Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for February 10, 2010

Joe, how was she rude? She just told him to pass the ketchup. On the contrary, all the guys are rude by making suggestive comments. Also, are you trying to tell us that it’s her fault that she is sexually harrassed, because she is ‘looking round the room’? (Yes, I know she likes it, but the guys couldn’t have known that, and they are doing the same thing to Melissa, who doesn’t like it at all. So it’s still sexual harassment.)

Another thing: An atmosphere in which sexual harrassment is considered normal is an atmosphere in which potential rapists find it easier to justify in front of themselves what they are going to do. ‘She’s a slut and deserves it, and all the others are obviously of the same opinion.’ Think about it. By the way, I know what I’m talking about. I worked for a year in place where I was the only woman, and everybody was always making suggestive comments. It makes you feel like shit. And when I complained, I was told I shouldn’t be such a shrinking violet. I quit working in this place, I just couldn’t take it anymore. This is a real problem for a lot of us women out there, even when you have the good luck not to have been raped.

Agreed 100% nagut. Been there, don’t want to do it again! But on the other side I changed professions and went in to nursing. One of the guy nurses (who worked in the ER) kept getting hit on by male patients and female patients. He fully understood how I felt about my other workplace. It does go both ways sometimes; just not in the military as yet.

“Dude, be a sister”…… somehow that just sounds wrong. At least to a dude.

nagut, you said it all perfectly. thankQ.

Let’s project this out a bit. How do you think this might relate to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” issue that’s bearing down on us like a freight train? Reckon the “guys” in the unit know what they’re doing is wrong, and maybe they’re afraid of putting the shoe on the other foot, as it were?

I was in kuwait going into this war and in tikrit a year later….this comic is dead on. Most of the women there were paired up with someone - marriage didn;t matter.

Since when did th ecintractors becme camp followers?

On the up side - didn;t see it adversely affceting any ones work.

Orgelspieler, it may sound wrong but it makes perfect sense to me. Melissa is calling her “dude” because she seems to be thinking with something besides her brains (like a lot of men). Then she asks her to get with the program and back a “sister’s” point of view.

BTW, I am male.

Nagut, 100% spot on.

Some women in my unit loved it, some hated it.

“Dude, be a sister” is so perfect in many ways. No word so cool as dude that women call eachother, so we call eachother Dude (if from the Dudeness generation). In part as a defense mechanism because of the rape, Melissa is out-dudeing the dudes soldier-wise, and wants to be respected for her abilities rather than undermined with patronizing and/or suggestive come-on’s (so terrifying to one who has been abused). She’s become a Dude, as though that would protect her from the sexual zone. Not. And the lunchmate who might have responded to her as a sister, temporarily luxuriating in the attention that on the civilian side would go only to arm-candy - can’t be “there” for her, woman-to-woman. They’re two sides of the human, like Alex and her gf the “babe”…..

I think Garry is trying to portray the difference between the “fortunate” and “unfortunate” in society. Some people are “blessed” with being attractive - which would be nice, if it didn’t attract admirers like rotting meat attracts flies.

Melissa is still feeling the effects of some very unwanted attention, and can’t see her friend’s point of view.

On the other hand, her friend can’t see things from Melissa’s standpoint. Not fitting western society’s current ideal of anorexic “beauty”, she probably had a rough time in the “meet market” back in the states - even boys who liked her might have felt intimidated by the opinions of their peers, and not asked her out because of that. t just lighten up and enjoy the attention.

Bottom line - things are tough all over…

WOMEN IN THE ARMED SERVICES INTERFERE WITH THE MISSION …

^ only when men cannot be civilized.

when i was station at camp casey korea, we would alway say queen for a year, due to it was like 1 female for every 10 men. unless u go down the range and get a hooker. thats a different story……..

Posted the audio and full text links to Ike’s Farewell Address in yesterday’s comments, and he was so right. It’s what’s running the country now and running us into the ground, much like the USSR did to itself (by some measures).

Nobody’s commented, that GT shows the men with a WTF expression on their faces. There’s a disconnect between Melissa’s impressions and their expressions.

Whereas I have a pro-individualist view that women who can do the job should have the right to be in the military, everything I read in these comments, plus everything I know about men (esp. being one), and about the military (Nuc. Wpns. Assblyman, U.S. Army), and about women (let’s not get personal now), I am concluding that the answer is to keep women out of combat units or ships – in fact, best keep them out of war zones.

Some women will complain with justification, but the costs of all kinds to accommodate them are just too high.

NOW HEAR THIS!! “She asked for it” does NOT justify giving it to her!

Somewhere along the line people learned to feel entitled to abuse other people. If a guy is rude to another guy, I would more respect the one who kept his cool than the one who punched him out. (until the first guy actually did some punching - that’s another story.)

There’s an old story about the way to tell if you could feel safe in a particular place: if a naked woman carrying a bag of gold could walk down the street at midnight and nothing happened to her, then nothing would happen to anyone else either. In other words, this is not a new problem. It’s a very old, very fundamental one.

All of which is to say, men are not taught enough about self-control. or something else which I expect they already know, but if I use the word I expect I’ll be censored, so you’ll just have to guess. Hint: it starts with m.

Incidentally, rape is NOT about sex. It’s about power and violence.

Well, that’s my rant for the day. It’s exhausting, but refreshing.

@pschearer, after I finished ranting I saw your comment. A long time ago I read something about the Israeli army, that they found it was bad to put women in the front lines, because then they would be attacked first and the men couldn’t stand it and would rush to protect them - whether or not it was contrary to orders. Do you know anything about this? I am assuming this is related to your comment.

Another human instinct…

Rina: I’ve not heard anything like that about women in the IDF. What I have heard is that the Israeli troops are such an argumentative bunch that the men will even loudly dispute with their officers on secret night missions. If true, then it is easy to believe they will ignore orders to save a woman.

In general I do believe that it would be hard for men to treat women equally in dangerous situations, which could endanger other troops and the mission. I’d prefer to see women out of harm’s way, and if they don’t like it, they don’t know how well off they are. Let men do the necessary killing.

@pschearer, if you read my comment more carefully you will see that I was referring to men going to save women when it was against orders to do so.

But knowing the Israelis, I would say that arguing about their orders sounds true-to-life! It fits a stereotype, but that doesn’t automatically say that it’s wrong.

Yes, Rina, I know how to read, thank you. Let me better state what I meant: It is easy to believe they will ignore orders in order to save a woman. While my ambiguous wording could be read the way you did, I did not at all think the orders being ignored were to save a woman.

I’ve always assumed “dude” was a term of comeraderie, regardless of the sex of the addressee.

” I am concluding that the answer is to keep women out of combat units or ships – in fact, best keep them out of war zones.”

Hey, let’s kick that up a notch: I would conclude that the best answer is to keep men out of combat too - to exclude war as an answer to anything. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Except the war-profiteers.

See Waltz With Bashir.

If men are not civilized enough to treat their fellow women respectfully, then we should spend some energy civilizing them, instead of keeping women away from them. Otherwise it will end like in Saudi Arabia (and similar countries). Also, it’s not fair to deny women job opportunities, just because men can’t be bothered to behave themselves like civilized beings. By the way, that’s exactly the argument men used for centuries to keep women away from work and their own money: they should be glad they don’t have to work! Well, we’re not. You can’t expect to gain any control over procedures that concern you if you’re not involved in them.

Hey, pschearer, I’ve got a better idea. Let’s just ship out all the straight men.

Having been in a combat zone in a unit comprised of men and women, I would much prefer someone like Melissa at my side than her friend. We had too many “Iraqi Princesses” and “Kuwaiti Princesses” with all the attendant drama, lack of discipline, and lack of focus on the mission.

Edit for additional thoughts. Of course if we didn’t also have males who contributed to the situation, and if we would have had officers who were actual military personnel instead of weekend warriors, it wouldn’t have mattered.