CJCS responds to Rep. Gaetz

[Brett327]

I remember your comments many years ago regarding spouses and married service members. So the Navy must be bias against those that are married because of your logic. Or have your views about women suddenly changed? Or is it systemically misogynistic based on Brett?

Please specify. Are you talking about BAH? Now, I do not avoid women, Frank, but I do deny them my essence.

 

[jtmedli]

I think the system favors individuals who have spouses that can geographically relocate every 3 years into different types of duties. That result is often men.

That is a true statement backed by data.

True. I would agree with you 100% on this. I think the reasons behind it, however, are cultural and genetic much more than sexism or some underlying deviance. It's extremely difficult, and in some ways unfair to men in the same profession, to accommodate pregnancy in a way that doesn't adversely affect a woman's career. Especially when that pregnancy affects her primary job in the form of an upchit/downchit. Culturally, there are also more stay at home moms than Dads and it's also culturally expectant for men to provide for children. The outcomes of family court systems overwhelmingly reinforce those cultural 'norms.' Ive also spoken to many accomplished female officers who voiced a desire to "be a mom" and leave the Navy to do it so I think there's something to be said for that. I'm unaware of and study or data that compares men to women WRT those desires so I'm hesitant to make any assertions that could be perceived as sexist or whatever.

 

[HAL Pilot]

Now, I do not avoid women, Frank, but I do deny them my essence.

Lucky women.

 

[wink]

Is there a difference between that and a Pretextual stop?

I used to work for the DEA/HSI prior to moving to Humanitarian Work.

Some of the fed leos I worked with loved to try to get people with pretextual stops and quite a bit of cases ended up getting thrown out by judges because it came out after that the stop was planned for a search.

People trying to board boats under safety at sea searches knowing it was a drug boat and then finding the drugs. But didnt have enough evidence to obtain a warrant to search.

No, my bad. Auto correct inserted the wrong word, You are correct, they are pretextual. I certainly don't know the facts of the cases you are aware of or can I second guess a Federal judge, but I am not sure that the problem was the stop was "planned" for a search. If the stop is legit, and probable cause is there for the following search, it shouldn't matter whether they "planned" a search. That is exactly why it is a pretextual stop. The very definition. And that is what Whren v USA was about. If the stop is legal and PC is obtained for a further search, it is legal and the evidence is allowed. Of course a lot of other problems can occur with a search beginning with the fact the stop may not have been legit.

Don't know about boat search under the guise of safety inspections. Never worked Lake Patrol.

 

[Mirage]

Sure.

I think the military needs a diverse workforce.

Without women or minorities the DOD will struggle in security cooperation missions and OAIs across COCOMS.

Do I think major command should be given to a minority of female simply because of gender or race? Of course not. When you’re in charge of people’s lives that isn’t the time for it.

Do I think that promotions needs to ensure that they’re is diversity when promoting? Absolutely. See point one.

The US Supreme Court upheld affirmative action in Grutter v Bollinger and as long as race is not the only issue considered it doesn’t violate the 14th amendment.

so I am unsure how there is a war on white males or anything like that within the Navy. Diversity should be taken into consideration but not the only consideration and that’s what the navy does

So, to make sure I understand your viewpoints:

-Women are discriminated against in the Navy because of sexism, but you know and agree with the fact that they're favored for promotion/good billets (ie, that men are discriminated against).

-You grew up poor, and you think you had to out work me to get to where you are, despite me growing up equally poor, in bad schools, etc., despite the fact that you know there's affirmative action, minority-only scholarship programs, etc that make it easier for poor minority kids to get into and pay for college than poor white kids

-You complain that some LT, who knows there's affirmative action, said you were a diversity hire (and you have every right to be mad at that bullshit), but you think it's great that the Navy ACTUALLY has systemically racist policies against white people

I never said there's a war on white males in the Navy. But there is accepted policy that discriminates against us.

And yes, affirmative action is currently the law of the land. The Supreme Court also upheld segregation, until they didn't. That didn't make it right the first time. Racism is racism. If you don't want policies to discriminate against you, then how in the world can you advocate policies that discriminate against others? Poor white kids who work hard to pull themselves out of poverty deserve the same chance to do so as anyone else. It's not their fault that other white jackasses were racist previously, or even currently. Do you really think affirmative action stops a bunch of rich kids from going to good schools?

 

[nodropinufaka]

So, to make sure I understand your viewpoints:

-Women are discriminated against in the Navy because of sexism, but you know and agree with the fact that they're favored for promotion/good billets (ie, that men are discriminated against).

-You grew up poor, and you think you had to out work me to get to where you are, despite me growing up equally poor, in bad schools, etc., despite the fact that you know there's affirmative action, minority-only scholarship programs, etc that make it easier for poor minority kids to get into and pay for college than poor white kids

-You complain that some LT, who knows there's affirmative action, said you were a diversity hire (and you have every right to be mad at that bullshit), but you think it's great that the Navy ACTUALLY has systemically racist policies against white people

I never said there's a war on white males in the Navy. But there is accepted policy that discriminates against us.

And yes, affirmative action is currently the law of the land. The Supreme Court also upheld segregation, until they didn't. That didn't make it right the first time. Racism is racism. If you don't want policies to discriminate against you, then how in the world can you advocate policies that discriminate against others? Poor white kids who work hard to pull themselves out of poverty deserve the same chance to do so as anyone else. It's not their fault that other white jackasses were racist previously, or even currently. Do you really think affirmative action stops a bunch of rich kids from going to good schools?

I mean you’re kind of taking a lot of liberties with that.

But you seem upset that as a white male you perceive you’re getting a bad deal?

I’m not sure how you took away all that in my statements.

How do you plan to do security cooperation OAIs and BPC missions without females?

How do you plan to implement a ICS/JCS with state without females?

They are needed. Why do you think otherwise?

 

[nodropinufaka]

No, my bad. Auto correct inserted the wrong word, You are correct, they are pretextual. I certainly don't know the facts of the cases you are aware of or can I second guess a Federal judge, but I am not sure that the problem was the stop was "planned" for a search. If the stop is legit, and probable cause is there for the following search, it shouldn't matter whether they "planned" a search. That is exactly why it is a pretextual stop. The very definition. And that is what Whren v USA was about. If the stop is legal and PC is obtained for a further search, it is legal and the evidence is allowed. Of course a lot of other problems can occur with a search beginning with the fact the stop may not have been legit.

Don't know about boat search under the guise of safety inspections. Never worked Lake Patrol.

Essentially we knew a bunch of boats to be smuggling drugs. No judge in their right mind was going to give us warrants on the evidence we had.

So they decided to stop these boats saying they needed to do a safety at sea search because they’re US Flagged and the coast guard can do that. Once onboard they found drugs.

Got thrown immediately for the safety at sea search being used to find the drugs.

 

[Mirage]

I mean you’re kind of taking a lot of liberties with that.

But you seem upset that as a white male you perceive you’re getting a bad deal?

I don't like racism or discrimination. Nobody likes to feel discriminated against for their skin or genitals. Rubs salt in the wound when there's constant double standards that are endorsed by "the system". I'm a fan of equality, but that's gone out of style, and I don't understand why so many people are on board with that. It seems "white guilt" has convinced many white folks that it's ok for them to be discriminated against, and many minorities are on board with it for the same reasons that ignorant and/or racist white people were on board with discriminating against minorities for so long.

 

[nodropinufaka]

I don't like racism or discrimination. Nobody likes to feel discriminated against for their skin or genitals. Rubs salt in the wound when there's constant double standards that are endorsed by "the system". I'm a fan of equality, but that's gone out of style, and I don't understand why so many people are on board with that. It seems "white guilt" has convinced many white folks that it's ok for them to be discriminated against, and many minorities are on board with it for the same reasons that ignorant and/or racist white people were on board with discriminating against minorities for so long.

I don’t get it. No one is taking away anything from you?

Affirmative action isn’t exactly racism.

 

[Mirage]

I don’t get it. No one is taking away anything from you?

Affirmative action isn’t exactly racism.

Here's a test you can always do:

If the law/policy/whatever would be racist or otherwise wrong if done to your race/gender, then it's wrong if it's done to another race/gender.

Would anyone be taking away anything from you if you knew that your race or gender counted as a point against you on any selection board? What if you aren't selected... would you always wonder if it's because of your race or gender? What if we knew that selection boards would hold it against you because you are insert your race here? Or college admissions programs?

Would you feel like it was racism then?

 

[nodropinufaka]

Here's a test you can always do:

If the law/policy/whatever would be racist or otherwise wrong if done to your race/gender, then it's wrong if it's done to another race/gender.

Would anyone be taking away anything from you if you knew that your race or gender counted as a point against you on any selection board? What if you aren't selected... would you always wonder if it's because of your race or gender? What if we knew that selection boards would hold it against you because you are insert your race here? Or college admissions programs?

Would you feel like it was racism then?

My personal thought is if you end up to the point where you’re going to lose your spot due to race or gender your record was probably not competitive to begin with.

As long as the selection is taking a whole concept approach I don’t see an issue.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Sure.

I think the military needs a diverse workforce.

Without women or minorities the DOD will struggle in security cooperation missions and OAIs across COCOMS.

Do I think major command should be given to a minority of female simply because of gender or race? Of course not. When you’re in charge of people’s lives that isn’t the time for it.

Do I think that promotions needs to ensure that they’re is diversity when promoting? Absolutely. See point one.

The US Supreme Court upheld affirmative action in Grutter v Bollinger and as long as race is not the only issue considered it doesn’t violate the 14th amendment.

so I am unsure how there is a war on white males or anything like that within the Navy. Diversity should be taken into consideration but not the only consideration and that’s what the navy does

Why would we struggle without women or minorities?

A month or so ago you were arguing that China was gaining influence in the Pacific because of climate change. Somehow they were doing that despite being the largest emitter in the world and growing without any firm plans to slow down. And in spite of being incredibly non-diverse. How can that be?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

Please specify. Are you talking about BAH? Now, I do not avoid women, Frank, but I do deny them my essence.

Perhaps the most off putting post in the history of AW

 

[Mirage]

My personal thought is if you end up to the point where you’re going to lose your spot due to race or gender your record was probably not competitive to begin with.

As long as the selection is taking a whole concept approach I don’t see an issue.

Unbelievable.

So if a college admissions board was able to count a point against you because of your skin color, you wouldn't see any problem with that? Or is it just ok because it's against white people and you aren't white?

 

[jtmedli]

My personal thought is if you end up to the point where you’re going to lose your spot due to race or gender your record was probably not competitive to begin with.

As long as the selection is taking a whole concept approach I don’t see an issue.

Or, you know, just go with standing policy that race and gender be sanitized from records and then not be butthurt when there's "too many of X."

Like he said, Equality is now no longer good enough. We need Equity now which is a fun little play on words that sounds like equality but actually implies intentional discrimination.