Panel Urges Female Capt. Bligh Be Forced to Walk the Plank

The next GOP Presidential candidate?

It must’ve been those damn rotting pumpkins. Next time dump bad cargo overboard or resell it at deep discounter retail stores. Or that South Pacific warm weather which makes Captains and First Mates go stir-crazy. No wonder basketball in Hawaii is tricky; just ask Virginia when they played Chaminade in ’82…
.
…or cursing and treating subordinates like crap. That type of management quickly fails even if successful at first.

“Graf was fired as Cowpens’ CO in January following an inspector general investigation into allegations of cruelty toward her crew.”

It appears as if this is an interesting, colorful story presented in a dry way where all of the interesting details are removed.

One aspect of military discipline has always troubled me, and I’m a guy who is and always has been solidly in our military’s corner: the military takes an almost absolutist approach to the meting out of justice. This is perhaps most visible in the Navy, though that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s most prevalent there.

I’m in no way whatsoever defending Captain Graf’s grotesque treatment of her crew, which horrified me at the time the story broke and I read about it. I don’t blame her crew one bit for complaining; apparently Captain Craf isn’t fit for command, particularly shipboard command, where the captain is virtually a law unto (in this case) herself.

However, that such an apparently unsuitable person reached such high command raises the larger question of “How on Earth did she serve however many years she did serve BUT her *superiors* failed to either detect her unsuitability at all or, if they did detect it, failed to block her advancement, or at least move her to, say, a specialist line without command responsibilities.

In short, I would be looking at her superiors as well, were I higher than them in the Navy’s chain of command. Maybe — but not necessarily — *they* share *some* responsibility for letting a “Captain Bligh” assume command of even a canoe.

Let me move away from this instance to another recent one. A Royal Navy submarine ran aground, and the captain got cashiered for it. Yet as I understand it, he wasn’t — couldn’t have been — the one actually carrying out the orders he was issuing. Keeping it simple, if a captain orders “20 degrees port” but the helmsman brings the submarine 20 degrees starboard and it plows into a reef, or whatever, before the captain can take command action, should he be made to walk the plank for that?

Returning to Captain Graf’s case, a general discharge is nowhere near as serious as a dishonorable one, of course. But it’s plenty serious, for sure. And it’s plenty harsh. Is there nothing in her record to justify her advancement? If not, how on Earth did she make it past her first tour of duty? Surely there must be *something* in her record favorably regarded by the Navy’s promotion boards. The rank of Captain is a serious one; it’s from the Navy’s captains that admirals are selected. (For the record, in the Navy a person can be captain of a ship *without* holding the rank of captain, but in this case, she indeed is a captain, both by rank and position.)

This whole case is a troubling one, and is bound to roil the conservative waters of the Navy, with good reason.

Mark, why does your headline need to refer to the gender of the offender? What is your point?

I can’t speak for Mark directly but he has used the Mutiny on the Bounty analogy early on and the real Capt. Bligh was male – William Bligh. See Mark’s original article / title – http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1971246,00.html His piece is more detailed than official report which is heavily redacted. Whether the analogy is appropriate from a gender basis is debatable but the two of you will need to fight it out (not literally of course). However, I can see why that analogy can be chosen: not by gender but by behavior. Bligh’s verbally abusive treatment of his crew was eerily similar. I made the rotting pumpkins smartass comment because that might have been the tipping point that made Fletcher Christian take over. Bligh later became a governor in Australia and was also overthrown by rebels.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1971246,00.html

Apr,
You’re awfully sensitive as of late. I’m wondering, how can someone seemingly so committed to sensitivity, propriety, and fairness -certainly someone not comfortable with generalizing labels- make so many nasty, condescending comments about Catholicism, referencing your “harsh” Catholic upbringing almost every chance you get? Either you’re a fair, principled person or you just have an agenda you wish to push. You should perhaps take some time to think about which of those two people you want to be.

Exiled, people with principles have an agenda. That agenda derives from their principles. Otherwise, they’re just aimless leaves in the wind. Like McCain, but I digress. So you and apr disagree over Catholicism while coming from same religious background, fine. Alas, you’re just as sensitive.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/10/01/more-headaches-for-the-vatican-priests-and-child-porn/comment-page-1/#comment-100009

What’s wrong agendas?
.
Has there ever been a Israel thread you haven’t joined Neo?
.
Not a thing wrong with that.

This post was also a portrait of sublime beauty in religious flagellation, so many gems to mine –
.
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/03/17/the-nuns-v-the-bishops/
.
Alas, Exiled was not so amused. I was totally LMAO, esp. at nuns in butt-less leather chaps and the Hells Angels. Good times. God, I miss KT here. She knew how to push all of us to our very best.

deconstructiva: I am ok with the Captain Bligh analogy. My concern with Mark’s using gender twice in his headlines about this case is that he doesn’t tell us why gender is important to the outcome, if at all.
.
Personally, I enjoy using The Caine Mutiny as an analogy. I picture Captain Graf claiming her strawberries were stole while playing with ball bearings.
.
Exiled, I have never said my Catholic upbringing was harsh. Mostly, it was amusing. I was able to take away worthwhile beliefs, such as social justice, that have infromed my life. You don’t read me very carefully.

After reading the article, I apologize Mark. The relevancy of gender is important. Thanks for the link.

Decon,
You’re just as sensitive…
.
Hold up. Is there no difference between a hyperbole-drenched smear campaign -such as what I was confronting with commenters in the thread you linked to- and using gender as a descriptive modifier? That you would put describing someone as a woman on the same level as calling all priests ‘pedophiles’ in terms of what level of sensitive response these may provoke is quite possibly the most lurid example of counter-intuitive “reasoning” I have encountered. Care to rethink that?

PNNTO-
Nothing is wrong with agendas. But, basically, APR was accusing Mark of having his own pejorative agenda simply by describing Capt. Graf as a woman. She is a women, no? I suspect Apr is far more guilty of making insenstive comments than Mark’s completely benign use of an adjective here.

Apr,
You don’t read me very carefully.
.
Or I do, and you just don’t choose your words very carefully.

Neo-apr asked a question. And,as seen at #6, apologized for the implication of the question.
.
My guess of why you are irked Neo?
.
“Burlusconi is not remotely amusing”
.
Apr touched one of your Holy Trinity. Catholics, Israel, and Italy.
.
( I’m pretty much just pushing your buttons. Just weighed in at a new low. 169 from 228 on Shrove Tuesday so I am punchy )

Care to rethink that?
.
Short answer: No.
Long answer: No. Just based on your reactions to everyone here, I don’t need to but thank you for proving my point (again based on your reactions to everyone here).
.
These have been Simple Answers to Easy Questions™.

Exiled, button-pushing aside, I’m curious for real. Why are you so sensitive about Catholic issues as opposed to most other topics here (except Israel, of course)? If you are so sound in your beliefs why the need to defend them when by your own standards there should no need to defend them? Or are there weaknesses you feel need addressed to your satisfaction?
.
And yes, to those of the literature / philosophy cognoscenti (Katy Steinmetz?), this line of questioning sorta comes from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and part about the Jesuits, students in the back row, and the Church of Reason. Pirsig’s exact quote is, “You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They know it’s going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it’s always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt.”

PNNTO,
I’m unashamed of my defense of Italy and the Church and proud of my antagonization of Israel. The Holy Trinity, indeed, thanks for noticing.

Neo no reason to be ashamed, as i said earlier-Not a thing wrong with that.
.
Nor is there a thing wrong with those who hold opposite views.

Decon,
Just based on your reactions to everyone here, I don’t need to but thank you for proving my point (again based on your reactions to everyone here).
.
Oh, don’t kid yourself. The only thing I’ve proven to you is your own massive shortcomings in the art of reasoning. Again, equalizing the reaction (Apr’s) to the use of the adjective “female” to the reaction (mine) to rabid, venomous smear campaigns against my religion is, to put it mildly, manifestly false.
.
Why are you so sensitive about Catholic issues as opposed to most other topics here (except Israel, of course)? If you are so sound in your beliefs why the need to defend them when by your own standards there should no need to defend them?
.
What an odd question, one that should need no answer. But, I’ll try to put in terms you can understand. Essentially, you’re saying that if my positions are sound, then I need not push back against virulent anti-Catholic propaganda when I see it. By that standard, when confronted with rabidly racist rhetoric against blacks, for example, we should simply be quiet for we know that sentiment to be wrong. What’s more, if we do call out racists, that is merely demonstrating the weakness of our own non-racist positions? Huh? So, speaking out is, in and of itself, an indication of being wrong. F*cking brilliant!

I think you’ve just given every authoritarian regime the perfect talking point. I can see it now, leaders across the globe dismissing journalists and opposition party members as senseless rabble-rousers, so thoroughly incorrect in their views that they actually feel the need to speak about them publicly. God knows, if they were right, they wouldn’t be using words in the first place.

Keep tossing the vitriol if you wish, which of course again proves the original point about your sensitivity. No one else here appears to be as offended as you at the moment, correct? Have a good evening. Seriously.

Sheesh decon hasn’t taken this much since Jay Rosen went off the rails.

Paul, I think you’re right. It’s been awhile.

Decon-It’s funny to me because there are only maybe a handful of “nice people” here.
.
You, Neo, sacredh, apr, and jc are the only ones that come to mind so to see any of that group squabbling is strange.

Thanks. Yes, if only more nice ones would hang around here. Or maybe they did in earlier days at this site but left for their own reasons.

Well as I gave it a little more thought I should have added Ivy and kbang. And I’m probably forgetting some.
.
I just wish there were more Neos who I disagree with about most things but our interactions remain (largely) civil.

Vitriol? Offended? Far from it…
.
Back to the matter at hand, you asked a condescending question based on your self-proclaimed curiosity. I answered, albeit chock-full-o-condescension. So, let’s set that all aside.
.
I’m asking honestly, do you really believe that people shouldn’t defend positions they believe to be right or true? You don’t believe in counterbalancing propaganda, irrationality, or absurdity when confronted with it?

Sorry, Decon, if I was a bit harsh. I’m not offended, and I didn’t intend come off as vitriolic. I’m just genuinely confounded with your false-equivalence.

Hello out there?

On some level her superiors do share some of the blame for allowing her to rise to the position she did, though arguably they are fixing this problem now.
.
In the case of the subordinate turning the wrong direction the ultimate fault still lies with the captain. It is the captain’s duty to make sure his/her sailors are correctly trained, so ultimate responsibility lies with the captain if a subordinate makes a mistake.

My working career has been in hospitals, ending up in a relatively senior position. I am in total agreement with the Admirals since, in my work, I came across similar behaviour to this woman from senior nursing and medical staff. These little Hitlers must be removed from authority and not allowed to bully those who join the services for whatever reason. The rules seem not to allow them to answer back, and if they do, they often have to go through the same line of command about which they may have a complaint.