# Article: Unwanted sexualized behaviour at RMC



## shawn5o

I don't know if this article belongs here but it's a stunner


*Most military cadets say they've seen unwanted sexualized behaviour at college*
_Vast majority of students surveyed say they've avoided intervening in such incidents_

Murray Brewster • CBC News • Posted: Oct 08, 2020 12:55 PM ET | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

Nearly seven in 10 Canadian military college students have witnessed or experienced "unwanted sexualized behaviours" in the past year, according to new research from Statistics Canada.

The StatsCan report, released today, also found that the vast majority of those students — 94 per cent of men and 91 per cent of women — reported choosing not to intervene in such incidents in the past because they didn't think the incidents were serious enough, or because they felt uncomfortable.

The military's campaign to stamp out sexual misconduct, Operation Honour, depends on members speaking up and reporting incidents when they see them.

The report conflicts with the results of a review conducted by an internal military panel almost four years ago. That review concluded that there was no culture of bullying and sexual misconduct at the Royal Military College of Canada, in Kingston, Ont.

More at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/statistics-canada-military-cadets-sexual-assault-1.5755369


and from Global


*Canadian military colleges have a sexual misconduct problem, new data suggests*

By Amanda Connolly Global News
Posted October 8, 2020 10:44 am
 Updated October 8, 2020 11:05 am

Canadian military colleges appear to have a sexual misconduct problem, according to new data released Thursday by Statistics Canada.

The report found that 68 per cent of students at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ont., and the Royal Military College Saint-Jean in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que., have either seen or been the victim of unwanted sexual behaviour during their time at the schools.

More at https://globalnews.ca/news/7385815/sexual-misconduct-canadian-military-colleges-statscan/

 :facepalm:


----------



## Retired AF Guy

Here is the link to the actual report:

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2020001/article/00011-eng.htm


----------



## daftandbarmy

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Here is the link to the actual report:
> 
> https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2020001/article/00011-eng.htm



Whoa... I guess that whole OP HONOUR thing was pitched as an ‘elective’.


----------



## SupersonicMax

More than six times as many women (28%) as men (4.4%) were sexually assaulted during their time as CMC students.

More than a QUARTER of the women were sexually ASSAULTED!!!  That is beyond unacceptable!!


----------



## Eye In The Sky

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> More than six times as many women (28%) as men (4.4%) were sexually assaulted during their time as CMC students.
> 
> More than a QUARTER of the women were sexually ASSAULTED!!!  That is beyond unacceptable!!



It is not also unacceptable for the 4.4% of men who were sexually assaulted?  

Also of note...More than three-quarters of students did not take action when witnessing discrimination

These students are (1) CAF members and, supposedly, (2) are the 'future leaders' of the CAF?   :facepalm:

Not going to do your duty IAW QR & O, Vol 1, Ch 4, Art 4.02?   Then they should face administrative and/or disciplinary measures.  Full stop - no excuses of "but they're not trained yet" or any of that  :blah:.  They are Officers.  Stop calling them 'students'.

They are also subj to the CSD - *start frickin' using it*.  They are subj to RMs, ARs, other adminstrative tools.  *Start frickin' using them*.

If their conduct deficiency warrants, release them under the correct release item (1X, 2X, 5D/F).  If they've incurred Oblig service, recover the taxpayers monies.


----------



## MilEME09

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> It is not also unacceptable for the 4.4% of men who were sexually assaulted?
> 
> Also of note...More than three-quarters of students did not take action when witnessing discrimination
> 
> These students are (1) CAF members and, supposedly, (2) are the 'future leaders' of the CAF?   :facepalm:
> 
> Not going to do your duty IAW QR & O, Vol 1, Ch 4, Art 4.02?   Then they should face administrative and/or disciplinary measures.  Full stop - no excuses of "but they're not trained yet" or any of that  :blah:.  They are Officers.  Stop calling them 'students'.
> 
> They are also subj to the CSD - *start frickin' using it*.  They are subj to RMs, ARs, other adminstrative tools.  *Start frickin' using them*.



Agreed, Operation Honour is suppose to be a zero tolerance towards sexual misconduct. The fact that we haven't heard of charges and mass expulsion from RMC indicates to me a command culture that the members there do not believe complaints will be investigated seriously. Which is an even bigger problem, if someone in the CoC is turning a blind eye to this, they need to be removed, yesterday.


----------



## daftandbarmy

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> More than six times as many women (28%) as men (4.4%) were sexually assaulted during their time as CMC students.
> 
> More than a QUARTER of the women were sexually ASSAULTED!!!  That is beyond unacceptable!!



.... or a good argument for extinguishing the institution - because we clearly can’t keep kids safe - and buy our post-secondary education from any one of a number of Great Canadian universities who can?


----------



## Eye In The Sky

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> because we clearly can’t keep kids safe



Is 'kids' an accurate definition/term?  I don't think so; they've all finished high school as a minimum, all of them can legally drive a car, most of them can likely vote.  And, they've all been assessed as 'suitable for service with a Commission'. 

Young adults...I'd buy that.


----------



## AKa

While I wholeheartedly agree that these stats are unacceptable, as a female CMC graduate, I'm not surprised.  I certainly frequently addressed wandering hands with monotonous regularity and varying degrees of force.

The military colleges are a strange world where professional, academic, and social spheres not only overlap, they almost merge.  You have a very young population (some as young as 16) all contained in relatively close (coed) quarters.  As the higher reasoning centers of the brain are not fully developed until we are in our early 20s, this is a formula for trouble.  In my day, there was little "adult" oversight, especially after hours and stuff happened, particularly when alcohol was involved.  I don't know if the squadron commanders and the Snr NCOs are more present today, but I hope so.

I would be curious to see what the stats are at civilian universities in the mixed gender dorms.

I don't know what the answer is other than to keep hammering home the messages.  But I don't expect that we will ever completely eliminate the problem, either at the CMCs or the CAF at large.  Stupidity is infinite.

Cheers,

AK


----------



## Eye In The Sky

AK said:
			
		

> I don't know what the answer is other than to keep hammering home the messages.



I do.



			
				Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> They are Officers.  Stop calling them 'students'.
> 
> They are also subj to the CSD - *start frickin' using it*.  They are subj to RMs, ARs, other adminstrative tools.  *Start frickin' using them*.
> 
> If their conduct deficiency warrants, release them under the correct release item (1X, 2X, 5D/F).  If they've incurred Oblig service, recover the taxpayers monies.



You'd be surprised how many (some of them) young Officers at RMC, etc who will contain themselves once a few of their numbers are dealt with appropriately.  Adult choices come with adult consequences.


----------



## Jarnhamar

There seems to be a discrepancy as to what exactly _zero tolerance_ means in the CAF. 

We've seen it with sexual misconduct, I'm guessing we'll see the same with our "zero tolerance" for hateful conduct.

I think some of us are under the impression "zero tolerance" and "no place in the military for offenders!" means offenders will be released. In practice it's less of the case.


----------



## rmc_wannabe

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I do.
> 
> You'd be surprised how many (some of them) young Officers at RMC, etc who will contain themselves once a few of their numbers are dealt with appropriately.  Adult choices come with adult consequences.



I wholeheartedly agree. Currently working at another CAF school here in Kingston with similar age ranges of candidates. Assurance that issues will be dealt with severity was a weak deterrent.  When the iron hand of the Administrative/Disciplinary measures came down hard on those who crossed the line... compliance was almost immediate.


----------



## AKa

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> I do.
> 
> You'd be surprised how many (some of them) young Officers at RMC, etc who will contain themselves once a few of their numbers are dealt with appropriately.  Adult choices come with adult consequences.



I agree completely.  This is the message that has to be "hammered" home and hopefully the numbers will improve.  But I cynically believe that the combination of alcohol, immaturity, and hormones will always produce some negative outcomes regardless of how well we indoctrinate.  Effective measures to address such stupidity will thin the herd.

Cheers,

AK


----------



## QV

AK said:
			
		

> I agree completely.  This is the message that has to be "hammered" home and hopefully the numbers will improve.  But I cynically believe that the combination of alcohol, immaturity, and hormones will always produce some negative outcomes regardless of how well we indoctrinate.  Effective measures to address such stupidity will thin the herd.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> AK



Removing the alcohol from that equation would be one of the most effective mitigation measures.


----------



## Good2Golf

QV said:
			
		

> Removing the alcohol from that equation would be one of the most effective mitigation measures.



‘Mitigation’ being the key word in your proposal. 

Should not the solution be based on core conduct, for which elimination of alcohol would not be viewed as a panacea To better behaviour?


----------



## Lumber

QV said:
			
		

> Removing the alcohol from that equation would be one of the most effective mitigation measures.



How? Alcohol is forbidden in the dorms, yet one time I had a full size keg in my room for a couple days, hiding under a blanket looking like an end table.

I suppose you could ban cadets from drinking AT ALL, and expel everyone who did it anyway in town at a bar or Queen's party, but then you'd have only 6 cadets left.


----------



## QV

You can either take active measures to curb and discourage alcohol use and abuse, or not.  If you think the latter is the better approach then don't complain when immature brains do immature acts whilst under the influence.


----------



## Remius

I’m torn on the Alcohol issue.

I worked for an organisation that forbade alcohol in the shacks.  But they could go out and drink.  Which they would and they would try to cram as much booze into themselves before closing.  Plenty of awol and drunk troops in the morning.  

They loosened the rules and let them behave like adults in the shacks.  Less awol to be sure and less issues as the it was confined to an area that could be better controlled. 

Young people, alcohol and hormones will always be an issue.   Especially when they live restricted lives on other things and get to let looses every so often.  When they let loose they go to hard because they do t know when they’ll be able to do it again or they know it will be some time before they can. 

I think severe consequences is a more effective way of dealing with it. Banning alcohol will just create more issues and rules to break which they will.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

QV said:
			
		

> Removing the alcohol from that equation would be one of the most effective mitigation measures.



If they aren't legal age to drink, they shouldn't be and should face the music if they do.  The "old enough to serve, old enough to BE served" days have faded away...

If they are old enough to drink and they fuck up, they should be held accountable if they do.  There's even a DAOD for that.  No need to reinvent the wheel, just roll the one that exits.  

Don't treat them like children to prevent an incident "under your watch";  you're just passing the buck to the next unit they go to.

Tell them the expected standard.  Enforce it.  Punish those accordingly who fuck up.

It's possible it is just that simple.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

The core issue here is a DISCIPLINE one;  not to confuse discipline with punishment/disciplinary actions which can result from a lack of discipline.

On my Senior Leaders Course (now called ILP) back in '02, we discussed the (then) 4 main types of discipline in the military:

1.  Imposed discipline - example the indoc period at CFLRS.  THere is a timeline, and a goal, which is to get people to the #2 type.

2.  Group discipline - when members of the group start conforming to the way the group acts.  This is great *if* Comd sets a clear expected standard of conduct, and informs members of what will happen if they do not obey/follow the standard.  Key to this is for it to be monitored and guided by Leadership (NCOs, WOs, and Officers).  

3.  Habits and rituals - the next type (level), where people start doing things because "that's the way they are done".  Them simply become part of the routine.  Example, clearing a weapon when you pick it up, polishing your ankle boots before Remembrance Day.

and the final goal, the END STATE...

4. * Self-discipline *- doing the right thing, the right way, at the right time, even if no one is watching.  You're going on a Remembrance Day parade 'back home', you'll be the only person there in uniform...you polish your boots and sort your DEUs out to the same standard as if you were parading with your unit and going to be inspected prior.

Sounds to me like something major is failing at places like RMC in types 1 and 2.  If you don't understand, or have a 'discipline goal' identified in your training and training establishment, well...

Maybe there is too much mentorship and leadership being conducted by "senior OCdts" or candidates...bring the leadership 'off the hanger floor' could be part of the solution?


----------



## Remius

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Sounds to me like something major is failing at places like RMC in types 1 and 2.  If you don't understand, or have a 'discipline goal' identified in your training and training establishment, well...
> 
> Maybe there is too much mentorship and leadership being conducted by "senior OCdts" or candidates...bring the leadership 'off the hanger floor' could be part of the solution?



When I was recruiting over 10 years ago we would be accompanied by an RMC rep.  And a cadet or two as well.  It boggled my mind what the RMC rep was spewing.  Talking about the College Pillars and that the “military” pillar was not that important as cadets would get that in their trades training and after college.  He told us that they were trying to make the college more attractive to applicants by portraying as a normal university. 

I could also get I to the varsity sports BS the college was recruiting for and the lowering of academic standards to get them in. 

Not sure if it has changed since them but RMC recruiting and selection I believe has been taken out of CFRG I think. 

They had priority issues back then.  Sounds like it hasn’t changed.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

What/who would the RCM *Rep* be?

I've been watching the CAF become the "civilitary" for a while now and think no good has, or will, come from it.  Thankfully, the worse it gets the closer I am to CRA...


----------



## Halifax Tar

Lumber said:
			
		

> How? Alcohol is forbidden in the dorms, yet one time I had a full size keg in my room for a couple days, hiding under a blanket looking like an end table.
> 
> I suppose you could ban cadets from drinking AT ALL, and expel everyone who did it anyway in town at a bar or Queen's party, *but then you'd have only 6 cadets left*.



I fail to see the problem... We over produce officers as it is.


----------



## Remius

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> What/who would the RCM *Rep* be?
> 
> I've been watching the CAF become the "civilitary" for a while now and think no good has, or will, come from it.  Thankfully, the worse it gets the closer I am to CRA...



I forget his title. If I remember he was some sort of academic guidance advisor of some sort.   Was a civy.  We actually filed a complaint about what he was saying.  Our CO passed it on but I doubt it was taken seriously.


----------



## MJP

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> The core issue here is a DISCIPLINE one;  not to confuse discipline with punishment/disciplinary actions which can result from a lack of discipline.
> 
> On my Senior Leaders Course (now called ILP) back in '02, we discussed the (then) 4 main types of discipline in the military:
> 
> 1.  Imposed discipline - example the indoc period at CFLRS.  THere is a timeline, and a goal, which is to get people to the #2 type.
> 
> 2.  Group discipline - when members of the group start conforming to the way the group acts.  This is great *if* Comd sets a clear expected standard of conduct, and informs members of what will happen if they do not obey/follow the standard.  Key to this is for it to be monitored and guided by Leadership (NCOs, WOs, and Officers).
> 
> 3.  Habits and rituals - the next type (level), where people start doing things because "that's the way they are done".  Them simply become part of the routine.  Example, clearing a weapon when you pick it up, polishing your ankle boots before Remembrance Day.
> 
> and the final goal, the END STATE...
> 
> 4. * Self-discipline *- doing the right thing, the right way, at the right time, even if no one is watching.  You're going on a Remembrance Day parade 'back home', you'll be the only person there in uniform...you polish your boots and sort your DEUs out to the same standard as if you were parading with your unit and going to be inspected prior.
> 
> Sounds to me like something major is failing at places like RMC in types 1 and 2.  If you don't understand, or have a 'discipline goal' identified in your training and training establishment, well...
> 
> Maybe there is too much mentorship and leadership being conducted by "senior OCdts" or candidates...bring the leadership 'off the hanger floor' could be part of the solution?



I would argue the root issue is culture, one where people feel they can act in manner contrary to our ethos. Discipline both individual and group is only one piece of the pie and should not be confused with culture. Using discipline as forcing mechanism only gets you compliance, not the change that is need to stamp out such issues and have a inclusive culture were people are treated properly.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

MJP said:
			
		

> I would argue the root issue is culture, one where people feel they can act in manner contrary to our ethos. Discipline both individual and group is only one piece of the pie and should not be confused with culture. Using discipline as forcing mechanism only gets you compliance, not the change that is need to stamp out such issues and have a inclusive culture were people are treated properly.



Good points; that culture needs to be part of the institutional 'standard' that people see, follow and emulate as time goes on (Group/habits & rituals) but compliance is the 'minimum standard' and even that seems...thin...at that institution by what I read in the above report links.

If I were a WO at RMC, I'd be telling the CWO and Comd "I'll take alittle of that effin compliance to start...."


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Remius said:
			
		

> I forget his title. If I remember he was some sort of academic guidance advisor of some sort.   Was a civy.  We actually filed a complaint about what he was saying.  Our CO passed it on but I doubt it was taken seriously.



I think I've highlighted the problem;  RMC should not present itself as 'any other university'.  Again...'civilitary' issues in the CAF...


----------



## MJP

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> If I were a WO at RMC, I'd be telling the CWO and Comd "I'll take alittle of that effin compliance to start...."



There is always room for "compliance" actions!


----------



## SupersonicMax

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> It is not also unacceptable for the 4.4% of men who were sexually assaulted?



I am pretty sure this isn’t what I said. Just like supporting BLM doesn’t mean you don’t support other lives...


----------



## Eye In The Sky

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I am pretty sure this isn’t what I said.



Your post did seem to emphasize what you wrote in the second sentence...



> Just like supporting BLM doesn’t mean you don’t support other lives...



Not touching that one... 8)


----------



## SupersonicMax

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Your post did seem to emphasize what you wrote in the second sentence...



Given that 11% of females and 4% of males at civilian universities reported being victims of sexual assault, it is fair to emphasize the one that is more than twice as prevalent as in civilian institutions.


----------



## Eaglelord17

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Given that 11% of females and 4% of males at civilian universities reported being victims of sexual assault, it is fair to emphasize the one that is more than twice as prevalent as in civilian institutions.



Another possibility is that maybe women in the military might be more willing to report it, especially post OP Honour, vs. a civilian university where there likely isn't seen much benefit to reporting and more social ramifications. Not saying that is or isn't the case, just that it could possibly be a factor.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

To throw some cold water on the howling mob, if i were asked these same questions I would be one of the 4.4%.  Unwanted sexual touching, too close, etc.....doesn't mean for a second I didn't want to get my monkey punched that night, just that I was hoping it was the cute red head and not the blond.  But the blond put her hand on my leg to guage how it was going to go....yes or no question in court?....yes I was touched unwantingly that night.  But do I feel like I was "sexually assaulted"?  Never in my life...now if it persisted  different story of course.

And for the no alcohol people, do you really think its better when they're in a place of command that everyone discovers they can't drink without being really really stupid?  I introduced controlled alcohol to my Daughters fairly early so that they didn't have to find out it can be a bad thing after its too late.


----------



## Lumber

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I fail to see the problem... We over produce officers as it is.



/s?


----------



## dimsum

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> I fail to see the problem... We over produce officers as it is.



The RCAF may disagree...


----------



## Remius

Dimsum said:
			
		

> The RCAF may disagree...



We overproduce the wrong kinds of officer?


----------



## dapaterson

Dimsum said:
			
		

> The RCAF may disagree...



The RCAF is responsible for Pilot and ACSO production.  If their training system can't keep up with one of the lowest attrition rates in NATO, then may I suggest that they need to engage in a brief flurry of introspection followed by action to fix the road to wings?

(The question of how many aircrew are in non-flying positions is another awkward conversation the RCAF would probably rather avoid, too...)


----------



## Navy_Pete

For context on the article, I don't think the gender distribution at RMC or CMR is comparable to a normal university. Based on a study I found with a quick google search, male/female ratio is something in the range of 70/30 to 80/20.

https://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc316/p807310_A1b.pdf

Not really surprised if it's a sausage fest that behaviour is worse, as it's easier to have a bro culture when you outnumber women 4 to 1. At a typical university where the majority of students are female, they are more of outnumbered little groups (but obviously bad behaviour still occurs).

From my own personal experience when I was a Training officer, the RMC grads were usually pretty obvious as they typically were lagging behind in basic life skills compared to ROTP or DEOs. Also once folks are past OFP it's usually difficult to find any real difference performance wise. Not really sure what the stats are for promotion rate etc, but not really sure what advantage, if any, the CAF has for maintaining the program. Stuff like this doesn't help, and the really weird separate court martial system they run is a bit of a mess.

We don't need new rules or processes; just enforce the existing ones. If we are going to have a CAF university, they should be better behaved then civvy equivalents. But we can't treat them like children; they are adults that signed up to the code of conduct, so just apply the consequences if they mess up.  This isn't rocket surgery or advanced leadership, it should be literally the bare minimum standard.


----------



## BeyondTheNow

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> For context on the article, I don't think the gender distribution at RMC or CMR is comparable to a normal university. Based on a study I found with a quick google search, male/female ratio is something in the range of 70/30 to 80/20.
> 
> https://cradpdf.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/PDFS/unc316/p807310_A1b.pdf
> 
> Not really surprised if it's a sausage fest that behaviour is worse, as it's easier to have a bro culture when you outnumber women 4 to 1. At a typical university where the majority of students are female, they are more of outnumbered little groups (but obviously bad behaviour still occurs).
> 
> From my own personal experience when I was a Training officer, the RMC grads were usually pretty obvious as they typically were lagging behind in basic life skills compared to ROTP or DEOs. Also once folks are past OFP it's usually difficult to find any real difference performance wise. Not really sure what the stats are for promotion rate etc, but not really sure what advantage, if any, the CAF has for maintaining the program. Stuff like this doesn't help, and the really weird separate court martial system they run is a bit of a mess.
> 
> We don't need new rules or processes; just enforce the existing ones. If we are going to have a CAF university, they should be better behaved then civvy equivalents. But we can't treat them like children; they are adults that signed up to the code of conduct, so just apply the consequences if they mess up.  This isn't rocket surgery or advanced leadership, it should be literally the bare minimum standard.



Bingo. And that mentality is magnified even more simply by way of ‘Hey look, I’m a RMC/CMR grad/student.’ Some of the egos are in desperate need of being taken down a notch. (They’d come over to CFLRS for whatever reason and couldn’t get through a sentence without inserting where they were from during regular conversation, as well as during pick-up lines. : )


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> Another possibility is that maybe women in the military might be more willing to report it, especially post OP Honour, vs. a civilian university where there likely isn't seen much benefit to reporting and more social ramifications. Not saying that is or isn't the case, just that it could possibly be a factor.



The opposite was apparently an issue in a previous sexual assault scandal at RMC in 2015:

Sex assault scandals rock prestigious Royal Military College in Kingston

Col. Michel Drapeau said the fact that the complaint was made via a third party speaks to a culture in which young cadets feel unable to report harassment and abuse

Drapeau, a law professor who is representing a young woman at the centre of a sexual assault court martial, is now raising the alarm about the very culture of the school. Amid reports of a second investigation into an alleged sexual assault, Drapeau said he has told school officials that nearly a dozen women have complained to him anonymously about sexual harassment on campus.

Among recent events at RMC:

• The ongoing court martial of Officer Cadet Alex Whitehead, who has been accused of raping one cadet and walking naked into a shower stall of another.

Julie Lalonde: “Someone looked me up and down and said: ‘I might listen to you if you weren’t a woman.'”

• A new allegation revealed this week, in which a “third party” complained about an alleged sexual assault on May 13, a day before the school’s convocation ceremony.

• An Officer Cadet, J.C. Scott, was issued a $2,000 fine and severe reprimand for assault, after allegations of sexual assault.

• A workshop coordinator said she was belittled and subject to sexual harassment while she was trying to conduct a seminar on the topic last October.

Earlier this month, a former Supreme Court of Canada judge warned the problems aren’t confined to RMC. Marie Deschamps wrote a damning report warning of a sexualized culture in the Canadian Forces where harassment is commonplace and victims are unwilling to complain for fear of being ostracized, demoted or transferred.

Drapeau said he’s heard from about 10 women at the college who have relayed stories of sexual harassment and minor assault.

“They’re indoctrinated right from the get-go to be respectful and obedient to anybody who has any authority over them which, in some ways, inculcates them (to the idea) that you shall not complain. You shall not speak,” he said.

Drapeau said he sent the school’s top brass a letter about the complaints back in 2013.

The most recent alleged assault took place on May 13 and was reported to Military Police by a “third party” on the same date, said Capt. Joanna Labonte in a statement.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/sex-assault-scandals-rock-prestigious-royal-military-college-in-kingston


----------



## FJAG

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> ...
> Col. (ret'd) Michel Drapeau said ...



Fixed that for the National Post. It's really not that hard to be accurate.

The problem for RMC is that it starts with exactly the same raw material as every civilian university - hormone charged and brain dead high school students who, for the most part, are experiencing their first freedom from parental supervision. To cap it off there is a hierarchical structure within the cadet corps which gives individuals whose leadership skills are still underdeveloped authority over more junior cadets who themselves feel unempowered.

There are already programs in place within DND and within RMC that should be addressing this problem, however, based on this and other reports, these seem to still be failing the mark.

I disagree with Drapeau about there being a system of inculcation that "you shall not complain". While there is clearly a program to build self confidence and self reliance which generally teaches you to handle problems yourself, there is at the same time a clear system that allows and encourages complaints of this nature. IMHO, the problem isn't so much that the system discourages complaints but that most young people aren't prone to going to "higher ups" to solve these types problems but generally deal with them through discussion with their peers. They generally decide amongst themselves what has crossed the line and generally, for low level issues, tend to "suck it up and carry on". It's a tough problem to solve.

I must admit, I was not surprised with the figure of 68% "had witnessed or personally experienced what was described as unwanted sexualized behaviour" - it's entirely too prevalent in our society - but I'm absolutely dumbfounded by the report that "28 per cent of female respondents said they had been sexually assaulted during their time at the military colleges — nearly twice the rate among students at post-secondary institutions in the rest of the country" and that "Fifteen per cent of female officer cadets reported having been sexually assaulted in the past 12 months, compared to 11 per cent in the general population." I haven't read the actual report, however, if those statistics are accurately reported, heads, many heads, should roll at RMC.

:clubinhand:


----------



## Haggis

AK said:
			
		

> But I cynically believe that the combination of alcohol, immaturity, and hormones will always produce some negative outcomes regardless of how well we indoctrinate.



In my experience, alcohol prohibition in such institutions simply leads to more discipline issues related to misuse (smuggling) and abuse as some young adults are incapable of drinking in moderation after a period of forced abstinence.


----------



## Haggis

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> There seems to be a discrepancy as to what exactly _zero tolerance_ means in the CAF.
> 
> We've seen it with sexual misconduct, I'm guessing we'll see the same with our "zero tolerance" for hateful conduct.
> 
> I think some of us are under the impression "zero tolerance" and "no place in the military for offenders!" means offenders will be released. In practice it's less of the case.



Despite what's defined in the respective DAODs, it all comes down to the personal perception of what constitutes inappropriate (and hateful) conduct and the willingness of members to address it.  

For some to say that Operation HONOUR is a failure is a stretch.  The program was born out of the CAF's inability/unwillingness to enforce basic moral conduct in the context of sexualized behaviour.  Because the offenders were mostly male and mostly in some form of leadership/supervisory position, often this conduct was overlooked or buried "for the good of the unit" or to protect the career of a "streamer".  There were and still are female sexual predators but they are far fewer in numbers and most military males are still unwilling to report a sexual assault by a female. The bottom line is that Operation HONOUR has had the effect of publicizing the issue and giving command guidance to those who are perpetrators, victims or witnesses on how to proceed.  Is it perfect?  No.  But it's a far cry from where we were 10 years ago.

During my Operation HONOUR cascade training, I became quite upset when two majors could not see that one of the scenarios put forward for discussion was clearly describing not only inappropriate sexualized conduct but a criminal offence.  One admitted that he had seen and tolerated such behaviour before and didn't want to admit that he could have done better in the circumstances. Overcoming those attitudes is harder than just putting out a new DAOD.


----------



## Kilted

If the CAF really wants to get rid of this problem as much as possible, they could just segregate RMC and open a second campus for women in a completely different location. They would never do it, because for one it would be saying that RMC cadets could never be trusted and many would feel that it was a step backwards.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

I don't think that COA is the right solution;  you're just passing the buck on the conduct issue to the next CO/Cmdt and their units.

The real solution is to supervise the young Officers, educate and mold them and punished those with the tools we already have to correct their actions/attitudes and, if necessary show them the door.

Even the USMC is moving away this segregated approach.  https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/your-marine-corps/2019/12/30/platoon-level-gender-integration-now-required-at-marine-boot-camp-as-lawmakers-still-question-recruit-safety/


----------



## CBH99

I think everybody on the forum is in general agreement about the key basics - if you are the type of person to sexually assault another, the military isn't the place for you.

Charge them appropriately.  Hold them accountable.  And then a 5F discharge on their way out the door!  





However -- and bear with me, as it's 7am and this may not translate the way I'm intending it...

When we say 'Unwanted Sexual Behaviour at RMC' - what ALL is included in that?


What I mean is...

-  Are sexual jokes (verbal) being included in that?
-  Is immature horsing around being included in that?  (For example, calling your buddy a fag while you joke back and forth?)

-  Is it unwanted sexual touching?
-  Is it including rapes?


The reason I ask is not to make light of the situation.  However, I personally find 'unwanted sexual behaviour' to be somewhat broad, and can include a lot of things depending on how one views it.



_I'll use a personal experience I had as an example, to try to put in perspective what I mean._

One day while at work, a buddy of mine and I were walking from one point of the armoury to another.  We were just chatting and joking about, as it was a pretty quiet training night & we were off to grab something.

During our chat, he shook his head at something I said, and mumbled "You're such a fag..."   And we both had a little chuckle.  Didn't think anything of it.

One of the ladies from the OR overheard his comment, and caused a ton of drama for him with the CoC.  I had to explain to my Sgt, 2Lt, and a few higher up's that "No, he wasn't sexually harassing me.  No, I'm not gay and he wasn't attacking me personally.  Etc etc."


So when I say 'unwanted sexual behaviour' can be fairly broad, that is what I mean.



I don't have any knowledge of RMC once so ever, and took off the uniform a while ago now.  So I don't intend to dismiss the seriousness of these problems, if they are in fact serious.

I'm just wondering if we are focusing on sexual assaults, unwanted sexual touching, rape, or some other form of grossly disgusting behaviour.  Or if we are also including some darker humour which, from my experience, was somewhat normal amongst the troops.  (Although the darker humour we experienced wasn't sexual in nature.)


If anything, I think the female members in our unit probably felt extremely protected.  If anybody said or did anything towards them, they had quite a few loyal colleagues there to back them up.  


 :2c:


----------



## SupersonicMax

CBH99,

That kind of language is also damaging and needs to be eradicated from our vocabulary, just like other words were.  If that kind of language is accepted in an organization, are we really a place that is welcoming for the people that language is targeting?


----------



## MJP

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> CBH99,
> 
> That kind of language is also damaging and needs to be eradicated from our vocabulary, just like other words were.  If that kind of language is accepted in an organization, are we really a place that is welcoming for the people that language is targeting?



Exactly, it doesn't matter what someone meant in using that sort of language nor does it matter what the intended recipient even thought but the fact they were said in the first place.  Some may be ok with ribald language, others may not but often they don't stand up and say so they just vote with their feet. If they stay then it likely makes them feel like not part of the team nor valued.


----------



## Haggis

CBH99 said:
			
		

> During our chat, he shook his head at something I said, and mumbled "You're such a fag..."   And we both had a little chuckle.  Didn't think anything of it.



Clearly, your buddy has no idea of the meaning of "fag" in a North American context (in the UK it's a cigarette).  Nonetheless it was inappropriate.

Personal perceptions can mean a lot.  Two examples:

First:  I was at my gun club recently to take a friend for a range day (she is a member of these forums, too).  We are both semi-avid cyclists.  She pulled up to park I saw she had a new bicycle rack on her car, one which we had chatted about previously.  The first words out of my mouth were.... "nice rack!".  Another visitor to the club overheard this and complained to the club president.

Second: Before I retired, I met up with a friend at the Legion following Remembrance Day.  She is a CAF vet and RCMP constable with several deployments and I had never seen her in person in her red serge. When we saw each other the first words out of my mouth were.... "nice rack!".  She replied "You, too"!  Standing nearby was her Inspector, who was momentarily aghast and then caught on.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Haggis said:
			
		

> Clearly, your buddy has no idea of the meaning of "fag" in a North American context (in the UK it's a cigarette).  Nonetheless it was inappropriate.
> 
> Personal perceptions can mean a lot.  Two examples:
> 
> First:  I was at my gun club recently to take a friend for a range day (she is a member of these forums, too).  We are both semi-avid cyclists.  She pulled up to park I saw she had a new bicycle rack on her car, one which we had chatted about previously.  The first words out of my mouth were.... "nice rack!".  Another visitor to the club overheard this and complained to the club president.
> 
> Second: Before I retired, I met up with a friend at the Legion following Remembrance Day.  She is a CAF vet and RCMP constable with several deployments and I had never seen her in person in her red serge. When we saw each other the first words out of my mouth were.... "nice rack!".  She replied "You, too"!  Standing nearby was her Inspector, who was momentarily aghast and then caught on.



 :rofl:

This is known as 'good clean fun' among savvy adults. My greatest fear is that this will be extinguished by this recent 'PC nuke and pave' equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition...

“One of the greatest tragedies in life is to lose your own sense of self and accept the version of you that is expected by everyone else.”
― K.L. Toth


----------



## CBH99

I agree with everything said above, from all of the posters.  100% of it.

And I couldn't agree more that the word 'fag' should be removed from our language, as it isn't used in remotely the same context as a British guy asking for a cigarette.



The thrust of my question was, however -- does anybody with recent experience at RMC have any knowledge of what kind of 'unwanted sexual behaviour' is being described in the article?

I'm not condoning it once so ever.  Just curious to see the situation in context.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Some of what you're asking about is, I think, detailed in the report, link below.  Scroll down to the Highlights section and start from there.

Examples

 - _The most common types of behaviours that were witnessed or experienced by CMC students were sexual jokes, inappropriate discussions about sex life and inappropriate sexual comments about appearance or body._

 - _Unwanted sexualized behaviours include acts other than sexual assault, and can range from sexual jokes to inappropriate discussions of a person’s sex life_.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2020001/article/00011-eng.htm#a18


----------



## PuckChaser

The actual data is a lot more telling than a bunch of headlines. 



> The prevalence of sexual assault among those in the general postsecondary student population was not statistically different for women (11%) or men (4%) when compared to students in CMCs (Burczycka 2020b). When looking at a similar age range to those in the CMC, these findings are also consistent with what was observed among Regular Force members of the CAF: 15% of women and 3% of men under the age of 24 were sexually assaulted in the 12 months prior to the SSMCAF (Cotter 2019), as well as the general population, based on results from the Survey of Safety in Public and Private Spaces (SSPPS) (Cotter and Savage 2019).



CMC should be better than the national average, but being at the national average for post-secondary is not, in itself, a crisis. It means there's a culture problem where the students are still acting like normal university kids than potential military officers and leaders. Again, CMC's are not significantly different from general post-secondary data on intervening:



> Even though many Canadian military college students who witnessed or experienced unwanted sexualized behaviours in the postsecondary environment viewed them as offensive, the majority of students did not intervene when they witnessed these behaviours taking place. According to the SISPSP, 94% of men and 91% of women CMC students did not take action in at least one instance of witnessing unwanted sexualized behaviours in the CMC postsecondary setting (Table 2). Similar findings were also observed among students in the general student population (92% and 91%, respectively) (Burczycka 2020b).



This is where we need to make the culture change, at the bystander level. Fancy briefs, DLN courses and safety briefs before the weekend aren't going to change culture. You need the 3rd and 4th years buying in to the program and being what right looks like, with stiffer penalties for those individuals acting inappropriately or failing to act. When the 1st and 2nd years see the upper class taking it seriously, then they will buy in and reinforce that new culture over their 4 year stay. It's the right kind of vicious circle, where we slowly get better and better every year.


----------



## stoker dave

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> where we slowly get better and better every year.



I agree there may be a problem and, as stated, it needs to be addressed.  My time at RMC goes back to when the lady cadets were first introduced.  That was not necessarily smooth.  My concern is that while we should "slowly get better and better every year" I am a bit aghast that almost 40 years later this is *still* an issue.


----------



## Jarnhamar

[quote author=CBH99]
And I couldn't agree more that the word 'fag' should be removed from our language, as it isn't used in remotely the same context as a British guy asking for a cigarette.
[/quote]

It seems like low hanging fruit sometimes too. People are quick to admonish that kind of language, which is great. 

People are a little less aggressive when calling out the mwo or maj who turn into Mr Hyde anytime alcohol hits their lips. Inappropriate comments, inappropriate behavior, grabby hands, sexual propositions.

Sometimes it's reported. Sometimes:
"They're _good guys_ when they're not drinking"
"They're going through a bad break up"
"They don't mean it"
"They're close to retiring, not worth ruining their career".





Some people are hard wired to behave this way and no amount of classes or training or workshops or threats will change that. These people have had careers of people making excuses for them and covering for them. The best thing we can do to prevent careers of this behavior is to take the hit to our strength/numbers and punt these men and women when they exhibit coming into the CAF with this behavior or anytime it comes up.


----------



## daftandbarmy

CBH99 said:
			
		

> I agree with everything said above, from all of the posters.  100% of it.
> 
> And I couldn't agree more that the word 'fag' should be removed from our language, as it isn't used in remotely the same context as a British guy asking for a cigarette.



Fun fact: the term 'fag' is cockney rhyming slang:

Oily Rag = Fag = Cigarette

Not related to 'Ginger Beer' at all... 

https://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Words04/usage/slang_cockney.html


----------



## dapaterson

stoker dave said:
			
		

> I agree there may be a problem and, as stated, it needs to be addressed.  My time at RMC goes back to when the lady cadets were first introduced.  That was not necessarily smooth.  My concern is that while we should "slowly get better and better every year" I am a bit aghast that almost 40 years later this is *still* an issue.


I had an instructor who was decidedly proud of being LCWB and not FCWA, who wore his sweat Buster's button beneath the lapel of his DEUs.

He was one of many factors that made me question the utility and professionalism of the MilCol system.


----------



## dimsum

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I had an instructor who was decidedly proud of being LCWB and not FCWA, who wore his sweat Buster's button beneath the lapel of his DEUs.



What's LCWB, FCWA, and a Buster's button   ???


----------



## dapaterson

Elements of the harassment inflicted on the first females at RMC as inflicted by the other students, with tacit approval of much of the staff.

Edit: See https://everitas.rmcclub.ca/looking-back-through-the-1981-review%E2%80%A6/


----------



## daftandbarmy

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Elements of the harassment inflicted on the first females at RMC as inflicted by the other students, with tacit approval of much of the staff.



For those who aren't aware of this particular horror show: SWEAT = 'Stupid Women Eating All the Time'. Apparently, they were so proud of this that even made a special pin...

RRMC Memories

Captain Laura Kissmann (Barr) joined RMC in 1984 and then transferred to RRMC in 1986 where she completed a bachelor’s degree in Physics and Physical Oceanography. She spent eleven years in the regular forces in the North Bay Fighter Group / Canadian NORAD Region HQ; Air Command HQ in Winnipeg; Wing Operations in Cold Lake, AB; and the CF Aerospace Warfare Centre in Ottawa. She remains a full-time air force reservist and lives in Carleton Place, ON.

Laura:  I actually am not certain of the date but I think I was the fourth or fifth class of girls.  And people often ask me because I graduated in the first class of girls with Roads, how hard was it at Royal Roads or RMC and I’ve always felt girls were more integrated here at Roads.  And part of that was because you had Royal Rodents who had come in and stayed in fourth year at RMC and they weren’t ready for girls so they’re our seniors and certainly I had a few experiences myself where they had that bitterness and lack of acceptance.  And my year they’d made a pin – I don’t know if you ever heard of this – it was a pin and it was a picture of Miss Piggy and it was the “NO” symbol – and she had the pillbox on – she was dressed like a cadet and I don’t know what it said on it but the symbol at the time was girls at military college were considered SWEAT– “stupid women eating all the time”.

Laurie:  Sweat busters.

Laura:  It was a sweat buster pin, that’s right. That’s right it was the year of the Ghostbusters. I was telling you about the stress – they went around the college and woke us up in the middle of the night and showed us this pin and yeah… you know that wasn’t fun.  In first year I was trying my hardest and you felt like you were keeping up with the guys and being accepted and then – just to have that little reminder that you weren’t really as well accepted there… was hard.

https://everitas.rmcclub.ca/rrmc-memories-9/


----------



## SeaKingTacco

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> For those who aren't aware of this particular horror show: SWEAT = 'Stupid Women Eating All the Time'. Apparently, they were so proud of this that even made a special pin...
> 
> RRMC Memories
> 
> Captain Laura Kissmann (Barr) joined RMC in 1984 and then transferred to RRMC in 1986 where she completed a bachelor’s degree in Physics and Physical Oceanography. She spent eleven years in the regular forces in the North Bay Fighter Group / Canadian NORAD Region HQ; Air Command HQ in Winnipeg; Wing Operations in Cold Lake, AB; and the CF Aerospace Warfare Centre in Ottawa. She remains a full-time air force reservist and lives in Carleton Place, ON.
> 
> Laura:  I actually am not certain of the date but I think I was the fourth or fifth class of girls.  And people often ask me because I graduated in the first class of girls with Roads, how hard was it at Royal Roads or RMC and I’ve always felt girls were more integrated here at Roads.  And part of that was because you had Royal Rodents who had come in and stayed in fourth year at RMC and they weren’t ready for girls so they’re our seniors and certainly I had a few experiences myself where they had that bitterness and lack of acceptance.  And my year they’d made a pin – I don’t know if you ever heard of this – it was a pin and it was a picture of Miss Piggy and it was the “NO” symbol – and she had the pillbox on – she was dressed like a cadet and I don’t know what it said on it but the symbol at the time was girls at military college were considered SWEAT– “stupid women eating all the time”.
> 
> Laurie:  Sweat busters.
> 
> Laura:  It was a sweat buster pin, that’s right. That’s right it was the year of the Ghostbusters. I was telling you about the stress – they went around the college and woke us up in the middle of the night and showed us this pin and yeah… you know that wasn’t fun.  In first year I was trying my hardest and you felt like you were keeping up with the guys and being accepted and then – just to have that little reminder that you weren’t really as well accepted there… was hard.
> 
> https://everitas.rmcclub.ca/rrmc-memories-9/



I knew both Laura and Laurie (Laura more so, as we were in the same Flight). I was in an RRMC class year that included women, so to me it was always a natural part of life at RRMC. I thought the “SWEAT” and “LCWB” thing was, at very best, a very poor and not very funny joke and at worst, incredibly stupid. It was a good example of how unofficial culture, if not ruthlessly stamped out, can have very negative effects on a unit. I saw the effects of unofficial culture actually lead to the disbandment of the CAR about a decade later.

The women that were in my year, I generally had a great deal of respect for. I knew they had it harder than I did (And I was barely hacking how hard it was), even just from the perspective having to keep up with a physical fitness regime That was designed for males and exceedingly difficult to boot, not to mention fitting in to a culture that was 9/10ths british boys school by design and academically demanding on top of everything else. I hope that I was not one of the “jerks”, but looking back over the decades, I cannot be sure. All that I can say now is that if I made things harder on my female colleagues than they needed to be, I am truly sorry.


----------



## daftandbarmy

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I knew both Laura and Laurie (Laura more so, as we were in the same Flight). I was in an RRMC class year that included women, so to me it was always a natural part of life at RRMC. I thought the “SWEAT” and “LCWB” thing was, at very best, a very poor and not very funny joke and at worst, incredibly stupid. It was a good example of how unofficial culture, if not ruthlessly stamped out, can have very negative effects on a unit. I saw the effects of unofficial culture actually lead to the disbandment of the CAR about a decade later.
> 
> The women that were in my year, I generally had a great deal of respect for. I knew they had it harder than I did (And I was barely hacking how hard it was), even just from the perspective having to keep up with a physical fitness regime That was designed for males and exceedingly difficult to boot, not to mention fitting in to a culture that was 9/10ths british boys school by design and academically demanding on top of everything else. I hope that I was not one of the “jerks”, but looking back over the decades, I cannot be sure. All that I can say now is that if I made things harder on my female colleagues than they needed to be, I am truly sorry.



It's not just a RRMC/RMC thing.... they had similar issues in the UK, at about the same time, with integrating women into Sandhurst. And, as described below, the vast majority of male soldiers (like yourself) were not a$$holes:

"While many men in the military are both good people and professional at work, toxic pockets of poor behaviour still cause difficulties. The influence of the Old Boys’ Network — of Eton, of Masonic handshakes — still persists, and in my view explains why the Army is struggling to recruit and retain women in 2020.

Back in 1983, it was made fairly clear to us that many in the Army did not really want us. Among the senior officers at Sandhurst there was a hardcore group of what I call ‘Red-Lighters’, who wanted to stop the progress of women altogether.

We were denied attendance at firepower demonstrations, for example, as ‘it would be all about tanks and armour and women would probably be bored’. We were told never to talk about ‘women’s problems’ and often heard men tell derogatory jokes."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8558139/Senior-female-Army-officer-reveals-women-march-Stripper-theme-tune.html


----------



## Eye In The Sky

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> CMC should be better than the national average, but being at the national average for post-secondary is not, in itself, a crisis. It means there's a culture problem where the students are still acting like normal university kids than potential military officers and leaders.



If they're at RMC, they are already Officers.  Maybe not 'trained' or 'OFP' but...they are still Officers.  I, for one, expect more from young Officers than I do from BMQ Recruits, the same I as expect more from Snr NCOs than I do Jnr NCOs.  

We need to rid ourselves of this image/concept that they are 'merely students', because they are not.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> If they're at RMC, they are already Officers.  Maybe not 'trained' or 'OFP' but...they are still Officers.  I, for one, expect more from young Officers than I do from BMQ Recruits, the same I as expect more from Snr NCOs than I do Jnr NCOs.
> 
> We need to rid ourselves of this image/concept that they are 'merely students', because they are not.



Or maybe they are, in which case they should be going to a civi school....


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Or maybe they are, in which case they should be going to a civi school....



Look- they are both students and young, inexperienced officers in training. They are going to get “human relations 101” wrong from time to time. Expect that, regardless of how many lectures, seminars, programs or supervision we throw at RMC cadets.

If we do not, as an institution, have the stomach to correct what is correctable (not all crimes are equally heinous) and get rid of those who cannot get with the program, then we might as well pack it in.


----------



## PuckChaser

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> If they're at RMC, they are already Officers.  Maybe not 'trained' or 'OFP' but...they are still Officers.  I, for one, expect more from young Officers than I do from BMQ Recruits, the same I as expect more from Snr NCOs than I do Jnr NCOs.
> 
> We need to rid ourselves of this image/concept that they are 'merely students', because they are not.



Are they? Or are they Officer Cadets, without a commissioning scroll? Save for a few UTPNCMs, they do not become commissioned officers until they march back through that arch in at the end of Year 4. We absolutely should expect more out of them, but we also need to train them at "what right looks like". The only military training they've had in Year 1 is BMOQ Mod 1. Seemingly if there's enough of a critical mass conducting themselves contrary to the values of the Institution, then there's got to be a lot of blame placed on the BMOQ Mod 1 TP and the CMC culture/supervision.


----------



## FJAG

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Are they? Or are they Officer Cadets, without a commissioning scroll? Save for a few UTPNCMs, they do not become commissioned officers until they march back through that arch in at the end of Year 4. We absolutely should expect more out of them, but we also need to train them at "what right looks like". The only military training they've had in Year 1 is BMOQ Mod 1. Seemingly if there's enough of a critical mass conducting themselves contrary to the values of the Institution, then there's got to be a lot of blame placed on the BMOQ Mod 1 TP and the CMC culture/supervision.



Officer Cadets are "officers" pursuant to the definition of "officer" in s 2(1) of the National Defence Act which reads:



> officer means
> 
> (a) a person who holds Her Majesty’s commission in the Canadian Forces,
> 
> (b) a person who holds the rank of officer cadet in the Canadian Forces, and
> 
> (c) any person who pursuant to law is attached or seconded as an officer to the Canadian Forces; (officier)



 :cheers:


----------



## Jarnhamar

[quote author=PuckChaser]We absolutely should expect more out of them, but we also need to train them at "what right looks like". 
[/quote]

I know where you're coming from but also don't think 1st year of university is where they should be learning what right looks like. They've arguably had 16+ years input already. Me and you can tell them what right looks like in the CAF but I suspect they're either on board already, or think it doesn't apply to them.


----------



## blacktriangle

I seem to remember there being condoms available in the RMC barracks because they were worried about OCdts knocking each other up, and that they couldn't be trusted (or bothered) to grab rubbers at the MIR or on the economy like everyone else. Also anecdotal, but from what a few OCdts told me, there was no shortage of sex being had (including relationships between those whom a power imbalance existed, maybe someone who understands RMC better could elaborate what that meant exactly)

Just another reason why the military shouldn't focus on running a degree granting university...let the kids go be kids at a regular school, and then enter RMC when they are ready to focus on becoming leaders.


----------



## PuckChaser

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I know where you're coming from but also don't think 1st year of university is where they should be learning what right looks like. They've arguably had 16+ years input already. Me and you can tell them what right looks like in the CAF but I suspect they're either on board already, or think it doesn't apply to them.



We can't simultaneously say we need to be better than the general population but then toss up our hands and throw someone away as a lost cause at 19 years old. Firing everyone that does something wrong doesn't change the statistics, the incidents still happen. What we need to do is train a lot of the behaviours out of people. There's clearly big red lines that can never be crossed, but we're expecting people to know what's acceptable in a workplace without them every having been in a workplace before. Its also a unique situation that doesn't happen in a lot of workplaces where you're living in close quarters with coed coworkers 24 hours a day. 

It starts with changing the culture at CMC (the students making their own pins to harass people made me shudder, screamed toxic culture) so that folks feel comfortable being that bystander to stop it at the lowest level. Peer disdain for your actions are a huge driver of change in personal behaviours for most people.


----------



## daftandbarmy

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> We can't simultaneously say we need to be better than the general population but then toss up our hands and throw someone away as a lost cause at 19 years old. Firing everyone that does something wrong doesn't change the statistics, the incidents still happen. What we need to do is train a lot of the behaviours out of people. There's clearly big red lines that can never be crossed, but we're expecting people to know what's acceptable in a workplace without them every having been in a workplace before. Its also a unique situation that doesn't happen in a lot of workplaces where you're living in close quarters with coed coworkers 24 hours a day.
> 
> It starts with changing the culture at CMC (the students making their own pins to harass people made me shudder, screamed toxic culture) so that folks feel comfortable being that bystander to stop it at the lowest level. Peer disdain for your actions are a huge driver of change in personal behaviours for most people.



I am continually amazed at how much better younger people these days are at being respectful to those of different genders etc than I was when I was their age.

These people either didn't get the memo or we have inculcated them, unwittingly, with values from the 70s....


----------



## Jarnhamar

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> We can't simultaneously say we need to be better than the general population but then toss up our hands and throw someone away as a lost cause at 19 years old. Firing everyone that does something wrong doesn't change the statistics, the incidents still happen. What we need to do is train a lot of the behaviours out of people. There's clearly big red lines that can never be crossed, but we're expecting people to know what's acceptable in a workplace without them every having been in a workplace before. Its also a unique situation that doesn't happen in a lot of workplaces where you're living in close quarters with coed coworkers 24 hours a day.
> 
> It starts with changing the culture at CMC (the students making their own pins to harass people made me shudder, screamed toxic culture) so that folks feel comfortable being that bystander to stop it at the lowest level. Peer disdain for your actions are a huge driver of change in personal behaviours for most people.



That's a fair point about people knowing what's acceptable and what's not in the work place when they've never worked.

My take is someone who goes through elementary school then high-school should be exposed to enough social interaction, rules and conversations that they should have a good baseline of right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable going into the workplace even at 18 or 19. I don't have a lot of sympathy or time for a 19 year old that "doesn't know any better" when it comes to this stuff. 

Statistically if we get stricter and do just start firing people for violating the rules then we're bound to start pushing them out of the system faster.

44% the court martials from this month to Feb 2021 include sexual assault as a charge. Seems like a lot.


----------



## FJAG

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> ...
> 44% the court martials from this month to Feb 2021 include sexual assault as a charge. Seems like a lot.



In the JAG's Annual Report for 2018-2019, sexual assault constituted 5.30% of the charges disposed of by courts martial, up from 4.41% the previous year.

See here.

 :cheers:


----------



## dapaterson

FJAG said:
			
		

> In the JAG's Annual Report for 2018-2019, sexual assault constituted 5.30% of the charges disposed of by courts martial, up from 4.41% the previous year.
> 
> See here.
> 
> :cheers:



So, JAG has reformed and started obeying the law and producing the report as mandated by statue?

Was the JAG who refused to do so ever reported to his provincial bar?


----------



## FJAG

dapaterson said:
			
		

> So, JAG has reformed and started obeying the law and producing the report as mandated by statue?
> 
> Was the JAG who refused to do so ever reported to his provincial bar?



 :rofl:


----------



## Kilted

Are they going to release an approved list of terms to refer to medals or do away with medals altogether?


----------



## MJP

Kilted said:
			
		

> Are they going to release an approved list of terms to refer to medals or do away with medals altogether?



Holy fucking red herring.....


----------



## blacktriangle

Kilted said:
			
		

> Are they going to release an approved list of terms to refer to medals or do away with medals altogether?



Didn't they do away with them already? I still seem to be missing one I'm entitled to, so I thought they just gave up?  ;D


----------



## Kilted

reveng said:
			
		

> Didn't they do away with them already? I still seem to be missing one I'm entitled to, so I thought they just gave up?  ;D



Well maybe... 

https://www.mint.ca/store/coins/2020-recognition-medal--magnet-prod3670019

Apparently this is what they decided to do with covid.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Are they? Or are they Officer Cadets, without a commissioning scroll?



Just saw that FJAG already posted the QR & O, Vol 1 piece.  In essence, they are both.



> Save for a few UTPNCMs, they do not become commissioned officers until they march back through that arch in at the end of Year 4. We absolutely should expect more out of them, but we also need to train them at "what right looks like". The only military training they've had in Year 1 is BMOQ Mod 1. Seemingly if there's enough of a critical mass conducting themselves contrary to the values of the Institution, then there's got to be a lot of blame placed on the BMOQ Mod 1 TP and the CMC culture/supervision.



I completely agree with your piece in yellow.  That is what I've been advocating for;  educate on the standard expected, enforce the standard expected and hold those accountable who do not abide - including those who 'witness and do nothing'.  Depending on the severity of the conduct, corrective actions could be as mild as a stern talking to, as harsh as a release from the CAF...and anything in between.  

Are BMQ recruits going to get the same "forgiveness" at CFLRS for the same conduct?  I don't think so, I hope not.  The expected standard needs to be made clear and enforced from the get-go, for all.

RMC OCdts/NCdts, which the article is about, don't seem to fit the "the only military training they've had in Year 1 is BMOQ...".


----------



## Remius

I find it odd that RMC would have to reinforce or teach what is “right”.  Most of what the report seems to indicate is not acceptable in ANY environment.  

If anything the CAF and RMC need to have a higher standard.  Kids that act this way came to RMC with some sort of warped sense of right and wrong to begin with.  It’s easy to blame RMC and some of it may be an institutional issue perpetuated by bad leadership but a lot of it rests on what society provided RMC to begin with.

Maybe we should be a bit more rigorous in our officer selection process. 

We’re bringing in what society produces so I guess some de programming/programming is required. We certainly should not be enhancing their attitudes but at the end of the day the problem kids come there with a certain way they were raised.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Just saw that FJAG already posted the QR & O, Vol 1 piece.  In essence, they are both.
> 
> I completely agree with your piece in yellow.  That is what I've been advocating for;  educate on the standard expected, enforce the standard expected and hold those accountable who do not abide - including those who 'witness and do nothing'.  Depending on the severity of the conduct, corrective actions could be as mild as a stern talking to, as harsh as a release from the CAF...and anything in between.
> 
> Are BMQ recruits going to get the same "forgiveness" at CFLRS for the same conduct?  I don't think so, I hope not.  The expected standard needs to be made clear and enforced from the get-go, for all.
> 
> RMC OCdts/NCdts, which the article is about, don't seem to fit the "the only military training they've had in Year 1 is BMOQ...".  They are Officers (in training) and not a a civy U.   :2c:



As I recall, during my RESO courses, the Mil Coll chaps were VERY clear about how much of an Officer they already were, as compared to we militia riff raff  

I find it odd that Sandhurst can train a civvy for 9 months and send them direct to the battlefield as a Pl/Tp Comd, with very successful results, while we feel it's necessary to coddle them in the nest for four years.

I guess our kids must be more 'special' in some way


----------



## blacktriangle

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> As I recall, during my RESO courses, the Mil Coll chaps were VERY clear about how much of an Officer they already were, as compared to we militia riff raff
> 
> I find it odd that Sandhurst can train a civvy for 9 months and send them direct to the battlefield as a Pl/Tp Comd, with very successful results, while we feel it's necessary to coddle them in the nest for four years.
> 
> I guess our kids must be more 'special' in some way



Didn't RMC have some policy about not walking out in jeans? I always wondered if it was a form of mental conditioning to prepare them to step off without even the most basic of equipment.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> As I recall, during my RESO courses, the Mil Coll chaps were VERY clear about how much of an Officer they already were, as compared to we militia riff raff
> 
> I find it odd that Sandhurst can train a civvy for 9 months and send them direct to the battlefield as a Pl/Tp Comd, with very successful results, while we feel it's necessary to coddle them in the nest for four years.
> 
> I guess our kids must be more 'special' in some way



It's the "Degreed Officer Corps" requirement;  and not one I believe in, personally.  Well...that is the only difference I know at least.

There are definitely some "special" ones.   ;D


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> It's the "Degreed Officer Corps" requirement;  and not one I believe in, personally.  Well...that is the only difference I know at least.
> 
> There are definitely some "special" ones.   ;D



I was being unnecessarily unkind, of course 

We've explored the 'non-graduate' Officer route on here a fair bit before, I believe, and I think the current policy is definitely moving away from that option. The main issue, I think, is should we pay for a full ride in a separate, military run, educational institution that seems to have ongoing issues with the whole sexual assault thing....


----------



## Eye In The Sky

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I was being unnecessarily unkind, of course
> 
> We've explored the 'non-graduate' Officer route on here a fair bit before, I believe, and I think the current policy is definitely moving away from that option. The main issue, I think, is should we pay for a full ride in a separate, military run, educational institution that seems to have ongoing issues with the whole sexual assault thing....



Would the other option be better?  All OCdts/NCdts attend a civy U and are indoctrinated into THAT culture with fewer checks/balances?


----------



## daftandbarmy

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Would the other option be better?  All OCdts/NCdts attend a civy U and are indoctrinated into THAT culture with fewer checks/balances?



You've got my vote! You could even make them join reserve units during the school year to increase their military skills development, in addition to summer training at Gagetown, or wherever  :nod:


----------



## Navy_Pete

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Would the other option be better?  All OCdts/NCdts attend a civy U and are indoctrinated into THAT culture with fewer checks/balances?



It works pretty well with all the ROTP and DEO officers that join. Also teaches you how to do things like pay your own bills, manage your own schedule, and get by in an academic setting where they don't really care if you fail hard. It's almost like real life skills, and if you crash and burn it has costs the CAF a lot less.

But you also encounter a massive range of really different people with totally different opinions and viewpoints from all over the world at a pretty important period of personal development in your life. You only learn as much as you are open to, but it can be a good way to broaden your horizons a bit.

I'm not really sure what the downside for that COA is honestly, and if you're only argument to keep RMC is 'BUT TRADITION' it's a pretty crap one. If we actually collaborated more on the R&D side it would be different, but you can do the exact same thing with any university.


----------



## Scott

I wonder what the civvy universities think?

During and post(?) covid, there are several universities that are going be be hit hard financially unless they can fill dorm space. In the buisness of higher education, the timing is right frigging now to explore this idea. 

Several student body whatevers may implode, but they'll get used to it.

Loads of civvy universities in my end of the country with reserve units within a short drive. Hell, throw a weekly panel on for them.

And yes, Gagetown. Allllllll summer. Or Aldershot. They can howl like wolves when they want fun.


----------



## Lumber

Scott said:
			
		

> And yes, Gagetown. Allllllll summer. Or Aldershot. They can howl like wolves when they want fun.



You realize that the CAF is made up of more than just the Army right? You have heard of the RCAF and RCN, haven't you?


----------



## Scott

Lumber said:
			
		

> You realize that the CAF is made up of more than just the Army right? You have heard of the RCAF and RCN, haven't you?



Sure have. Seen some RCN and RCAF types in both places I mentioned, which, I guess is why I mentioned it.



			
				daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> You've got my vote! You could even make them join reserve units during the school year to increase their military skills development, in addition to summer training at Gagetown, or wherever  :nod:



Guess this is what I was having some _fun_ with.


----------



## blacktriangle

Lumber said:
			
		

> You realize that the CAF is made up of more than just the Army right? You have heard of the RCAF and RCN, haven't you?



Would having RegF NCdts integrated into NRDs near their respective universities be something worth pursuing?


----------



## jeffb

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> Would the other option be better?  All OCdts/NCdts attend a civy U and are indoctrinated into THAT culture with fewer checks/balances?



We don't send NCMs to "finishing school" and expect them to uphold high standards as well. Good luck bringing up at a summary trial that the Pte in question is only 19 and should be given a pass on this one. We should expect more from our young leaders. 

The vast majority of officers are DEO, ROTP (civy U) or UTPNCM who went to Civy U. If we are relying on our post-secondary institutions to instill basic human decency values, then these are not the right people to be leaders in the CAF.


----------



## dimsum

jeffb said:
			
		

> The vast majority of officers are DEO, ROTP (civy U) or UTPNCM who went to Civy U. If we are relying on our post-secondary institutions to instill basic human decency values, then these are not the right people to be leaders in the CAF.



Bingo.

For the RCN, having Reg F NCdts in NRDs is not a bad idea.  Not only do they get some "navy" stuff, they can also break down the "Reg vs Res F" mentality.  

RCAF is trickier since there aren't really any RCAF Res units outside of bases.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Dimsum said:
			
		

> RCAF is trickier since there aren't really any RCAF Res units outside of bases.



They could be encouraged to join local Flying Clubs so they can, if nothing else, learn some interesting language


----------



## Navy_Pete

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> They could be encouraged to join local Flying Clubs so they can, if nothing else, learn some interesting language



Or they could do work terms at places like the Canadian Warplane Heritage museum. May as well get acclimatized to yesterday's technology tomorrow from the outset!  ;D


----------



## jeffb

Having them work at an Army PRes unit may not be the worst thing anyways. I`m sure they can help relieve some of the admin burden and getting some experience with an Army unit would not be the worst thing a young, dashing RCAF officer could do.


----------



## blacktriangle

Does the RCAF have anyone dedicated to force protection these days, or is it still relying on MPs/WASF, Cbt Arms, allied security forces etc? Task some PRes Inf or MP to train for airfield defence, as well as perhaps Armd Recce (to provide mounted element/mobility tp) and have the RCAF task OCdts from nearby schools to support the effort, leadership development etc in a capacity that benefits their parent organization.

Edit: Apologies for pushing this further off topic. I will say that as someone who served for basically my entire youth (with no shortage of personal or professional failings along the way), it's pretty sad that this topic had to exist in the first place, has spanned 4 pages, and revolves around the conduct/culture of future leaders.


----------



## SupersonicMax

So, are we acknowledging there is a failure, at the institutional level, to train our future officers and instil our ethos?  How can you blame someone coming off the streets?


----------



## SeaKingTacco

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> So, are we acknowledging there is a failure, at the institutional level, to train our future officers and instil our ethos?  How can you blame someone coming off the streets?



You cannot blame someone off the street. Otherwise, what is the point of having a training system?


----------



## blacktriangle

Devil's advocate here - do applicants to a professional career, in 2020, really require a "training system" to explain to them that harassment & sexual misconduct are not acceptable in the workplace? Especially one where those around you are supposed to be your "sisters & brothers"?


----------



## Haggis

reveng said:
			
		

> Devil's advocate here - do applicants to a professional career, in 2020, really require a "training system" to explain to them that harassment & sexual misconduct are not acceptable in the workplace? Especially one where those around you are supposed to be your "sisters & brothers"?


You would think/hope not and pray that acceptable behaviour had been instilled in them through their parents and schooling.  Most are well behaved enough to survive in the workplace but there are outliers who need this training. However, in true Canadian fashion, we will smear everyone with the same tar rather than deal with the transgressing individuals.


----------



## daftandbarmy

reveng said:
			
		

> Devil's advocate here - do applicants to a professional career, in 2020, really require a "training system" to explain to them that harassment & sexual misconduct are not acceptable in the workplace? Especially one where those around you are supposed to be your "sisters & brothers"?



Oh h%ll yes. 

Unfortunately, most big organizations tend to come down with the hammer at the start of the 'compliance campaign' and then it trail off to the point where the campaign joins other previous, and now forgotten, compliance tune up efforts. This can even make things worse, paradoxically.

There are better ways to promote compliance.... here's a good article related to that subject:

Why Diversity Programs Fail

Why You Can’t Just Outlaw Bias

Executives favor a classic command-and-control approach to diversity because it boils expected behaviors down to dos and don’ts that are easy to understand and defend. Yet this approach also flies in the face of nearly everything we know about how to motivate people to make changes. Decades of social science research point to a simple truth: You won’t get managers on board by blaming and shaming them with rules and reeducation. Let’s look at how the most common top-down efforts typically go wrong.


https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail


----------



## MJP

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Oh h%ll yes.
> 
> There are better ways to promote compliance.... here's a good article related to that subject:
> 
> Why Diversity Programs Fail
> 
> Why You Can’t Just Outlaw Bias
> 
> Executives favor a classic command-and-control approach to diversity because it boils expected behaviors down to dos and don’ts that are easy to understand and defend. Yet this approach also flies in the face of nearly everything we know about how to motivate people to make changes. Decades of social science research point to a simple truth: You won’t get managers on board by blaming and shaming them with rules and reeducation. Let’s look at how the most common top-down efforts typically go wrong.
> 
> 
> https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail



One of my fav HBR articles on diversity


----------



## blacktriangle

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Oh h%ll yes.



Thanks, I will give that a read tonight. So if people do need to be "trained" not to act on their baser instincts, how does one accomplish this? Is it actually a training issue, or begging of more thorough recruiting & selection? Better onboarding? Lengthy probationary periods? I've read that probation isn't all that effective as a tool, and would be inclined to think my first two points might be more successful in the long term. 

Maybe there needs to be some kind of social assessment phase as part of joining the CAF? Rent some hotels or Airbnbs, make people sit through a bunch of dry but important briefings, and then give them early dismissal each day and turn them loose. You won't catch everyone, but it might red-flag those with serious drinking problems, penchants for snorting stimulants in bathroom stalls, and those who can't keep their limbs and organs to themselves. 

Maybe a recruit shows up and needs to be shown how to shave, fine. If you ask them to go get their razor, and they come back with a rock, perhaps you've enrolled the wrong candidate? If a candidate shows up thinking it's ok to harass, assault, or rape others, how do you expect to change that?


----------



## daftandbarmy

reveng said:
			
		

> Thanks, I will give that a read tonight. So if people do need to be "trained" not to act on their baser instincts, how does one accomplish this? Is it actually a training issue, or begging of more thorough recruiting & selection? Better onboarding? Lengthy probationary periods? I've read that probation isn't all that effective as a tool, and would be inclined to think my first two points might be more successful in the long term.
> 
> Maybe there needs to be some kind of social assessment phase as part of joining the CAF? Rent some hotels or Airbnbs, make people sit through a bunch of dry but important briefings, and then give them early dismissal each day and turn them loose. You won't catch everyone, but it might red-flag those with serious drinking problems, penchants for snorting stimulants in bathroom stalls, and those who can't keep their limbs and organs to themselves.
> 
> Maybe a recruit shows up and needs to be shown how to shave, fine. If you ask them to go get their razor, and they come back with a rock, perhaps you've enrolled the wrong candidate? If a candidate shows up thinking it's ok to harass, assault, or rape others, how do you expect to change that?



Good leadership from the front (carrot) and good discipline following up (stick). You know, the things that have always built the best armies throughout history.

That's all


----------



## Blackadder1916

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Good leadership from the front (carrot) and good discipline following up (stick). You know, the things that have always built the best armies throughout history.
> 
> That's all



But it is getting that front end leadership started in the right direction that is often the problem.

While not specifically related to this topic, I came across this while having a general look at things suggested by another thread related to misconduct and the military justice system.

https://decisia.jmc-cmj.forces.gc.ca/jmc-cmj/cm/en/item/485670/index.do


> Introduction
> 
> [1]               Major Bourque pleaded guilty to one charge contrary to section 129 of the National Defence Act (NDA). Having accepted and recorded his plea of guilty with respect to the charge, the Court must now determine and pass sentence on the charge which reads as follows:
> 
> “Section 129 NDA
> CONDUCT TO THE PREJUDICE OF GOOD ORDER AND DISCIPLINE
> 
> Particulars: In that he, on or about 11 April 2019, at Ottawa, Ontario, made comments that devalue females and female members of the Canadian Armed Forces.”
> 
> [2]               The Statement of Circumstances filed in court reads as follows:
> 
> “STATEMENT OF CIRCUMSTANCES
> 
> 1.                  At all times material to this case, Major Bourque was a member of the Regular Force of the Canadian Armed Forces. In April 2019, he was employed as the Senior Staff Officer Integration for the Planning and Policy Development team at what was then called the Canadian Armed Forces Strategic Response Team - Sexual Misconduct (DG CSRT – SM), now known as the Directorate Professional Military Conduct – Operation HONOUR (DPC – OpH).
> 
> 2.                  Major Bourque received this posting as the result of a competitive process. His duties and responsibilities included representing the organization to five organizations/teams: the Operation HONOUR Tracking and Analysis System, the Research Coordination and Performance Measurement team, the ICCM-led Defence Team Healthy Workspace Tiger Team, to the Training and Education Team, and to Public Affairs.
> 
> 3.                  On April 11, 2019, on a walk to a Tiger Team meeting, Major Bourque and CPO1 Wilcox ran into a female colleague who is a Major. Following their encounter, he made inappropriate comments about her sexuality. He further commented that her knowledge and leadership abilities were not to the standard of a field officer.
> 
> 4.                  From there, Major Bourque’s comments turned into a general critique about how the system is unfair and caters to the advancement of females in the CAF.
> 
> 5.                  Later on that day, in a car ride with CPO1 Wilcox and WO Foulds, Major Bourque continued with his diatribe about women in the military stating that they are pushed ahead into command positions at a faster rate because of their sex/gender.
> 
> 6.                  Major Bourque’s behaviour left WO Foulds and CPO1 Wilcox in shock and disbelief. They were offended that Major Bourque felt as if they had similar opinions to his. Furthermore, his inappropriate comments are not conducive to their work environment; both have stated that they have felt uncomfortable working with him since that day.
> 
> 7.         Following a Unit Disciplinary Investigation, it was determined by Col Raymond - Director of DPC-OpH - that Major Bourque’s inappropriate behaviour and comments had degraded trust and affected team cohesion within the unit. He was subsequently re-assigned to his current position at CJOC headquarters, subjected to remedial measures, and ultimately, charged with one count under s.129 of the National Defence Act for Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline.”



And to tangentially connect it to this thread, the subject of that court-martial is a graduate of RMC (Class of '05).


----------



## LittleBlackDevil

AK said:
			
		

> I would be curious to see what the stats are at civilian universities in the mixed gender dorms.



Given the nature of civilian "versions" of this setup, getting firm statistics would be much harder to guage, but it would seem that numbers are similar.

Just doing a quick google search, this Harvard study suggests a 12.4% incidence of sexual assault on campuses generally, not narrowed to co-ed dorms.

This suggests to me that this is not specifically a RMC thing, but a young adults without supervision living in mixed gender settings thing, and therefore a broader cultural thing.



			
				AK said:
			
		

> I don't know what the answer is other than to keep hammering home the messages.  But I don't expect that we will ever completely eliminate the problem, either at the CMCs or the CAF at large.  Stupidity is infinite.



The stupidity of humans is prodigious. 

That said, as a graduate of RMC, are you able to comment on whether there are "cultural" factors -- i.e. things specific to the culture at RMC that may contribute to attitudes that it's acceptable to touch others in a sexual manner without their consent?

I've never been to RMC myself. My army experience has been with my reserves unit and with army cadets. My observation is that different units will have their own culture cultivated over time. It depends on a mix of factors.

I wonder if certain "dehumanizing" aspects of basic training (being demeaned and belittled by instructors for example) have unintended consequences of allowing recruits to view others as less of a person? 

Again I don't know how things are at RMC but I trained with lots of RMC guys in Gagetown. I found the training in Gagetown at least with the staff I trained under, did very very little to build up camaraderie or esprit de corps. I only got that when I returned to my unit. I'll have to think about it some more to try to put my finger on what it was about the training but I just recall being very disconnected and in subtle competition with other officer candidates, going up to outright enmity between some people. I made no connections during Phase training but made very solid connections with people at my home unit.

If my experience isn't unique, this would seem to contribute to the sexual harassment stuff as cadets don't have that camaraderie or sense of team and looking out for each other.

Maybe there is something to this: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/09/18/no-more-drill-sergeant-shark-attack-army-moves-toward-kinder-basic-training-start.html


----------



## SupersonicMax

reveng said:
			
		

> Maybe a recruit shows up and needs to be shown how to shave, fine. If you ask them to go get their razor, and they come back with a rock, perhaps you've enrolled the wrong candidate? If a candidate shows up thinking it's ok to harass, assault, or rape others, how do you expect to change that?



The spectrums of sexual assault and sexual harassment is pretty broad.  Telling inappropriate jokes or even inappropriate touching (the “good game” slap on the bum for example) may be acceptable in some circles but it is not in our military yet they are part of the spectrums of sexual harassment and assault.

Hell, some of those things were tolerated in our own organization (the CAF) not too long ago.


----------



## Navy_Pete

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Oh h%ll yes.
> 
> Unfortunately, most big organizations tend to come down with the hammer at the start of the 'compliance campaign' and then it trail off to the point where the campaign joins other previous, and now forgotten, compliance tune up efforts. This can even make things worse, paradoxically.
> 
> There are better ways to promote compliance.... here's a good article related to that subject:
> 
> Why Diversity Programs Fail
> 
> Why You Can’t Just Outlaw Bias
> 
> Executives favor a classic command-and-control approach to diversity because it boils expected behaviors down to dos and don’ts that are easy to understand and defend. Yet this approach also flies in the face of nearly everything we know about how to motivate people to make changes. Decades of social science research point to a simple truth: You won’t get managers on board by blaming and shaming them with rules and reeducation. Let’s look at how the most common top-down efforts typically go wrong.
> 
> 
> https://hbr.org/2016/07/why-diversity-programs-fail



That's an excellent article, thanks. Makes a lot of sense, and also maybe points to another reason for ROTP vs RMC.  In my own case, my core class was roughly 50/50 male and female with people from 5 different continents, and a bunch of different religions. It made pot lucks really fun, and we also did stuff like celebrate other people's cultural events (because who isn't looking for a reason to throw a party).

With RMC the recruiting input is still pretty white and mostly male. My life would have been blander if I had gone there and my worldview smaller.

I think if we could do similar with some trade school (like the old super stoker program in St. Johns) it would do the same thing, but harder to do unless we straight up mirror a civilian trade, then do a bit of delta training. Not sure that works for any trade we have in the Navy, but might be an option for specific courses.


----------



## AKa

LittleBlackDevil said:
			
		

> Given the nature of civilian "versions" of this setup, getting firm statistics would be much harder to guage, but it would seem that numbers are similar.
> 
> 
> ...That said, as a graduate of RMC, are you able to comment on whether there are "cultural" factors -- i.e. things specific to the culture at RMC that may contribute to attitudes that it's acceptable to touch others in a sexual manner without their consent?
> 
> I've never been to RMC myself. My army experience has been with my reserves unit and with army cadets. My observation is that different units will have their own culture cultivated over time. It depends on a mix of factors.
> 
> I wonder if certain "dehumanizing" aspects of basic training (being demeaned and belittled by instructors for example) have unintended consequences of allowing recruits to view others as less of a person?
> 
> Again I don't know how things are at RMC but I trained with lots of RMC guys in Gagetown. I found the training in Gagetown at least with the staff I trained under, did very very little to build up camaraderie or esprit de corps. I only got that when I returned to my unit. I'll have to think about it some more to try to put my finger on what it was about the training but I just recall being very disconnected and in subtle competition with other officer candidates, going up to outright enmity between some people. I made no connections during Phase training but made very solid connections with people at my home unit.
> 
> If my experience isn't unique, this would seem to contribute to the sexual harassment stuff as cadets don't have that camaraderie or sense of team and looking out for each other.
> 
> Maybe there is something to this: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/09/18/no-more-drill-sergeant-shark-attack-army-moves-toward-kinder-basic-training-start.html



I can only comment on how it was in my day, which was indeed an eon ago.  My personal opinion is that sometimes the environment promoted an exaggerated sense of closeness/familiarity.  In many cases, with all the time spent together, some people thought they were better/closer friends than they were in reality and stopped seeing boundaries.  I've seen this on long courses too, but less intensely. 

I also would like to reiterate the wide range of behaviors that subject study references.  There is a world of difference between the high end and the lower end.  I myself have been known to make the odd off-colour remark or crass joke (but I am very cautious about the audience these days).  I feel that counting inappropriate jokes and sexual assault in the same category confuses the issue.  It gives those who wish to discount the stats a sense that it's not as significant, and it enflames those who don't add context.  

Just my  :2c:

AK


----------



## Eye In The Sky

reveng said:
			
		

> Maybe a recruit shows up and needs to be shown how to shave, fine. If you ask them to go get their razor, and they come back with a rock, perhaps you've enrolled the wrong candidate? If a candidate shows up thinking it's ok to harass, assault, or rape others, how do you expect to change that?



1.  At the start of trg (RMC, CFLRS, local Res unit...where ever).  Brief all on expected standard for conduct, and possible repercussions for not abiding.  *education, awareness, and understanding* 

2.  For mbr's who don't follow the policy and orders, use the applic level of administrative and disciplinary measures available.  Minor offences should be treated as such, as should major ones.  *corrective actions, counselling, and monitoring*

3.  For mbr's who don't continue to not follow policy and orders, escalation to more serious admin/discip measures including ARs/release action. *bringing out the Big Stick/removing mbr's who are unfit service*

For a place such as, say, RMC where there seems to be a 'Training Establishment Culture' issue, this needs to be done a way to maximize the deterrent factor.  I don't like the "make an example out of someone" idea, but...I'm all for making a ST 'mandatory' or something like that as well.  I was at CFLRS on staff in the 06/07 timeframe as the "TE culture" I witnessed there was...very concerning.  It happens, and it is actually a huge issue.  Recruits, who will become the CAFs NCOs and Warrant/Petty Officers down the road, being shaped by shitty role models...and the cycle continuous.  

Why might the approach above I wrote work?  It's worked for years, the tools are already there.  People in various "superior officer" positions just need to be committed to doing their job and fulfilling their function, especially earlier on in a new CAF mbr's trg when it is likely easier to spot 'problem children'.   They also need to police themselves, and their peers and be professional enough to act when required.

:2c:


----------



## Colin Parkinson

reveng said:
			
		

> Devil's advocate here - do applicants to a professional career, in 2020, really require a "training system" to explain to them that harassment & sexual misconduct are not acceptable in the workplace? Especially one where those around you are supposed to be your "sisters & brothers"?



The purpose of harassment and diversity training is to reduce the liability of the owners/senior management/politicians etc. This is way they want you to sign that you have taken the course. if you muck up and someone sues the company for harassment, their lawyers can say we ran these courses with X compliance the individual in question took the course and acknowledge it and therefore all the fault is on them. 
If the course reduces the unwanted behaviours that's just a beneficial side effect.


----------

