Clinton's Military Legacy: SEX

October 13, 2005

Why is it when people mention Clinton's name, sex comes to mind? Well, he is the President that put women into combat positions and now...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

they estimate that anywhere from a quarter to three-quarters of female soldiers are engaging in sex while on deployment.

Some female soldiers say that estimate is probably low.

"If you include all the girls who are having sex with girls, it’s much closer to every one of us,” said a female soldier in the 146th.

I must say from my military experience, I didn't know any of our female soldiers were having sex with each other, but all of them I knew were quite "lose".

Sex Runs Wild In Military

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

"We don't really have any other choice than to go to each other," said a male soldier in the 872nd Maintenance Company headquartered in Mosul.

"In past wars, they could go into town and there would be girls there or boys or whatever you want. Here, you can't really leave the base because you'll get killed."

October 13, 2005

Well, given that Bush has put a bunch of highly-sexed young people in a situation where they can't go out or they'll get killed, maybe it's just as well there are women there... otherwise they'd still be turning to each other...

I know, it's pretty much a nonsense argument, but IMO so is blaming this situation on Clinton.

October 13, 2005

ROFLOL

Sex and soldiers have been an issue since BC.

Read "Black Hawk Down" and find out about what our elite boys get up to.

As for "lose" - I doubt that they are any "loser" than the civils I associate every day with at work or at the hospital. In American society today, it is unusual for any 20's-50's person to be celebate regardless of their marital status.

/Bevin

October 13, 2005

When President Clinton decided to allow women into combat, this is exactly what we said was going to happen. So now that it is happening, I think we are within our rights to say, "See, I told you so."

President Bush had nothing to do with this. Was he suppose to reverse what Clinton did before going to war? If that was the case it should have been his first order of business since we were attacked before he had been in office for a year.

October 13, 2005

Of course sex and soldiers has been an issue since the begining of conflict. However soldiers normally didn't have sex with each other.

When soldiers are having sex with each other it compromises their ability to make life and death decisions on the battle field. I.e. there are times when a soldier has to be sacrificed for a mission. When soldiers put each other's welfare above the mission it often means more end up getting killed than need be. I once made that mistake and was disciplined for it. We were training with mls gear. We ambushed another squad and when we were ordered to pull back a comrad of mine got trapped under heavy fire. I was ordered to pull back but I advanced and provided supresive fire so my comrad could pull back with us. I was told that my disregard of an order placed my entire squad in danger. Now if I would do that for just a comrad, how much more likely would someone be to do it for a lover?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

As for "lose" - I doubt that they are any "loser" than the civils I associate every day

True stories of three different female soldiers I served with.

I was once pulling guard duty and a female soldier causually walked up to me and asked me if I wanted a BJ. That has never happened to me in the civilan world. I had previously done "watch" duty while the same female had sex with six guys, one after another. I never did that in the civilian world either.

A female platoon leader I once had bragged about how she had mad passionate sex with some guy she met at a bar and how he couldn't keep up with her. I have never had women in a civilian workplace talk to me that way.

Maybe it is just my limited experience but to me, I think the culture in the military tends to make the women a little more lose. Putting them into combat was perhaps a worse idea than having sex with Monica in the Oval Office.

October 13, 2005

Quote:

But they estimate that anywhere from a quarter to three-quarters of female soldiers are engaging in sex while on deployment.

Some female soldiers say that estimate is probably low.

"If you include all the girls who are having sex with girls, it’s much closer to every one of us,” said a female soldier in the 146th.

Even anonymously, female soldiers are reluctant to speak about sexual harassment.

MaxNews

Quite frankly, Shane, I tend to think that MaxNews is nothing more than a tabloid.

I have heard that there is sex in the military, but not to the extent that you and this tabloid article are promoting. I can not argue with your experience, but I will argue that NPR also told the story of a female soldier, and her description was nothing like what you are intimating and what these storys are imtimating.

Frankly, I tend to think better of our boys and girls than what you want to let on....

October 13, 2005

Your point about bonding is very real. It has been a problem since at least the ancient Greek's where homosexual relationships between soldiers were very common.

Male soldiers have been going around proposing casual sex with females for millenia - and often did not even bother asking. I doubt they are any looser today than ever. The proximity of females won't improve that!

I think you, like me, have been somewhat sheltered in our civilian experiences - because I know many teenagers who have been propositioned with casual sexual activities and I know what I hear from the nurses and other staff in the hospital where I am doing my paramedic training.

For instance, one of my EMT acquaintances walked onto a floor in the hospital one night around 10pm, and a 40'ish female nurse he had never met before propositioned him on the spot...

/Bevin

October 13, 2005

Quote:

Maybe it is just my limited experience but to me, I think the culture in the military tends to make the women a little more lose.

Haven't been in the military, but many of the sisters at my church have served proudly. I would say that they would be completely offended by your statements. The military is a world in itself. Looking at every military woman as loose is ridiculous, and I think what happens is that you tend to act like what you hang around. I guess it is all ok as long as the men make the crude comments. No one thinks twice about men talking dirty ,but oh let a woman in a uniform talk like a man. . . it becomes a situation where we judge all women based on the Lindey Englands in the military.

K

October 13, 2005

Is this % higher or lower than non military...

October 13, 2005

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

many of the sisters at my church have served proudly. I would say that they would be completely offended by your statements.

Perhaps... but I would say they are more likely to confirm what I have said and testify to how hard it is to maintain one's high standards when serving in the military.

October 15, 2005

My position on this:

1) The military is a reflection of society. Military personnel engage in non-martial sex in the same proportation that people of thier age and background to outside of the military.

2) With 20 years of active duty, and Reserve time, I am aquainted with military people having sex. But, I am also aquainted with those who do not. The ratio of those who do not is that same as it is on the outside.

3) As I read Shane's comments, his focus seems to be on females (Just my opinion.). I mean, he begains this by focusing on the entry of females into the military, talks about the military females whom he knows are having sex, and says little about males who had non-marital sex prior to the entry of females into the military.

4) Shane fails to acknowledge the females associated with military opperations, and in the military, decades prior to President Clinton.

October 15, 2005

Shane mentions that President Clinton placed woment into combat positions.

I am not certain as to what he means. He could mean that Clinton placed women into combat Military Occupational Specialties (MOS). He could mean that women were placed into danger zones.

Many civilians faile to understand what modern warfare is all about. In the old days combat occured up on the so-called front lines. Personnel back in the "rear area" were faily safe from danger.

Following WW II developing Soviet doctrine change all of this. The Soviets recognized that critical "command and control" elements were located in the rear area. If combat could be taken to those areas, and nuturalized, the forces on the front lines would become ineffective. So, Soviet military doctrine took combat to the rear areas.

All modern military doctrine has those rear areas as scenes of great combat. Any person (male or female) who in in the "theatre of opperations" is potentially in the combat zone.

This is a change from historical combat. It is a change that is driven by military doctrine and not an ex-President.

I have mentioned MOS. Congress has enacted laws that restrict women from combat MOSs. e.g. In the Army, women cannot be trained and assigned to an 11B MOS, as that is clearly (Infantry) a combat MOS. But, women can be assigned to the MOS of a truck driver. So, the female truck driver is headquartered in the rear area. But, her truck driving duties take her into front areas of combat. In addition, she will drive her truck over miles of roads, poorly deffended, subject to enemy attack, in order to get to her delivery point in areas of combat.

Here is the bottom line: Historical definations of combat to not apply any more. All personnel in the theater of opperations are subject to combat in modern warfare.

October 15, 2005

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Military personnel engage in non-martial sex in the same proportation that people of thier age and background to outside of the military.

I would suspect that a military chaplin is somewhat sheltered from much of its culture. The above statement sounds quite naive. But that is OK. If my son ever wants to join the military I will encourage him to be a chaplin's assistant.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

As I read Shane's comments, his focus seems to be on females (Just my opinion.).

My focus has been on women becuase, for the most part, men are the same sex-driven creatures in the civilian world as in the military. That said, a buddy of mine was having sex with a girl in the military when another buddy accidently walked in. The guy's reaction that walked in was to ask if he could have "some" too. Hmmmmmm, that typically doesn't happen in civilian life. So I suspect that military guys do act more permiscuous as well.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Shane fails to acknowledge the females associated with military operations, and in the military, decades prior to President Clinton.

During WW2 the women in the navy were known as WAVES or "Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service". The joke at the time was to join the navy and ride the waves. Sex in the military has a long history but it was President Clinton that put women into combat position or MOSs for those who understand military lingo.

October 16, 2005

Shane said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I would suspect that a military chaplin is somewhat sheltered from much of its culture. The above statement sounds quite naive. But that is OK. If my son ever wants to join the military I will encourage him to be a chaplin's assistant.

Somehow I suspect that a military chaplin probably has heard it all.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

So I suspect that military guys do act more permiscuous as well.

It's obvious the "friend" who walked in on your buddy behaved in a rude, crude and socially unacceptable manner. However, I would be very surprised if there are not many such people in general who may say the same thing and not be in the military.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

During WW2 the women in the navy were known as WAVES or "Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service". The joke at the time was to join the navy and ride the waves. Sex in the military has a long history but it was President Clinton that put women into combat position or MOSs for those who understand military lingo.

Sex in society has a long history. While I have heard the same tired references to WAVES,I really take offense to a joke in such a poor taste. one would hope that after all of these years that it would have gone by the wayside.

In defense of the WAVES who served their country, they did an important job and deserve our thanks and respect. Their private lives are just that; private. He who is without sin should cast the first stone.

Naomi

October 16, 2005

Re: "I would suspect that a military chaplin is somewhat sheltered from much of its culture. The above statement sounds quite naive. But that is OK. If my son ever wants to join the military I will encourage him to be a chaplin's assistant."

Shane, I really cannot blame you for the above statement, as it likely represents the thinking of those who do not have the slightest idea as to what military chaplains do.

1) I deal with people.

2) I have been in combat with a coed unit.

3) In the military, situations arise where men and women share living quarters. I have been in such situations.

4) I have dwelt with female soldiers who were dealing with military life.

5) I have worked on the command level with commanders who had to deal with issues of commanding coed units.

6) I probably have spent more time behind prison bars than you have spent. But, I walked in by choice, and walked out when I chose.

Let me put my background is perspective: As a U. S. Army officer, I, as a chaplain, have had much of the same general training that is given to all other officers. I have spent several months at Ft. Leavenworth being trained in the art of war. I am a graduate of the Command and General Staff Course. No, I have not attended either the Army War College, or the National Defense University.

In my background, I have been trained in the deployment of nuclear weapons, but not to to the level of the officer specialist.

October 16, 2005

One more comment: In the early 70s, long before President Clinton, I was in a unit with female soldiers and haveing to deal with issues of male and female soldiers who were required to share a foxhole at night, with no one near by.

October 16, 2005

I readily admit that I don't know much about the job of a military chaplin. What I do know is if one thinks the civilians are as sexually premuscuios as are military personal are they either don't know enough about civilian culture or military culture.

Even college culture is not as premiscuios as the military culture. I think it has something to do with being so far away from home and there is a feeling of everything being temporary. One feels more free to lose their inhibitions. It is like they are living someone else's life and when they return home they will go back to being the way they were before.

The military has had issues with sexual conduct between male and female soldiers for a long time. There is no debate there. Yet when President Clinton allowed women to take combat positions, a large group of us predicted what would happen. The same issues the military has had to deal with before with those in non-combat positions, they would have to deal with in combat positions. While someone serving in a noncombat position can end up in combat, the likilihood is less. Those in combat positions are sure to end up in combat and sexual relationships will impair their judgement. President Clinton knew that. It was very foreseeable. Yet he decided that he would place his agenda in front of the life and death issues it would cause. We now see that what was predicted has come to pass and we have President Clinton to thank for it.

October 16, 2005

Quote:

Shane said:

Why is it when people mention Clinton's name, sex comes to mind?

I can't say that happens to me. We are all different of course.

October 17, 2005

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

lazarus said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Shane said:

Why is it when people mention Clinton's name, sex comes to mind?

I can't say that happens to me. We are all different of course.

Lazarus, You are not alone. Doesn't happen to me either.

Naomi

October 17, 2005

Should the world last long enough, in 25, 50, 100 years - how will Clinton be remembered?

I will suggest he will be remembered as one of only two Presidents that was impreached.

I will also suggest that it will not be told that his impeachment was due to obstruction of justice, purgery or abuse of power but because of sex.

It is, however, unlikely that he will be remembered for allowing gays to join and remain in the military or for putting women into combat. However those are his real sex-based legacies.

October 17, 2005

Shane

I think much of what you have said is more wishful thinking than anything else. I guess if sex come to your mind when you think of him then I can understand the conclusions you draw. Most people don't even recall who the other president was who was impeached.

Clinton has done a pretty good job of rehabilitating himself so far. That will continue. The sex thing will fade. At worst it will deminish him in the eyes of most religious right Christians. At best it will continue to earn the secret admiration of many American men.

My guess is that if he could run again he'd probably get elected! If Hillary gets in he'll have a second shot at running the country!

October 17, 2005

Shane,

In the hospital where I work, most of the people have college degrees up the hilt so I would consider them "professional". A man I worked with, handsome, single, and all around nice guy had one of the "professional" people come up to him in the workplace and make a very vulgar comment concerning what she could do for him. Now in the days of sexual harassment, he could've had her fired, but be the all around nice guy in shock, he ignored the comment. It shocked me when he told me, but then this "professional woman" has been in more closets with any doctor married or not than anyone I know.

There have been doctors fired for sexual misconduct. (closing off an exam room door with a chair to get sex while at work with co workers). There is more hanky panky than I would have ever guessed, by women and men than you would ever imagine.

So I think that the military just reflects all the stuff that is happening everywhere else.

I just find it ironic that we are into the Bush reign for the 2nd time, and we still hear Clinton getting blamed for everything.

I agree with Lazarus, Clinton was so well liked (sex or no sex in the oval office) that if the man could run again, he'd be elected easily.

K

October 17, 2005

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

what you have said is more wishful thinking than anything else.

Wishful thinking of who? President Bush is trying to do as much as he can to help diminish President Clinton's indiscreation. He has given President Clinton nothing but praise since taking the office himself.

Those that write history books all know who the other president was that got impeached. And they know why. I agree that President Clinton did many good things while in office. However I am a realist and can admit that those good things were overshadowed by the bad things and it is the bad that is likely to be recorded in the history books.

October 17, 2005

Sister K, When I was in the Army we had to yell out a little chant everytime we were called to attention. It was suppose to increase moral. I will not give the exact words here but it ended by stating how we were going to perform oral sex on a woman. Can't say I ever had to recite a chant like that for a civilian employer.

October 17, 2005

Quote:

Those that write history books all know who the other president was that got impeached.

I don't even think historians will make Clinton's sexual indescretions the main focus of their analysis of his presidency. They want their books to be treated seriously!

Sign In

Clinton's Military Legacy: SEX

Recommended Posts

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Bravus

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bevin

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Neil D

Link to comment

Share on other sites

bevin

Link to comment

Share on other sites

K

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Stan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Gregory Matthews

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Gregory Matthews

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Naomi

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Gregory Matthews

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Gregory Matthews

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

lazarus

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Naomi

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

lazarus

Link to comment

Share on other sites

K

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Dr. Shane

Link to comment

Share on other sites

lazarus