Navy Officer in Hot Water for Retaliating Against Ensign After Anti-Gay Harassment

[Gerald]

The Navy's Inspector General has ruled a junior officer suffered unfair retaliation by his commander after filing harassment charges last year for being nicknamed "fagmeister" and a slew of other anti-gay epithets.

Ensign Steve Crowston filed a harassment claim in February 2010, alleging that Cmdr. Liam Bruen, along with other senior and junior officers, voted in August 2009 to give Crowston the military call sign "Romo's Bitch," a reference to Dallas Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo. Crowston says other suggestions included: "Cowboy," "Gay Boy," "Fagmeister," "Cowgirl," "TO," "Terrell Owens" and "Redskins."

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/10/navy-ig-finds-officer-gave-subordinate-bad-review-retaliation-harassment/


Note: Published February 10, 2011

[Skybird]

What an bright mind that CO is.

He probably considered himself a genius when offending a subordinate time and again, and in front of witnesses. Brain monsters like that are too bright and too intelligent for just commanding troops in battle, therefore they should be sorted out from the military so that they can find duties in life that are more adequate for their superior capabilities.

[Gerald]

Yes, he learns on the trip ... if he wants

[Bubblehead1980]

The fact that the ensign can not handle some ribbing is just crap, he should have never filed a complaint anyway.I would love to know what SOB(sure it was some yuppie professor at a college in San Francisco or somewhere like that) started the PC movement back in the day and knock him out.ugh.:damn:

[Takeda Shingen]

Or, maybe the crap is that your CO has no business calling you 'fagmeister'. Maybe we could also go back and knock out the undoubtably toothless, inbred redneck that invented that term.

[UnderseaLcpl]

As much as I'd like to make a joke about the entire Navy being gay, this is a serious issue. Any military leader who resorts to belittling his juniors, for whatever reason, is unfit for command. Officers are supposed to command respect through exemplary conduct and leadership, not through badgering one member of the unit to gain acceptance via humor or common mistrust. Breun's leadership style can get people killed in a combat situation.

I hope they strip Breun of his command and rank, and dishonorably discharge him for slighting the uniform. I don't care what his merits are, people like him have no business considering themselves servicemembers.

[ETR3(SS)]

I'd just like to point out that the Ensign in question is 37. While the article makes no mention of it I doubt this is some butterbar fresh out of the Academy. If he was than it is the enlisted mans job to break in a new Ensign, not the CO. I'd put money on the fact that he was a senior enlisted man (at least an E-6) and chose an officer program. If that is the case I would be pissed as well.

[Tribesman]

I'd put money on the fact that he was a senior enlisted man (at least an E-6) and chose an officer program. If that is the case I would be pissed as well.
Yes, 16 years of service and a whole pile of ribbons, a rather funny sort of set up for the frivolous politicly correct complaint bubble seems to think it is.

he should have never filed a complaint anyway
Oh dear, it was law school you said you was going to get educated at wasn't it?

Maybe we could also go back and knock out the undoubtably toothless, inbred redneck that invented that term.
That is totally blatant prejudice based on false steroetypes, inbred rednecks ain't toothless, they get their dental work on welfare

[Bubblehead1980]

Okay, so this occured in a F/A-18 squadron.I grew up in Pensacola, FL aka the "Cradle of Naval Aviation" I have known a lot of Naval Aviators, Naval Flight Officers over the years ranging from the most junior flight students to seasoned officers etc Know two flight students now I went to college with, actually one just got his wings and is in Lemoore, CA for F/A-18 training.Even have a couple retired Naval Aviators in my extended family and know them well.They tend to have senses of humor that prefer the risque/off color jokes etc but it's not about harassment or offending anyone, it's about camraderie and right off passage.Has nothing to do with education, race, class, actual sexual preference etc. Back in college my fellow pledges and I were called much more offensive names than "fagmeister". We were assigned female names etc We just went along with because it was all in good humor and established a fraternal bond and that is what it is about.This guy was from the Enlisted ranks which I assure you say and do much worse in most cases.This guy became an officer, could not tell by his picture if he had wings or not but he was part of the squadrons officers and was tagged with various names by the skipper as a joke.This guy obviously was too much of an uptight tool to get the humor and took offense, so he complained and started a bunch of trouble.Now a well trained Commander and Naval Aviator who no doubt has a distinguished career considering he was CO, well his career is prob over and why? Because some douche could not take a joke and mold into the brotherhood? Nothing more than Political Correctness out of control.Perhaps he was retaliated against or perhaps he found he was not cut out to be an officer and thus had a low eval, lower than his evals as an enlisted man for a reason.Bottom line, complaint should have never been filed and no action should be taken esp at the expense of ending the career of the Commander.

[Takeda Shingen]

No, a well-trained commander and naval aviator's career is probably over because he was unable to act like a well-trained commander and naval aviator. Wrong is wrong.

[razark]

So if we insult you, and you take offense, it's your fault for not finding it funny?

[Bubblehead1980]

So if we insult you, and you take offense, it's your fault for not finding it funny?

All about the circumstances.I do not know you other than this forum.However, if we were in a squadron or any organization together and jokingly dubbed me "fagmeister", I would not be offended and if I was, well obviously I would be too soft to be in that squadron or organization.I have seen what that community is like, they all have callsigns, they often seem insulting but are in jest.You don't get to choose your own for a reason.This nancy should have just sucked it up and embraced it instead of being a punk, the end.

[razark]

This nancy should have just sucked it up and embraced it instead of being a punk, the end.
And it's never crossed your mind that the fellow may have had his reasons for his original complaint?
:nope:

[Tribesman]

I grew up in Pensacola, FL aka the "Cradle of Naval Aviation"
So what?

[UnderseaLcpl]

Take it from me, Bubblehead. Marines are amongst the most vicious when it comes to insulting others by questioning their sexuality, amongst other things. It is usually done in good humor and viewed as more of a challenge than an actual slight. Our officers occasionally get in on the fun, and it's all good, but that changes when one member of the unit is singled out for undue harassment. Frakking around is one thing, ruining unit cohesion is quite another.

It's a fine line, and one that respectable officers can tread, but failure in this capacity is not acceptable. Troops expect their superiors to be paragons in every capacity. After all, they are entrusting their lives to them. They also entrust their lives to their comrades. If an officer makes a member of the unit weak by harping on him/her, their subordinates will see it. When the unit gets into combat, everyone will be second-guessing both the officer and the member in question. That is not a good thing.

[Takeda Shingen]

All about the circumstances.I do not know you other than this forum.However, if we were in a squadron or any organization together and jokingly dubbed me "fagmeister", I would not be offended and if I was, well obviously I would be too soft to be in that squadron or organization.I have seen what that community is like, they all have callsigns, they are often seem insulting but are in jest.You don't get to choose your own for a reason.This nancy should have just sucked it up and embraced it instead of being a punk, the end.

The thing that you seem to be conveniently ommiting in your anticedote is that this is not between two squadron mates on equal footing. This is not 'locker room banter'. This is between a subordinate and his commanding officer. As Lance has said repeatedly, the superior in the relationship has the burden and responsibility of decorum. His behavior clearly worked contrary to unit cohesion.

[Bubblehead1980]

So what?


Meaning I have been around the very community that this case involves, so know how it operates, far more than someone not exposed to it.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Meaning I have been around the very community that this case involves, so know how it operates, far more than someone not exposed to it.

Clearly, you don't know how it operates. I'm not trying to be hostile or anything, Bubble, I can see your point. But unless you've worked within an honest-to-god military "Unit" in every sense of the word, you're lacking context.

A good unit is just that. It is a difficult thing to describe. Members of the unit live work together, live together, and fight together. They are individuals, but every individual knows everything about every other individual. At any given time, whether in peace or in combat, any given member can account for every other memeber to a reasonable degree. They can tell you what the others are likely doing, or what they will do in a given circumstance.

Worried there are targets to the right? There is no worry, "PFC. X" has always been good about covering that flank. Hearing curses from "Lcpl Y" to your left again? That ****ty old rifle of his has probably froze up. He'll have it fixed in about four seconds. In the meantime, you need to assume responsibility for his sector. "Cpl. Z" saw the trouble at the same time you did and he'll cover your sector of fire. No visible targets in Lcpl Y's sector, shift fire to PFC X's sector so he can reload, which he does automatically because he knows you're firing. All of this takes place in the space of barely more than a second. That's what a good unit is. That's how it operates.

Throw just one monkey wrench into the works in the form of a team-member or a crappy officer and you ruin the whole thing. Suddenly, you have a major fracking problem. Either the team doesn't trust the judgement of the officer, in which case they are fighting under the assumption that they might be screwed, or they don't trust a squad member who is the focus of mistrust and belittlement as per the attitude imparted by the leader of the unit, so now everyone is second-guessing that guy and checking their backs when they should be focusing on their own sectors of fire and proper employment of their weapons. No amount of training will fix that when you're being shot at. There is no time for rational thought, only time for honed behaviour.

I'm speaking from the perspective of a naval infantryman, but I imagine that the situation is much the same aboard a ship. The crew has to know that their crewmembers will put out fires or man systems or whatever the hell it is that squids do to make a vessel combat-effective. Their trust in their captain is only as good as his trust in them. There's probably other stuff, too.

So, are we on the same page now or what?

[razark]

This is not 'locker room banter'. This is between a subordinate and his commanding officer.
This is the crux of the whole matter. The superior officer is not facing punishment for calling the junior officer "fagmeister". The junior officer complained about it, but from reading the article, that case is still pending. The result of that case is not important, anyway.

The superior officer is facing discipline because, after that complaint was filed, he took it out on the junior officer. Even if the Ensign is later found to have been unjustified in his claim, the Commander still lashed out at him due only to his complaint.

[Tribesman]

Meaning I have been around the very community that this case involves, so know how it operates, far more than someone not exposed to it.
Have you been round the system more or less than the officers of US navy legal branch?
As it seems obvious those amatuers know much less about how their community works and the laws and regulations than you do.
Have you thought of skipping law school entirely and going straight into teaching the navy how to run its advocate generals office based on your superior knowledge derived from living near a naval base.