For those of you who aren't familiar with this story, let me recount the details from the Navy Times editorial Hold E-8 Accountable regarding the reported actions of Chief Master-at-Arms Michael Toussaint:
The original investigation into the matter, which occurred in 2005 and 2006 and only recently surfaced publicly, cited 93 instances of hazing, abuse and other improper conduct. Much of it was shocking. The report said members of the dog--handling unit routinely held "hooker parties," gambled, fraternized and hazed men and women. In one incident, a naked female sailor was handcuffed to a bed and forced to pretend to be a lesbian fighting with another woman. And a female sailor's report of sexual abuse was not forwarded up the chain of command.Despite the damning findings of the command investigation, the man in charge of the unit -- Chief Master-at-Arms Michael Toussaint -- not only avoided accountability for any of his actions or those of unit members, he was advanced to senior chief in 2006. The story made national headlines in September, when the documents became public.
(By the way, E-8 is the paygrade for Senior Chief Petty Officers.)
The Navy Times' related article to this editorial added this to the description of events lead to this discussion of punishment:
The investigation found one sailor was ordered to simulate homosexual sex acts, tied up and locked in a dog cage, and forced to eat dog biscuits. Gambling, fraternization and socializing with prostitutes were also commonplace among some of the unit's sailors, investigators found.
The Navy Times has a summary of the report's contents here. Be prepared to be disgusted should you decide to read it.
The bizarre thing is that after an initial investigation found "93 incidents involving hazing and other improper behavior in the Military Working Dog Division at Naval Support Activity Bahrain in 2005 and 2006," not only was no one held accountable for these incidents, Chief Master-at-Arms Michael Toussaint (paygrade E-7) was advanced to Senior Chief Master-at-Arms (paygrade E-8).
[Below the fold: How the Navy is going to hold Senior Chief Toussaint accountable.]
This all came to light last September, and the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), Admiral Gary Roughead, ordered a second investigation.
As a result oesult of the CNO investigation, the Senior Chief is going to be held accountable by being forced to retire. Again, from the Navy Times' Senior chief to retire in hazing investigation:
The senior chief who ran a military working dog kennel in Bahrain and permitted hazing, hookers and other misconduct will be forced into retirement in January, Navy officials said Wednesday.Senior Chief Master-at-Arms Michael Toussaint, 38, will be removed from his current post as a dog handler with a SEAL unit and placed on desk duty with Naval Special Warfare Group 2 until he leaves the service, said Cmdr. Elissa Smith, a Navy spokeswoman at the Pentagon.
This forced retirement is going to likely going to cost him a lot. This is because he likely won't be retired as a Senior Chief Petty Officer (E-8), but as the last highest paygrade in which he's considered to have served honorably. The Navy Times, in their editorial, is suggesting that the Senior Chief should be retired at the rating of First Class Petty Officer (E-6):
[I]t cannot be argued that Toussaint served honorably while a chief. Toussaint should be retired at no higher than E-6.
He could be retired at a rate as low as Seaman Recruit (E-1).
Under the 2009 retirement pay schedule, Toussaint will be eligible for about $2,032 in monthly retirement pay as a senior chief. If [Secretary of the Navy Ray] Mabus opted to reduce him one rank, to E-7, he would receive about $1,850 each month under the 2009 figures; if reduced to E-1, a retired sailor can receive $664 monthly.
There is little doubt he won't be retired as an E-8, so the reality is that any retirement demotion will have the potential of costing civilian Michael Toussaint tens of thousands of dollars over the rest of his life.
Joseph Rocha, the gay sailor who bore the brunt of Chief Michael Toussaint's hazing, has applauded the outcome.:
"This is a proud day for the entire Navy, in re-establishing its core values and in protecting the dignity of its service members."To see the CNO and the secretary of the Navy, the most powerful gentlemen in the United States Navy, to speak nationally on behalf of an openly gay veteran, it's definitely groundbreaking. I think it sets the tone for our future military."
Joseph Rocha is now a civilian activist, working to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT). If DADT is repealed relatively soon, Mr. Rocha plans on rejoining the military as a commissioned officer.
What do I think about all of this?
Well, when I was in the Navy, I was sexually harassed based on my gender expression: I was presumed to be gay. There was an Executive Officer (XO) and a junior Petty Officer involved in my sexual harassment. The punishement for sexually harassing me: the XO received a written reprimand, and the junior Petty Officer received a verbal reprimand at a non-judicial proceding (an Article 15 hearing). (You can read about it here.)
The U.S. Navy has a long history of dealing with issues of hazing and harassment very poorly -- going back to way before the Tailhook scandal. Leaders -- like Senior Chief Toussaint -- rarely are held to account for what most of us would consider hazing or harassment, and the chains-of-command above hazers and harassers are rarely held accountable for failing to hold leaders like Senior Chief Toussaint to account. Unless, of course, the media, the public, and congress get involved.
At this point, I'll be satisfied if this ends up costing Senior Chief Toussaint tens of thousands of dollars over his retirement.
Frankly though, it would have been a lot better if the Nf the Navy would have held then Chief Toussaint to account for his behavior instead of promoting him. The Navy needs to address their systematic problems related tacidly condoning hazing and harassment.
Forcing the leaders in the chain-of-command out of the Navy -- those chain-of-command officers who failed to hold Cheif Toussaint accountable for 93 incidents of hazing and harassment -- seems a good place to begin dealing with those systematic problems.
.
Residents say that they will be taking action as a two-week notice given to all gays and lesbians to flee the community has now expired.Usually these homophobes are most concerned about gay men, but in this article, special attention goes to lesbians -- that are apparently multiplying like rabbits.THE STAR learnt that about two weeks ago angry residents who declared that they were fed up with seeing the activities of several gay persons in their community, ordered that they leave by today or suffer the consequences.
Some residents who admitted to THE STAR that they are a part of the "gay clearing out" scheme said that it is being done to protect their families and the community on a whole.
When THE STAR visited the area, a small group of residents pointed out an old community centre which is said to be the main 'hang out' spot for the lesbians. According to the residents the lesbians gather there almost nightly and can be seen hugging, kissing and even "touching".I assume the men are more prevalent, but are tightly shut in their closets as being out of the closet can mean a death sentence.
The residents say they are mostly worried about the lesbian group as they are most prevalent and influential. The number of persons in this group is said to be steadily increasing....The residents say they will not stop until their community is "gay free" and are not afraid of resorting to extreme measures.
Every time I think of this kind of outlandish hate, I wonder why doesn't the State Department issue a warning to LGBT travelers or make some bold issue out if the naked, violent homophobia of an island nation that prominently advertises itself as a welcoming tourist environment. Noting in those "Come to Jamaica" commercials says "except the homos." At the lease it's false advertising, at the most, it's negligent in calling out a country for its inhumanity by calling for an "Eradication Day." Why are they not focused on the misery of the poverty affecting the average Jamaican rather that a group of people that have no impact on their day-to-day lives?
This is a guest post by Gwendolyn Ann Smith. Gwen is the author of the Transmissions column that's been syndicated across the United States, and is the founder of the Transgender Day Of Remembrance.
Gwen is yet another trans community voice who I've asked to share their thoughts on federal hate crime legislation -- the hate crime legislation that was signed by President Obama on October 28, 2009.
~~Autumn~~
by Gwendolyn Ann Smith
Since early in the creation and promotion of the Remembering Our Dead project and the Transgender Day of Remembrance, I've made one thing clear: the most important right we can have is simply the right to exist.
When a person is murdered due to anti-transgender violence, it is so often more than a simple killing. Our killers take great pains to obliterate us, participating so often in trying to erase our existence. They'll stab us not once or twice, but dozens or even hundreds of times. They'll cut off our genitals or mutilate our breasts, attempting to destroy not only our bodies but the physical markers of our genders. They'll beat us, strangle us, burn us, and do all they can to make us go away and become a non-being. It's not just murder -- it is eradication.
With the passage of the Matthew Shepard Act, the federal government under President Obama has taken a stand against these acts. No longer is it so easy to erase us, and no longer shall it be acceptable to treat us as disposable. We are now no longer to be treated as such, in much the same way we are protected due to race, color, national origin, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability.
Indeed, by the very passage of this bill, actual or perceived gender -- what we identify as, and/or how we are seen -- is not just part of a hate crime law, but it past of the law overall. This is not just saying that we deserve to not be subject to a hate crime, but that we exist in the first place.
Are there still hills to climb? Of course. The law will still need to be seen in use. We'll have to see if it deters any crimes, and if any crimes that do happen are treated as hate crimes. It is one thing to have the language in there, and quite another to see the law applied.
Yet by an act of Congress and the stroke of the President's pen, I and those like me have been brought into existence on a Federal level. They have stood firmly opposite those who would seek to see me and others wiped away and forgotten.
We exist, and no one can take that away from us -- at least not without facing the specter of the Matthew Shepard Act and the 1969 Federal Hate Crimes Law. It feels remarkably good to know this.
~~~~~
Related:
* Pam's House Blend tag: Transgender Hate Crimes Essay Project
No comments:
Post a Comment