Air Force Sargeant may be stripped of duty

[Zero]

military or not, this isnt very professional.

i dont think its repressed american sexual watever. She's free to do wat she wants in her private life, but when u go off nudin' it up in magazine where public has access to, i dont see how thats being professional.

and playboy pictorial is not art. not to say a nude women's body cant be art, but at least fo sho playboy aint.

[Az]

Tsk tsk Az
You've got no style.

Look at my "more photos" link.
she's old and crummy.

I said "I'd hit it", not "I'd definetly hit it!"

[Zero]

18yrs (min age for enlistment) + 13yrs in service = at least 31yrs old plus few years of whenever she actually joined air force.

[Az]

yes so?

[Zero]

it was a response to old and crummy.

[Zkribbler]

My opening post had two complaints. The first was for the possible punishing of this woman even though the AF can't point to any regulation which she violated.

The second is the hypocracy of it all when compared to the infamy of the AF Academy in its allowing sexual harassment, sexual assaults and outright rapes to go unounished. It took me seconds to find this article (albeit from a few years back).

Sex abuse at US air force academy
By Suzanne Goldenberg
The Guardian
30 Aug 2003

America's air force academy yesterday confronted devastating evidence that it presided over a training regime that was hostile to women, with nearly 70% of female cadets reporting they had been sexually harassed, and nearly 20% sexually assaulted.

The findings, in a draft report by the defence department's inspector general's office, comes just six months after six former cadets charged the academy with fostering a climate that condoned violence against women because it punished those who reported they had been raped.

Although the air force vowed to embark on an "agenda for change", it was embroiled in another scandal this week when seven male cadets were caught drinking in a hotel room with under-age girls.

In the survey of 579 female cadets, conducted last May, 68% said they had experienced sexual harassment, ranging from inappropriate language and emails to unwanted touching.

Some 18% said they had been sexually assaulted or raped - including 11% of this year's graduating class who said they had suffered rape or attempted rape.

The survey also found that in 149 of the 177 incidents of assault reported, the attackers were their fellow male cadets.

That fact - and the experience of earlier generations of recruits - may explain why only a third of the victims reported the assaults. Of those who did report assaults, nearly half said they suffered reprisals.

That experience was consistent with the suffering of an earlier generation of cadets. Earlier this year, half a dozen women who had been at the academy came forward to describe a climate of harassment. They said women who reported rape or assault were routinely punished for minor offences, while no action was taken against their attackers.

Their disclosures destroyed the notion perpetuated by the air force that sexual harassment was relatively rare in its ranks. Several commanders left the academy and reform was promised.

Part of that reform process appears to be an atmosphere of openness. On Thursday, the new commander of the academy, Brigadier General Johnny Weida, told a graduating class: "If you don't think we have ... a sexual harassment problem at the air force academy, your head is in the sand."

[RogueIce]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
My opening post had two complaints. The first was for the possible punishing of this woman even though the AF can't point to any regulation which she violated.

That one, at least, is easy enough:

Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice
“Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special, or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.”

Specificly the part where it says all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces which could easily be construed to include posing in Playboy, with your uniform.

[Dinner]

The problem is they don't enforce those standards equally. I recall a few years ago they had one of the first female fighter pilots in the Navy. She got brought up on charges and discharged for having an affair with a married man. The guy was some Generals son who was married with three kids. He got a slap on the hands while she got discharged.

Now if he's the one cheating and he's equal in the affair how come he gets to play softball while she gets the max punishment? The anwser is he was the son of a general while she was hated for putting her woman's nose into what the good old boys thought was a man's job (namely, flying a fighter plane). I suspect this is a very similiar case. Men pose for sexy photos all the time even while in uniform but a woman does it and she's toast? Clearly a double standard.

[Dinner]

The saddest thing about all this is that the military is once again lowering their standards and are now letting in convicted criminals in certain circumstances. Ex-cons can be uniform but a good NCO who poses for tasteful nudity gets kicked out? No wonder the military is having such difficulty.

[Arrian]

This is silly.

-Arrian

[SlowwHand]

The Air Force doesn't want personnel going to the store in fatigues, for example.
From home to duty and back. Class "A" uniform is different. The blues.
Given that, naturally they don't want any uniform referenced in Playboy.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by RogueIce
Specificly the part where it says all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces which could easily be construed to include posing in Playboy, with your uniform.

What article said she used an official uniform? Doing that would be a hell of a lot worse than simply discussing her line of work in the printed interview, having it mentioned on the cover, and/or donning some hunting camo.

[RogueIce]

Originally posted by Darius871


What article said she used an official uniform? Doing that would be a hell of a lot worse than simply discussing her line of work in the printed interview, having it mentioned on the cover, and/or donning some hunting camo.

I could be thinking of an article I saw elsewhere, that said she was. Sorry.

Anyway, even not in uniform, simply identifying herself as being in the Air Force in the article (she must've, given the cover says "Drill Sergeant Naked HOOAH!" or something to that effect) would probably be enough.

As to whether or not it's fair, that's another issue. No, I don't think it is, or that guys can get away with things the women can't. Sadly, that seems to be a fact of life, at least for the moment. I do hope it changes.

But that doesn't mean they can't prosecute her for her actions, either.

EDIT: Looking it up on Google she is, in fact, in official Air Force uniform in the article. Complete with DS hat.

If you want to see, look up "Michelle Manhart" on Google, and go to the "seccpics.blogspot.com" result for it. I don't know the rules on direct-linking to NSFW images here, so I won't do that.

[Dis]

Originally posted by RogueIce


And lo, did it work.

She just goes to show that the old wisdom of "Air Force chicks = hot" is, indeed, very true.

yeah, and navy women are fat. But they still got gang banged by the divisions from the stories I heard.

[RogueIce]

Originally posted by Dis
yeah, and navy women are fat. But they still got gang banged by the divisions from the stories I heard.

There is a rule I have heard about, but cannot personally verify it's validity.

That rules states that, three months into deployment, all females get a +3 on the 1-10 scale.

If that rules holds true, then it is no surprise about these Navy women. I don't know about gang banged, but I'm sure they can get some if they choose to.