Sexual Assault & Sexual Misconduct in the CF

[Gunner98]

We are 6 years post-Col Williams' arrest, stating that sexual assault is a biological thing makes wonder what the CAF leadership has learned.  I am happy, in fact overjoyed that I took my uniform off for the last time in September 2013.  I watched enough deviant crap being swept under the rug rather than being dealt with during my career.  Leadership and role-modeling must begin at the top.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Holy shit- some people have reading comprehension issues, here.

To state the bloody obvious- that young men in general are impulsive, tend to exercise bad judgement and can be sexually aggressive-is not to excuse anyone of any bad behaviour. It is the starting point to understand how to solve the problem.

Change the culture? How much of the CF culture has a recruit absorbed in day one at the CF? Or week one? Or month one? Or year one? We don't (or shouldn't) trust new privates and OCdts very much. They should be under heavy supervision, mentorship and discipline nearly all the time. Are they? Not in my experience- we are too lazy as an institution; we want them to have normal 9-5 lives and not live in shacks (too expensive; too hard to supervise; infringes on their rights). Nobody wants to correct poor behaviour any more- you might be accused of harassment and really, it is too much work. Suddenly, we are amazed that we might have a discipline problem in the CF and that no one bothered to set (and reinforce daily) expectations of conduct and to nip bad behaviour in the bud. (Apologies to all army.ca readers who do set and enforce standards of conduct).

We are so busy building monster HQs and staffs, we forgot the basics- Training and leading junior soldiers and junior officers. That first couple of years in the CF is formative and daily has a new cohort of people who do not have the right culture. You can never relax in the recruit training business.

 

[OldSolduer]

:goodpost:

Well said SKT.

 

[PanaEng]

Holy crap- some people have reading comprehension issues, here.

To state the bloody obvious- that young men in general are impulsive, tend to exercise bad judgement and can be sexually aggressive-is not to excuse anyone of any bad behaviour. It is the starting point to understand how to solve the problem.

Change the culture? How much of the CF culture has a recruit absorbed in day one at the CF? Or week one? Or month one? Or year one? We don't (or shouldn't) trust new privates and OCdts very much. They should be under heavy supervision, mentorship and discipline nearly all the time. Are they? Not in my experience- we are too lazy as an institution; we want them to have normal 9-5 lives and not live in shacks (too expensive; too hard to supervise; infringes on their rights). Nobody wants to correct poor behaviour any more- you might be accused of harassment and really, it is too much work. Suddenly, we are amazed that we might have a discipline problem in the CF and that no one bothered to set (and reinforce daily) expectations of conduct and to nip bad behaviour in the bud. (Apologies to all army.ca readers who do set and enforce standards of conduct).

We are so busy building monster HQs and staffs, we forgot the basics- Training and leading junior soldiers and junior officers. That first couple of years in the CF is formative and daily has a new cohort of people who do not have the right culture. You can never relax in the recruit training business.

:cheers:

 

[McG]

The talking heads now want Gen Lawson to make a second video that is more like the one done by the Australian Army Commander in 2013.  I think it's too late for that.  I don't mean that as anything against Gen Lawson, but a second video now would seem insincere and intended to appease political pressures; a second video would not carry the weight that critics want.

Putting things in perspective, the Australian Chief of Defence Force also issued a video which was much less pointed than that of the Australian Army Commander.  Maybe CCA could fill the Canadian void with a supporting video of his own.

Gen Vance could make the desired video once he takes the CDS job, but if he were to launch his tenure with a video message to the whole CAF then I hope he would go broader and nail down his expectations of leadership and military culture (to include opposition to unprofessional, unethical, and immoral conduct)


… but, if it helps now, I know a lot of Canadian Army COs are showing both Australian videos along with the CDS & CFCWO video as part of their mandatory unit level briefings.  So, many of our troops are still getting this stronger message. 

Canadian brass urged to follow Australian commander's lead
In online video, general warns soldiers to respect women 'or get out'
Lee Berthiaume
Ottawa Citizen
18 June 2015

Staring straight into the camera, a visibly angry Australian Army commander tells his soldiers that he will take no prisoners when it comes to the mistreatment of women in uniform.

"I will be ruthless in ridding the army of people who cannot live up to its values," Lt.-Gen. David Morrison warns in a stern voice. "And I need every one of you to support me in achieving this."

Morrison's video, posted online in June 2013, has been viewed 1.5 million times. It's the type of message from the top that opposition politicians in Canada, and those who work on preventing sexual crimes, say is absolutely necessary - but sorely missing - from attempts to eliminate sexual misconduct in Canada's military. "That is what would restore the trust and confidence of the troops, especially those who are most affected by this toxic, sexualized culture," Liberal defence critic Joyce Murray says. "But neither the chief of defence staffnor the minister have ever had that kind of clarity and conviction on how to move forward."

Canada's top brass has repeatedly faced questions about its commitment to fighting the problem. Those doubts reached new heights this week when Chief of Defence StaffGen. Tom Lawson suggested that "biological wiring" was partly responsible for what has been described as a "hostile" sexualized culture in the military.

In an interview with the CBC Tuesday, Lawson was asked why sexual misconduct persists in the military in 2015. "It would be a trite answer," he said, "but it's because we're biologically wired in a certain way, and there will be those who believe it is a reasonable thing to press themselves and their desires on others."

The top general found himself under fire from all sides, with even Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Wednesday calling the comments "offensive, inappropriate and completely unacceptable." In response to Liberal calls for Lawson's resignation, Harper noted that Lawson is due to retire in the coming weeks.

The general, who had already apologized, did so again Wednesday during an appearance at the House of Commons defence committee with Defence Minister Jason Kenney. But Lawson also defended the military's efforts to deal with the issue, and noted the military isn't the only organization struggling with it.

"I agree there can be no excuse for sexual misconduct," Lawson said. "This is a societal problem that we see across academic institutions, police forces, perhaps even on (Parliament Hill) itself."

Lawson's commitment to tackling sexual misconduct in the ranks had previously been questioned after he referenced an internal Canadian Forces survey from 2012 that found 98.5 per cent of military members said they had not been subject to sexual misconduct. At the time, he warned against "jumping to conclusions."

The military also accepted only two of 10 recommendations made by a retired Supreme Court justice who spent a year studying the issue, while Lawson publicly wavered on the idea of creating an independent centre that would receive reports of inappropriate conduct and support victims. Kenney eventually promised the creation of such an independent body.

Morrison's video, which warned Australian soldiers to respect women "or get out," came after soldiers swapped emails showing sex acts without the women involved knowing.

The emails also contained derogatory remarks about the women. Six soldiers were fired from the Australian military, and the ringleader pleaded guilty to three charges.

Sex-assault prevention educator Julie Lalonde, who was harassed while giving a presentation at the Royal Military College in Kingston, Ont., last year, says Morrison's message is exactly what Canadian military personnel - and the general public - needs to hear from its own leadership.

"The military is an incredibly hierarchical organization and what people at the top say and do actually has a huge impact on what people on the ground are enabled to do," she said. "What the Australian general said is incredibly strong language, and we have seen nothing, nothing of this sort in our country."

NDP defence critic Jack Harris said Morrison's "definitive statement of the values of the Australian forces and the insistence of those values is the kind of leadership we need."

"It's a good thing that Gen. Lawson is being replaced because if he was sticking around, there would always be a question of whether there will be a change," he said. "The Canadian Forces needs someone prepared to say the sort of things, and actually follow up on them, that the head of the Australian Army said."

Lt.-Gen. Jonathan Vance has been tapped to replace Lawson. Vance, who is responsible for managing all Canadian military operations, has not spoken publicly about sexual misconduct in the ranks.

 

[ballz]

"It's not the way it should be"

Quite a few Canadians - and I am thinking maybe a couple of people here - went out of their way to overlook the above, which is the most important part.

No one overlooked it, it is just too weak.

It is also the directive: discipline yourselves and your subordinates; pass no faults.

Like I said, weak. Leaders issue clear, concise, and direct messages. That is strong direction.


In contrast to the Australian Army Commander, you can easily see why one was effective and one was not. It's pretty sad that COs are showing a video of a foreign country's army commander speaking to his own troops instead of one made by our own leadership directly addressing the issue. It doesn't say much for our leadership.

 

[dimsum]

The talking heads now want Gen Lawson to make a second video that is more like the one done by the Australian Army Commander in 2013.  I think it's too late for that.  I don't mean that as anything against Gen Lawson, but a second video now would seem insincere and intended to appease political pressures; a second video would not carry the weight that critics want.

Putting things in perspective, the Australian Chief of Defence Force also issued a video which was much less pointed than that of the Australian Army Commander.  Maybe CCA could fill the Canadian void with a supporting video of his own.

To put some context into this, why the Australian Chief of Army put out the video first and so strongly was because it was a response to a then-recent scandal that was specifically Army (the Jedi Council if you want to look it up) which involved some fairly senior personnel.  A year or two prior, there was the Skype scandal at the ADF Academy, which there was a response but it wasn't as pointed.  Also, I can't remember if it was before or after, but there was also a thing about some Regt getting in a bit of trouble over topless bartenders at their beer calls.  Around the same time, the RAN was involved in a scandal onboard HMAS Ballarat.

In short, between the Skype scandal, HMAS Ballarat scandal, and then the Jedi Council scandal, the Australian public demanded a swift and strong response from the leaders.  It wasn't exactly a great time to be in the ADF.

Besides the fact that the horse has well and truly fled the barn, having CCA specifically put out something now would seem a little out of place.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I'm not a "communications" (public relations) expert ... not by any stretch of the imagination ... but, in my opinion, what Gen Lawson should do now is just stay quiet and take his public lashing. It's going to be uncomfortable, but he stepped into it all by himself, so ...

Gen Vance can make the "right" statement about the whole military ethos, covering much more than just sexual harassment, when he takes over in a few weeks.

 

[GAP]

Just listened to the CBC "The Current" replay this evening. They had on Judy Lalond ? the female speaker at RMC that created that controversy....and from what I heard, she went in there with an attitude and an agenda and succeeded in creating one.

They the, cadets and the Senior Cadre, were set up from the get go....they could not have won.

 

[cupper]

Just listened to the CBC "The Current" replay this evening. They had on Judy Lalond ? the female speaker at RMC that created that controversy....and from what I heard, she went in there with an attitude and an agenda and succeeded in creating one.

They the, cadets and the Senior Cadre, were set up from the get go....they could not have won.

I just listened to the same discussion. If you thought the DesChamps report was damning, you haven't heard jack.

 

[McG]

Is there a transcript?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Just listened to the CBC "The Current" replay this evening. They had on Judy Lalond ? the female speaker at RMC that created that controversy....and from what I heard, she went in there with an attitude and an agenda and succeeded in creating one.

They the, cadets and the Senior Cadre, were set up from the get go....they could not have won.

Julie LaLonde

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2669674272/

Was this It?

 

[OldSolduer]

I just listened to the same discussion. If you thought the DesChamps report was damning, you haven't heard jack.

Maybe I am wearing a tin foil hat.....but could it be these people have an agenda?

 

[George Wallace]

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2669674272/

Was this It?

Just watched that.  Even CBC labelled her as:

NEWS | Jun 16, 2015 | 7:22
Woman's rights advocate....

No tinfoil hat required.  Advocate = Agenda.

 

[MARS]

And I have seen her labelled as an "activist" equally as often as "educator" or "advocate"

I question the vetting process which led the decision makers to choose her over other candidates.  I have to assume there are plenty of sexual assualt/harassment SMEs out there to chose from.

 

[George Wallace]

And I have seen her labelled as an "activist" equally as often as "educator" or "advocate"

I question the vetting process which led the decision makers to choose her over other candidates.  I have to assume there are plenty of sexual assualt/harassment SMEs out there to chose from.

Good question.

Interesting that no video was shot at this 'event', as usually at any 'significant' event someone is recording it for future use.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Never ascribe to malice what simple incompetence will explain.

 

[captloadie]

In her interview she highlights the fact she has a miltary background. Maybe someone only read her CV, and didn't do a cursory web search to see what she was all about.

Or maybe the staff who organized the lecture was like minded and also was trying to push an agenda. Who knows.

 

[jollyjacktar]

And I have seen her labelled as an "activist" equally as often as "educator" or "advocate"

I question the vetting process which led the decision makers to choose her over other candidates.  I have to assume there are plenty of sexual assualt/harassment SMEs out there to chose from.

Well, you can rest assured she won't have a return engagement any time soon.