Bullying - Surely Not

#2
I like John Shonfeild's response to the BBC post:

I was in the army for 11yrs and i never saw any bullying.. sure if i screwed up my SGT Maj would take me round the back and give me a slap.. or we would all go through the initial few months micky taking and leg pulling when you are a sprog in the new unit.... but is that bullying? Dont be stupid. The army is becoming increasing full of girls these days.. you shout at a sprog and he'll report you to the euro poofs court of human rights or something. Are we the British army.. or the girl guides? Yeah go on.. lets all report bullying and unfair treatment.. lets tarnish the reputation of our armed forces even more.... lets all lets those sick jounalists about diffy kit... all they want is to make money out of making the British army look stupid... dont do it lads...they are scum!
Email: jshonfield@yahoo.com
 
#3
I think that there has always been bullying in the Army. As there is in civi street. Deepcut has been picked on by the media, but I would say Catterick & other training depots are just as bed:

Extract from: http://groups.msn.com/158RLC/deepcut.msnw

A source with experience of Deepcut said yesterday: "There have undoubtedly been junior NCOs who have taken advantage of the lack of an adequate chain of command and control to impose their own regimes on recruits.

"That leads to a Lord of the Flies situation in which people perceived to be the weakest links are picked upon, not only by their trainers but by fellow recruits within the barracks blocks.

"It is a food-chain reaction which should have been stamped out. Unfortunately, manpower shortages and budget restrictions have meant that not enough high-calibre personnel have been available to provide supervisory safeguards.
I am not saying all suicides are bullying related. I am sure some would have still done it, had they not joined up! I think it is a tendency with some people to harm themselves. But do not think the Armed Forces are Whiter than White is all I am saying:

http://groups.msn.com/158RLC/deepcut.msnw
Sarah Hall, political correspondent
Saturday August 28, 2004
The Guardian

Soldiers aged under 20 are 1.7 times more likely to kill themselves than civilians of the same age, figures from the Ministry of Defence revealed last night.

The report said that while members of the armed forces were generally less likely to commit suicide than the rest of the population, the youngest army recruits bucked the trend.

In the past 10 years 29 soldiers aged 17-19 had died,compared with 12 in a similar number of civilians in the same age group.

Although the numbers are small, they were "statistically significant".

The findings are of interest in the light of the discovery of four privates dead from gunshot wounds at Deepcut Barracks, Surrey between 1995 and 2002. Two were aged 17, one 18, and one 20.

The report shows that trained soldiers, unlike those at Deepcut, are more at risk than recruits. The suicide rate for trained soldiers is 27 deaths in 100,000, compared with 17 in 100,000 for recruits.

Last night the MoD stressed that training establishments were randomly inspected to ensure that recruits were properly cared for, and a range of other measures, including better tracking of reports of bullying and harassment, had been introduced.

Such measures have done little to appease the Deepcut families, who have been denied a public inquiry.

The report, by the Defence Analytical Services Agency, reveals that between 1984-2003 there were 461 suicides and 82 open verdict deaths in the armed forces. Of these, seven suicides and four open verdict deaths occurred in 2003, but the number could be higher, since coroners are yet to rule on a further 44 deaths in which there is a suggestion of self-harm.

The possible explanations included higher than average ill-health in the under-20s and greater access to the means of suicide, but for further investigation was needed, the report said.
 
#4
When I joined the Apprentice's School at Arborfield, one of the first, (and least), introductions to life, was being invited to push a boot-polish tin the length of the centre-deck with my nose stuck in the polish. I was urged to greater speed by a senior apprentice kicking me up the arrse. I managed to survive that, and a lot more, and ended up doing about 24 years. None of it mattered, none of it turned me bitter and twisted, (well, not a lot), and none of it made me go weeping to someone in authority. WTF is wrong with the sprogs now? Can't they hack it?
 

X-Inf

War Hero
Book Reviewer
#6
Bullying - this is a relative term.

I joined boy service in the mid 60s and some of the things and events that I had to put up with would nowadays be classified as bullying. There were times that I was treated harshly - I deserved it.

We should not look too harshly at how things are looked at today. It seems to me that the boys in BW, and all those others in theatre, seems to be doing a good job in this non-bullying time.
 
#7
This bullying scare has already gotten riduclous and will only end up destroying people's careers.

Case in point:

When at Cattrick, one of my section comds, great bloke, BW Cpl, will go far, was accused by one of our scrots of bullying. Now said BW Cpl was an enthusatic individual who also taught a bit of unarmed combat, so we (Sgt and I) thought that perhaps this was the wee boy taking a demo the wrong way. Marched him in, asked his side of the story, not too impressed with it and suggested that he was over-reacting, stop being pathetic and get on with it. Nope, he was having none of it.

Said scrot calls Mummy, who happens to be a barristar, who then calls CO at Cattrick, who over-reacts (IMHO) and calls in the OC and gives him a roasting. OC suitably p*ssed off, calls in me and Sgt and does the old "give it to me straight routine". We said we did not believe that their was a case to answer for but told to wait in hall whilst OC sees Cpl (without coffee). Cpl holds up well, but doubts remain so OC has to call in scrot and under questioning he admits that NOTHING HAPPENED. He just wants out!

Ahhhhhhhhh. Anyway, classic roasting from OC (then from CSM, which was great to watch) who hit the roof and scrot was gone. OC then calls us all in and explains he had no choice, which of course, is correct and he didn't. HOWEVER, the CO then of course has doubts and no surprise, but we and said Cpl, were watched that much closer.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#8
Isn't that sweet ! Mummy's boy got his way in the end, bet he'd always been used to that ! :evil:

So the jack barstard decided he'd the right to try to ruin the career of a better man just so he could get back to mummy ?

I hope she bought him a nice motor as a welcome home present and he managed to top himself by smashing it into something inamimate !

I've no time for jumped up little h**ns with no thought of anyone but themselves !

:evil:
 
#9
posted in reply:

It must be remembered that juornalists plie their trade on sensationalism. Forget any hope of a fair and balanced viewpoint that sees the reality of what goes on, they have a line to sipn and they will spin it. The army has gone to great lengths to get rid of bullying from the ranks, and it has largely succeeded. Officers and NCOs will not abide bullying, we all know it is a sign of weakness in leadership skills, skills that count on the battlefield, and will always weed out the bullies one way or another. The system will not tolerate it, and it never has.

Sadly too many people see crying wolf as an easy way to settle scores and right perceived wrongs and where mud is flung some of it all too often sticks. Don't give biased journalists who haven't any service background or sympathy another opportunity to peddle their bias in the hope that the public will buy what they say through ignorance of the truth. Too many people are ignorant about the forces and casting calls for a "duty victim" only serve to reinforce the worst stereotypes.
 
#11
"Bullying" was the best way of getting rid of the wasters going through training. If they couldn't put up with the crap at depot they would never make it in the army for real.

Bullying is a justifiable way, as is suicide, of offing the unsuitable wasters.

Committing suicide is proof of just how unsuitable a person is for the army.
 
#12
armourer said:
"Bullying" was the best way of getting rid of the wasters going through training. If they couldn't put up with the crap at depot they would never make in the army for real.

Bullying is a justifiable way, as is suicide, of offing the **
No it isn't. A robust, but fair, training regime is.
 
#13
CrapSpy said:
No it isn't. A robust, but fair, training regime is.
But in having to be fair, it means that wasters get through. The isn't and never will be "fair".

MODS, WHO ADDED THIS TO MY POST, I DIDN'T WRITE IT:

No matter how high you set the benchmark someone will always just about scrape it, so at what point does pushing people out because they are on the line cease?

Personally I would rather have a soldier who is giving 100% and just making it under my command than someone who breezes through without caring. There has to be a balance and the culture should be about bringing people along who try hard as they will ultimately suceed. Those that don't try and are wasters the system should deal with and eject, but not by his platoon taking him round the back and filling him in on a daily basis until he "gets the message" while the DS look on. That doesn't produce good soldiers, it produces soldiers that can't tell the difference between effective soldiering and thuggery. If you want to know how the Lyndie England's of this world do what she did, look at the training system that instills the values.
 
#14
armourer said:
CrapSpy said:
No it isn't. A robust, but fair, training regime is.
But in having to be fair, it means that wasters get through. The isn't and never will be "fair".
I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you. An individual may not be the world's best soldier in subjective terms. But if he has passed all of his ITDs, then the 'fair' and objective decision is that he should pass out.
 
#15
CrapSpy said:
No it isn't. A robust, but fair, training regime is.
I totally agree. No matter how high you set the benchmark someone will always just about scrape it, so at what point does pushing people out because they are on the line cease?

Personally I would rather have a soldier who is giving 100% and just making it under my command than someone who breezes through without caring. There has to be a balance and the culture should be about bringing people along who try hard as they will ultimately suceed. Those that don't try and are wasters the system should deal with and eject, but not by his platoon taking him round the back and filling him in on a daily basis until he "gets the message" while the DS look on. That doesn't produce good soldiers, it produces soldiers that can't tell the difference between effective soldiering and thuggery. If you want to know how the Lyndie England's of this world do what she did, look at the training system that instills the values.
 
#18
I get the impression that some are confusing a tough training regime with bullying. They are not the same thing.

I remember vividly being beasted during basics in deepest winter in Catterick. My god did we suffer, - was it bullying? No it wasn't. It was tough and it made soldiers of us. No individuals were picked on, - we all got a hard time.

In a later unit I saw some despicable bullying and am pleased to have been able to help stop it. Bullying can ruin lives and make people do almost unimaginable things to make it stop.

Some of the comments I've read here must be made by bullies who cant tell the difference.
 
#19
woopert said:
CrapSpy said:
No it isn't. A robust, but fair, training regime is.
I totally agree. No matter how high you set the benchmark someone will always just about scrape it, so at what point does pushing people out because they are on the line cease?

Personally I would rather have a soldier who is giving 100% and just making it under my command than someone who breezes through without caring. There has to be a balance and the culture should be about bringing people along who try hard as they will ultimately succeed. Those that don't try and are wasters the system should deal with and eject, but not by his platoon taking him round the back and filling him in on a daily basis until he "gets the message" while the DS look on. That doesn't produce good soldiers, it produces soldiers that can't tell the difference between effective soldiering and thuggery. If you want to know how the Lyndie England's of this world do what she did, look at the training system that instills the values.
100% agree here also......

Statistics show that 80% of child abusers were abused themselves!
I wonder if this follows for the 'Military System'
If only one death is down to bullying, its one to many.

In the last few months the press have written about needless military deaths.

What about these:
(as at Nov 2003)

In the last 12 years 1750 army personnel have died in non combat situations.

This figure includes road traffic accidents and genuine natural causes

Other deaths are not as easily explained and are not fully investigated by the MOD

Over 200 of these deaths are fire arm related

Some are suicides

Some are unexplained deaths

Some are murder

Some as a result of bullying and abuse

Over to you.....
 
#20
Rudolph_Hucker post
Some of the comments I've read here must be made by bullies who cant tell the difference
very good comment:wink: and the same here. Bullying is not what the Army is about, Its training is about working hard and having trust in each other, at all levels.
I have seen how bullying has effected not just recruits with serious outcomes but all so trained seasoned soldiers. by all ranks, I have had the task of investigating officers, Maj upwards who have abused their status and made for example a 13 year SNCOs life hell. His complaint fell on deaf ears. why? because the Officer was a good rugby pal of someone high in the food chain. The SNCOs reward for attempting to complain through the proper channels was further mental bullying, what message has that sent through the ranks?
If the Chain Of Command continue to wear blinkers on this subject. how can it be stopped?

here is a good link on the subject with readings from the web on this sorry subject
http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/yone_manning/vpost?id=27
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top