic and addresses weaknesses in the skill set of the unit is key to foster teamwork and responsibility to the unit. Blanket assessments of perceived issues are not a solution. It takes individual effort to make group success or improvement. As with everything in life to achieve success it takes effort and mandatory power point isn't cutting it.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 12:38 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:38:59 -0400

1) Most SHARP training is check the block
2) The chain of command gets in the way more than it helps
3) Unequal justice system. Senior personnel are coddled and allowed to retire while junior personnel go to jail. (if it is a Junior person Commands want the MPs to cart the offender out in cuffs. If you really want to make an impact have them cart a GO out of his/her office
4) take the CoC out of it completely. Its a CRIME! Let Law Enforcement do our job. and Tell Commanders to stand down.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 1:12 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:12:00 -0400

in my opinion the implementation of our SHARP program has been successful. I received a brief by my regiment commander, as well as classes during the year.

I think most people are upset because sexual assaults and sexual harassments are still happening. People expect this utopia society in the military where nothing bad happens (sexual assault). But the reality is that you will never ever eliminate sexual assaults.

Response by LTC Thomas Tennant made Mar 21 at 2016 1:57 PM

LTC Thomas Tennant — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 13:57:27 -0400

Like everything else I see in today's military, SHARP is "Band-Aid program" that fails to get to the heart of the issue. I have been accused of being a "knuckle dragging Neanderthal" and an old school officer out of the stone age, but I see even the need for a SHARP program as pathetic attempt to paper over several social engineering attempts forced upon the US military while it is trying to fight a GWOT. Actually the problem goes way before 9/11 but the solution has been and still is LEADERSHIP down to the individual fire team, The Army Values, and the Warrior Ethos.

Now, in full disclosure, I have been involved in raising four daughters (adopted and step) and I see no reason why men and women can not serve side by side. I say involved because, face it men, it takes a Dad's love to raise a wholesome and empowered woman....but they need a lot of a Mother's instruction and modeling to round them out and make them effective powerful people. Frankly, most young women today are still defining who and what they are....and what they want. They are told they can have it all and that men are not necessary. But at the same time their hearts, minds and perhaps body is at odds to those messages. I for one can see women in combat roles so long as the meet realistic standards that have not been watered down for political purposes. BUT is this what they really want...or is it the fact that the opportunity exists should they so choose?

At the same time, I see a generation of young men who are confused and full of misconceptions as to what a man is and is not. You can blame liberalism, feminism, the breakdown of the family, forty years of failed liberal policies, the rise of gangs & gangsta music, the decline of religious teachings and morals, of our subpar educational system, unlimited access to porn and the list goes on. But once you step outside of Christian-Judah ethics and roles the role of a man in society is very much in flux. Women for some men are to be objectified and to be manipulated for sexual and emotional use and abuse. On the flip side is the new castrati who milk toast for most woman.

All this is a cauldron stew for a major clash of the sexes. BUT THE FACT REMAINS the whole society has been in turmoil since the late 1960's to the present. We have "collectively" lost the ability to see beyond ourselves and respect others as individuals. Then when you throw in the military environment where there are the inherent pressures of rank, chain of command, missions and life-death situations...are we expecting too much of everyone?

Yes and No....By my definition "Sexual Assault" is at its core is the word "assault" which the total disregard of the individual. The assailant does not care about the other person and possibly does not see them as a person. Rather they see them as a means to an end...be it sexual gratification, power or something else. If YOU as a commander or senior NCO are not fostering an environment where every individual in your organization is respected, valued and validated, you fail as a leader or commander. Look in the mirror and I think you will agree. As a Band-Aid, SHARP is trying to force feed sensitivity and awareness on an organization whose mission is to kill people and destroy things of our enemies. But it is the leadership team of your organization that has to provide the backbone and support to that sensitivity and awareness. Actions, not works can only accomplish that.

AND YES ... I was born in the 50's so what do you expect...my perceptions are those of an "old man" who grew up with "Leave It To Beaver" and "Father Knows Best" and has no idea what is going on....yea...Right!

Response by SFC Marcus Belt made Mar 21 at 2016 2:09 PM

SFC Marcus Belt — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 14:09:52 -0400

My cynical side tells me it's because people know when they're being BS'd.

We can all generally agree on two things: sexual harassment = BAD; sexual assault = VERY BAD.

So where do we go from there? The Army has chosen to conduct regular blocks of training that may or may not (I think not) do anything about the problem. After an overview of what constitutes harassment and what constitutes assault, focusing on the areas that might lack fidelity ("what exactly is "quid pro quo?"; "she was drunk, so she didn't say 'no'!), we're done with training, and are now in the penalty phase.

Commanders and other leaders have to create climates that don't allow the conditions amenable to harassment and assault to fester and grow, but seriously, no one but no one thinks rape is okay, and if they do, an hour block of instruction won't fix that.

Response by Capt Tom Brown made Mar 21 at 2016 3:01 PM

Capt Tom Brown — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:01:36 -0400

Thanks for raising this question which still has not been adequately answered, even tho I believe for the most part, the services are sincere in eliminating this horrible problem which has existed since the beginning of time no doubt. If one reads the various report from DOD to Congress they paint a fairly rosy picture of progress being made on all levels. Yet there are still disturbing reports on the other hand of less than satisfactory progress. Depends on who you want ot believe. Speaking out may be the most powerful way to put a lie to the rosy reports and make people recognize the truth where it lies.

Response by SSG Michael Primm made Mar 21 at 2016 3:50 PM

SSG Michael Primm — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:50:31 -0400

Because they are always the people who are SHARP violators.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Mar 21 at 2016 4:10 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:10:51 -0400

This seems like stats for civilian organizations.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 4:32 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 16:32:18 -0400

I don't think it is a "winnable" program. We give safety briefings every week but some knuckle head has to get shitcan drunk and drive a vehicle. We have suicide prevention training but we still have Soldiers taking their own lives. We do IA awareness training but we still have Soldiers plugging iPods and phones into government computers. We do a heck of a lot of training with no results or sometimes the problem gets even worse.

We are a cross section of the population. There are bad people in the population, there are going to be bad people in the Army. I am all about educating the Soldiers. If a one hour powerpoint stops someone from killing themselves or sexually assaulting someone it's worth it. Like many others have said I think it boils down to leadership and the climate within the command. It definitely helps if our Soldiers have some morals and values.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 21 at 2016 8:48 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 20:48:49 -0400

My biggest beef with sharp is that is seems like I am being beaten with a foam bat. It basically tell us don't speak to female service members because it's a sharp/eo violation. I know that's not what it says but that's how it feels. That being said my unit is so sensitive to sharp it seems when ever one of our female attachments (I am in a infantry line company) gets with in 30 ft of us we just clam up, then we keep a 3ft buffer zone around them. Which I think is a disservice to them but with the way sharp is beaten into us it make it seem the we(male soldiers) are going to commit a sharp violation by just saying hello.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 12:47 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 00:47:30 -0400

What is your definition of "abysmally" failing? In the last two years, I've dealt with three SHARP cases which were investigated fully by CID after the victims came forth and all victims were treated with dignity and respect. Good leaders make the difference and based on purely personal observations, I have to disagree with us leaders failing our Soldiers.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 7:29 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 07:29:15 -0400

Philosophically I agree with SSgt Private RallyPoint Member. In these types of questions I always try to think of demographic data and how that would be tied in. Each year we recruit ~60,000 new Soldiers in the total Army. Most of them kids out of high school or from a college campus (slightly more mature).

A 1-2 hour powerpoint semiannually or quarterly will not change how the human body and psychology operates. I'll speak for men as I am one: 900,000+ years of evolution has dictated the animal instincts of how human mating happens. That isn't changed with a power point. A modern civilization such as ours is still owned and operated by people who, on an evolutionary scale, are a shade above neanderthal.

Anyway, we know better because our mothers raised us so. Instead of cave manning our way to the win ...when we see something we want we try to engineer a situation to get it. In proper engineering a date, flowers, chocolate, chivalry, time, and all the good things that go into good human relations happens. In bad engineering alcohol (or rank or whatever) is poured into the mix and its forced.

I'm going to guess as every year we add 60,000 new Soldiers to the force NOT All OF THEM will be the best of social engineers. In my SHARP style training I try to name and call out this type of behavior. Prevent bad things from happening by recognizing that you (or your buddies) are poorly engineering a situation.

Preserve human dignity, SHARP will never replace damn good leadership.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 8:24 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 08:24:36 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member In 1973, I arrived at Fort Hood having just finished basic and AIT. Those were troubled times racially, but we always seemed to have MORE trouble right after one of the interminable race relations briefings.

There's almost nothing that can't be screwed up, once people are involved. Simple example is the Communist slogan, "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need." It's great, until people get in the way, and NO ONE produces according to their ability without something extra from themselves, and EVERYONE wants more than they need.

And we can get more modern with Hillary saying that in the case of assault, the woman should be believed. And yet that doesn't apply to Paula Jones and the other women molested by Slick Willie.

Some women want to be fully integrated into the military; treated so that their sex is immaterial. And that's not a bad thing to hope for. But two people go out drinking. They wake up the next morning in bed. Suddenly the stories are different. The woman was taken advantage of. The guy thought she was making a play for him. Who is right and who is at fault?

Our sexual harassment briefings often show a woman falling down drunk, and put the onus on a man to see she gets safely to bed. Are women so weak and unintelligent that they need a minder when they go out drinking?

There's also the "sexual revolution" that has been going on since the 60's, so long that almost no servicemembers today were alive when it started. The basic premise is that going to bed is no different that shaking hands. "If it feels good, do it!" (And no, I'm not claiming to have been perfect. I have been falling down drunk, and I've had one night stands. The thing is, if that's the NORM, and gender doesn't matter, then it's the NORM for women too.)

The simple truth is that going out and getting falling down drunk is a really STUPID thing to do, regardless of your sex. But that's what many of our servicemembers choose to do with their off time. And drunk servicemembers do really stupid things that cause them to spend a night in jail and spend the next few months on extra duty. How did this situation become something different just because women wanted to get in on the fun?

We have a strange culture. On St Patrick's Day, you can wear funny clothes, stick a leprechaun's pipe in your mouth, get falling down drunk, and everyone laughs. If you try that on Cinco de Mayo, wearing a Frito Bandito moustache, you are a racist. There are people who are convinced that the Stars and Bars means the holder favors slavery, and others who think it mourns the loss of State's Rights and the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. We tell Aggie jokes, and dead baby jokes, and Polack jokes, and Ethiopian jokes - at what point does that cease to be fun and become racist? NCOs say, " Don't call me Sir! I work for a living!", and officers say, "Don't call me Sergeant! I have a college education!" Are those discriminatory or just good, clean fun?

I don't think reprisals are a good response, but I can't help wondering as the commander must wonder, if this is a case of rape or buyer's remorse. There's an old saying, "No one was ever raped on an upper bunk." What that means is that unless their is bruising or some other damage, its hard to determine which story is the true one. One thing I am sure of. Equality must come with thicker skins, or it isn't about equality.

I do not have a solution. But I don't think we can say, "boys will be boys", when it's the guys going out and getting stupid, and then make it a federal crime when a girl goes along. I think women are smart enough to have a dedicated driver, and to make sure a trustworthy female friend goes with them when they are going to drink. And I think we need swift investigation of allegations, and investigators who know when to say, "I cannot judge between the two stories. Both are at least partially at fault."

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 9:02 AM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 09:02:30 -0400

The problem with your logic is that you're using a percentage to gauge success. "Why have only X% of female Soldiers reported a sexual assault? How do we make that number higher??". The measurement of success of a preventative program should be the ever DECREASING number of SHARP cases. For example, I used to work manage an IT department that had annual goals based on "fixing X problems a day". The problem with that metric is that if you are doing your job correctly and succeeding at it...your problems SHOULD be going away making that magic X number decrease year over year.

Aside from making every officer make SHARP an annual goal, mandatory training of every Soldier and pouring millions into awareness program...how are they failing again? What do you suggest the Army does that they haven't done already? There is an entire program driven from the top down that spends enormous resources making sure female Soldiers are given anything they need.

To label SHARP as a "abysmal failure" is just wrong. Today's Soldier spends way, way more time in SHARP training than they do in CLS, BRM, PT, MAC, MOS training, hooah schools, or training other basic Soldiering skills.

Response by LTC Thomas Tennant made Mar 22 at 2016 9:23 AM

LTC Thomas Tennant — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 09:23:15 -0400

I want to add to my earlier comments. Back in the 70'sI was a troop during the transition to the All Volunteer Army. Later as a young "save-tail" Infantry LT, I had to deal with the "Rep-68" Soldiers as well as the new volunteers. I am here to tell you it was no "cake walk" as both a troop and young officer. Over the years I transition into the Reserves and into co-ed units. Many of us were the blind leading the blind while learning to lead in this new "leadership environment." As we went from mission and assignment to another the central elements was "Mission First - Soldiers Always". I can tell you the Army has come a long way from what some of you "old timers" experienced and that is a good thing.

Yes there are "leadership challenges" with young troops and biological hormones raging is chief among them. But again, Leadership has to give a SH#% and work to create an environment where every Soldier, regardless of sex/race/background/orientation is respected, is valued and validated. We talk about making units safe....that is how you do it. As a leader you have to live, breath, and instill the Army Values and the Warrior Ethos. We now know more about how to integrate and blend diversity into a cohesive and effective unit...and it starts with maintaining standards of conduct as well as performance....and giving a SH#%.

Can you fight biology? Nope! If only because when men and women get together there will always be those that want to pair off and scratch the itch or fall in love/lust (retired about the same time DADT was being retired). As a leader, all one can do is meet with them, counsel them, and document the process once it hits your radar. In many cases the individuals can act as mature and drama-free adults. But some can't and in those cases the chain of command above you has to be "pro-actively" brought into the loop. If they are within the same unit and "good order and discipline" is in jeopardy (for any reason) then removal of one or both from the unit is in order.

It is a balancing act and the commander and the NCO core of the unit have to in sync on this issue or you will quickly have a "tar baby mess" on your hands. And no one comes clean.

Response by CPL Geoffrey A. Pfister Sr made Mar 22 at 2016 10:09 AM

CPL Geoffrey A. Pfister Sr — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:09:42 -0400

The answer is quite simple...restore the ethics and morals that founded this Republic...you know..."ONE NATION, UNDER GOD"...the military isn't a standard job and the blatant "PC" perversions enacted and forced upon soldiers is ludicrous. Remove God and you remove personal accountability in the vast majority of people...especially when you a a hen into barracks of aggressively trained roosters...common sense tells you that's not gonna end well...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 10:34 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:34:33 -0400

My longest standing point on this subject is that we view sexual harassment/assault as a "military problem". This is incorrect. This is a problem with society as a whole, not just within the military. What the military is doing with SHARP is attempting to correct a problem that originates outside the gate. None of us were born into our respective military uniforms. We all spent the first 18+ years of our lives out there in the civilian sector where we developed our personalities, habits, world-views, etc. Environment has a direct impact upon how an individual develops. Most, I believe, develop positively, but there are many who do not.

In the military we are attempting to undo nearly two decades of society's programming of each individual. In this day and age where pornography of all sorts is only a mouse click away, it shouldn't be surprising that many people develop the wrong ideas about human sexuality. Pornography is never, never positive. It's an exploitation of people and teaches young, impressionable minds the wrong messages about human relationships.

Real change needs to start outside the gates of our bases and in the homes of future service men and women. Once that change begins out there in the rest of the world, our fight to eliminate sexual harassment/assault in the military will become much easier. Until that day, all the SHARP classes in the world won't stop a determined sexual predator out for his own gratification.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 11:26 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 11:26:48 -0400

Ive been in the army for 34 years. When I got to AIT in 1982 they pulled us all into a room and explained to us how we couldn't sexually harass the female soldiers (at that time it was about cat calls). This was also about the time they started integrating male female units. 34 years later they are pulling us back into the same room and telling us about sexual harassment. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Its still the same speech, different speaker. Back then, there were male barracks and female barracks. males wernt allowed in female barracks and vise versa. Maybe we need to go back to this if they are serious about fixing this.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 12:39 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 12:39:24 -0400

I believe that the primary challenge with SHARP as it is currently implemented focuses so much on the categorization of violations and empowering the victim that there is little room for discussion regarding the underlying cultural issues in the profession of arms and no room for subsequent instruction on basic interpersonal relationships and mutual respect. Instead it produces an atmosphere of fear and political correctness that can reduce the unit cohesion that the training is supposed to enhance. Refusing to ignore the elephant in the room...the redefinition and introduction of new (accepted) categories of sexual attraction and behavior causes the backdrop of these issues to be more complex and confusing for leaders and subordinates alike. Taken together, the potential for meaningful progress in this arena continues to diminish.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 2:56 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:56:36 -0400

The reprisal isn't just from the chain-of-command. It can come from the offender themselves.

At one point I had a barely 23 year old NCO who had just arrived to our unit who, 3 days into being on our roster, made comments and non-verbal gestures towards myself while pouring hand sanitizer over his forearm. This individual was aware that only he and I were alone in the office and I quickly removed myself from the situation. Several days went by while I thought over what had occurred. Was I just harassed? Should I report it? If I do, what will happen? What if nothing happens? Will people just assume it was more extreme than what happened? Two weeks went by where I worked with this person who continued to act and behave in odd manners, generating a hostile work environment. Finally I went to the unit SHARP and explained to them what had occurred. They informed me that they would speak to him and my leadership regarding the issue.

The following day I was hunted down by my NCO-IC and a different SHARP rep to ask me in a very peculiar manner if I felt safe several times before I responded with "If you are this concerned over my safety, maybe I should be too?" Turns out my leadership along with a SHARP rep spoke with the NCO regarding the matter, which he admitted to doing and stated he was just joking. After they explained to him it wasn't a joke and how serious the issue was he blew up in a rage and issued death threats against myself and the NCO-IC. Several escorts were assigned to him and it came to light that he had transferred to us from another unit for a similar issue that had occurred. This was a person who was merely being told "Don't be saying this stuff, don't do this stuff" and he turned it up to 11. In his mind he had given the Army the best years of his life so my life was forfeit for daring to bring the incident forward.

With the Army just shuffling problem children around, I don't know where this person went to or if they are still in the Army but I will always remember the first time I received a death threat that didn't come from a child over Xbox live and what has become another nail in the coffin that is my service in the US military.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 22 at 2016 7:24 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:24:05 -0400

Requires a culture change. That does not happen overnight. All the briefs and classes in the world are not the magic bullet for solving this problem. People that do wrong already know it's wrong and continue despite what they are told. Criminals don't obey laws.....duh!

We are stuck in P.C. hell right now so leaders can say "we tried" or can check a block because they honestly have no other realistic answer for this problem.. Bad people are going to continue to do bad things and no posters or AIM cards are going to stop them. It's going to take Soldiers looking after Soldiers and identifying those problem people quickly! It's also going to require non-panic action because honestly many males are afraid to even correct a female now. It might not be right but there is a genuine fear out there.

Sad to say but we've become a PR oriented Army. The line between reality and advertised results in very grey now. As long as there are no red blocks on the Command and Staff slides everything is good to go, right????? lol

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2016 8:09 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Mar 2016 08:09:23 -0400

It really boils down to power in the wrong place, and an outdated chain of command requirement. When I was in the ARMY, I complained about sexual harassment and was told that everyone is "treated differently as a woman". This was from a female commander who called in my female platoon sergeant to agree with her. I was told to go to mental health, where they promptly, although "honorably" chaptered me out of the ARMY for "preexisting conditions". The problem was that we were the military police, and when I arrived from basic training my company was already under investigation for sexual violations (things like high ranking soldiers sleeping with the newly arrived teens and even marrying them). Needless to say, the commanders do not want to appear like they are not fixing problems like these. When I complained about ridiculous comments and refused to work with a certain sergeant, I was first threatened with jail. I said, "I work in a prison (USDB), jail would be a step up." So then, they sent me up the long and useless chain of command where a First Sergeant told me I had been having a "stellar" career, and tried to cajole me back to my post without further "problems". I eventually ended up in a doctor's office telling me he could "get me out of the Army". I thought: "ow about, you get the pervs out?" But by the end of a tortuous "therapy" attempt to fix "my" issues, I was writing Congress to speed up the discharge. Anyway, as long as the people who are molesting you and your rights are your superiors or reflections of their performance, crap will always roll right back downhill to you. Policies that link the chain of command in a criminal and civil liability charge if they don't take immediate action to protect you from further injury and personal suits for damages will work to break this ridiculous pattern. Of course it could backfire and cause the higher ups to more ferociously deny responsibility. By the time you reach someone powerful enough and courageous, not alone concerned enough to care, you've been victimized by multiple people. We simply need more power to immediately remove ourselves from the situation. One idea is that a report of sexual harassment results in a temporary, but immediate leave of absence (or possible transfer) for the accuser, while an objective investigation takes place by investigators from another post.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 23 at 2016 8:31 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 23 Mar 2016 20:31:26 -0400

1LT, I am sorry to hear that you have experienced reprisal or know those who have. I have worked with several commands and have never seen what the law deems reprisal for a report. If you feel that you or another person is a victim of reprisal, see your Special Victims Judge Advocate, the IG, or go to the highest commander in post and voice your concerns.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 2 at 2016 9:19 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 May 2016 21:19:58 -0400

A organization must have a culture that does not allow perpetrators to act with impunity. Accountability is the key. The "make it go away" style of leadership leads to perpetrators having a free-for-all, and then getting pushed on to become another unit's problem.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2016 2:07 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 10 May 2016 02:07:28 -0400

Why are the Chain of Command failing... because they are the Chain of Command and not Law Enforcement. Its a CRIME so let Law Enforcement deal with it.... tell commanders to get that thier star PT and Weapons expert is really a POS oh and the MPs are coming to pick him up and put him in pretrial confinement. Everyone knows SHARP is a crime but CoC think they know better than Law Enforcement. I have said it before and will say it again.. Untill we see Senior Leaders treated the same as junior Soldiers and walked out of their offices in cuffs they will continue to do this.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 19 at 2016 12:21 PM

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 May 2016 12:21:26 -0400

There is a problem. But like everything else, we are overthinking it. Not sure if you are familiar with a book called the "Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg, but if you have the time, read it. In a nutshell, if your core processes are out of control, you will see lots of problems that might at first seem unrelated. However, fix the foundation...and like magic, all the other problems fix themselves. The best example I can give from the book is when ALCOA's new CEO Paul O'Neill made his first speech to the shareholders, he didn't talk about taking over the world, expanding product lines or production or anything like that. He said "I intend to make Alcoa the safest company in America. I intend to go for zero injuries." He was of course met with huge criticism and doubt. However, he insisted that the goal be zero accidents. What nobody else saw was that making that the one single goal changed the entire culture of the organization. Workers were given a target they could see and hit and more importantly, understand. That ONE change in safety habits improved several processes in the organization. When he retired, 13 years later, Alcoa's annual net income was five times higher than when he started.

As Soldiers, we keep looking at the symptoms and not at the problem, which is our culture. Our culture should NOT tolerate sexual harassment, rape, laziness, complacency, toxic leaders, unsat personnel, or any of the MANY issues we complain about with the military which mainly stem from a failure of cohesive leadership at the very top levels. When we fix that and find our "zero accident safety goal", then we won't need SHARPS or any other Band-Aid approach to our problems.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 12 at 2018 12:07 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jun 2018 12:07:57 -0400

I just think that it's a systemic issue that crops from 1) Socio-cultural attitudes that is not just in the Army but is across the Country as a whole, it's the same way legal cases are handled Country-wide. 2) The Commanders and Leaders, are not really equipped to address these issues on a practical and realistic level.
3) The SHARP/SARC currently use a cookie-cutter solutions to all allegations.
4) The sentimental nature of the issue; sentimental issues often cause leaders to be overly careful to act in a particular direction due to the multichotomous nature of the issue fed with biases from different schools of thought; As a Country our moral judgment darts into different directions.
5) Granted that some cases are obvious, but some have to be investigated in detail to verify the authenticity of claims that are not really obvious.

As a country our society is reactive rather than proactive, hence most of the classes we take in the Army are designed to make us aware of symptoms. I believe that TRUE PREVENTION ; SHARP has to be directed at building and developing our value system towards simple RESPECT for others. It becomes impossible to do in an institution like the Army or any other Institution in the general society. It goes back to our homes.

All of us have the ability to bring out the Good, Bad & Ugly attributes; but I'd like to believe that our individual upbringing plays a big role in what we become.
Nonetheless, we just have individually do our best in our individual roles to deter, avoid, prevent, mitigate and eventually control this ugly monster that has come to eat out on the fabric of our Military Brotherhood. If you think that you're a victim or a reverse-victim, you need to speak out to the IG, SVJA and even the Chaplain. Never give up; keep fighting!

Response by CSM Darieus ZaGara made Jun 9 at 2019 7:28 AM

CSM Darieus ZaGara — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 07:28:30 -0400

While I know there is a problem in society, surely it exists in the military, maybe even at a higher rate. I served along side of women for the last 8 years of my career, I was a CSM for that period. I never heard of or saw backlash, and as a CSM I was at the apex of those issues for assessment and determination, advising BDE level Commanders and the General Officers. All issues were taken seriously and reviewed at the highest level, not the lowest. This is a topic that requires maturity and a clear understanding of the issues at large, and the impact it can have on both individuals and the morale of an entire organization if handled incorrectly.

If Soldier know that Commands take this and all other issues seriously, They also know that they must stand back, follow protocols, and ensure good order and discipline, with this or any other case.

It is when young Commanders believebtgay can handle this type of very complex issue on their own, or when senior Commands have policy in place that states it will be handled at the lowest level, is when problems begin. Don’t get me wrong, the Company and Battalion leadership exercise legal authority, the higher Command provides over-site and resources in these cases.

In closing, where there is backlash, there is a lack of proper authority. Where there is backlash, there should be further punishment. Even if it is determined to be a false claim, backlash is against good order and discipline.

Thank you for your service.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 9 at 2019 1:10 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 09 Jun 2019 13:10:24 -0400

Is there two ways of investigation? Formal and informal?