superfangirl1: (Default)
[personal profile] superfangirl1 posting in [community profile] scans_daily


A ghostly figure arrived to steal children. Batwoman arrived to stop the creature, but the spectral kidnapper stole away with the little ones, and the heroine promised to get them back. Cut to Gotham P.D., as Detective Maggie Sawyer concludes her interview with the grieving parents







Date: 2011-09-17 04:20 am (UTC)
rdfox: Schematic depiction of the operation of a Wankel rotary engine (mechanical)
From: [personal profile] rdfox
No, it's not. The whole point of putting people through that level of stress is to weed out the ones who'll crack under the pressure of combat. Officers end up with much more long-term pressure than enlisted types, hence the extended period of ultra-high pressure for them.

On top of that, part of the point of the psychological treatment of the cadets is to essentially break down the individual who initially arrives and then rebuild them to be a member of a cohesive team where *every* member of the team knows that they can rely on *every* other member of the team to do their job without fail. Individualism is a *bad* thing in combat. It gets you killed, and, worse than that, it gets the rest of your unit killed.

The harsh, almost cruel treatment is inflicted on the cadets for a *reason*. While they may seem arbitrary or bizarre, there is always a reason for everything that the military officially sanctions, even if it may not always be immediately obvious.

(There are some aspects of military culture, such as "blood pinning" and such, that are idiotic grunt-grunt macho-man rituals, yes, but none of those are officially sanctioned, and indeed, if the military finds out about them, they'll do their best to nip them in the bud.)

Date: 2011-09-17 08:34 am (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
The harsh, almost cruel treatment is inflicted on the cadets for a *reason*. While they may seem arbitrary or bizarre, there is always a reason for everything that the military officially sanctions, even if it may not always be immediately obvious.

I know that ostensibly there are reasons, it's just that the practice never seems to follow on very clearly from those reasons. I mean "break down the individual who initially arrives and then rebuild them to be a member of a cohesive team" - yeah, I totally get how saying everything in a theatrical shouty-voice will achieve that end.

Date: 2011-09-17 01:58 pm (UTC)
rdfox: Joker asking Tim Drake, "'Sup?" from Paul Dini's "Slay Ride" (Default)
From: [personal profile] rdfox
It's not the shouting that does it. In fact, most drill instructors look down on those whose only tool for the job is shouting; shouting is a tool used for the initial intimidation upon arrival (witness R. Lee Ermey's initial speech to the new recruits in Full Metal Jacket) and for situations when you either need to be heard at a distance, over noise, or because someone's doing something REALLY stupid and needs to be corrected RIGHT NOW (for example, starting to stand up on the crawl-under-barbed-wire course, where there's machine gun fire seven feet above the wire to add simulated combat stress--it's supposed to be high enough to be safe if someone stands up, but just in case, you're supposed to stay in a low crawl until you get clear of the course and thus off the firing line). Basically, shouting should only be used for shock value; anyone who relies on it won't be a very successful instructor.

There *is* the "command voice," but that's not shouting--that's projecting the voice with power and authority. Hell, I've never been in the service (health issues and, until recently, being bi meant DADT issues), but I've actually busted out the "command voice" once without even realizing to. (Short version: I was working part-time at Michigan State as an assistant traffic cop for events, and when then-sitting President Clinton was to speak at the graduation, I was assigned to keep a parking lot next to the site empty. Later, while I was out there, I was told that I was also to clear everyone back from the curbs when the motorcade came by(!); as it approached, I called out a polite-but-firm request that came out spoken, not shouted, but about four times louder and an octave lower than I normally can do, and saw *everyone* in a quarter-mile radius backing away from the curbs.)

The methods used to break down the individual and rebuild them are much more subtle and psychological, relying on a continual high-stress environment and repeated drilling to obey orders instantly and without question, so that even if your brain runs off into a corner and hides, you'll still be able to function under fire. The classic "Strip the bed! Make the bed! Strip the bed! Make the bed!" and "Empty the pack! Pack the pack! Empty the pack! Pack the pack!" routines are examples of this; they seem like pointless things, but it's intended to both make following orders instinctive, and build an instinctive attention to detail.

Interestingly, it's apparently a formal requirement that military instructors inform troops of the purpose, goal, and technique to be used in any form of training *before* they start it ("The purpose of this exercise is to learn to maintain the M16A4 assault rifle. The goal is for you to be able to field-strip, clean, reassemble, and function-check your rifle while blindfolded. The technique will be repeated practice in the disassembly, cleaning, reassembly, and function-check procedures, until it can be successfully done by sense of touch alone!"), and in the case of the training that is done as an ongoing psychological or physical drilling, there's a semi-official requirement that, if asked respectfully during off-hours (i.e., when not engaged in direct training), that they explain the purpose and goal of any of their actions to any recruit who asks, clearly and politely.

The days of the sadistic drill instructor who's just out there to break students because he enjoys it are long gone; drill instructors are now out there to weed out those who won't be able to cut it in the early phases, then do everything in their power to make sure that those who *will* be able to succeed in a military environment do so. (One crucial rule: Never ask, order, or expect any trainee to do anything you personally can't or wouldn't do, and be ready to demonstrate, at any time, that yes, you CAN do this, and a hell of a lot better than your best trainee.)

Hence Kate's behavior; she's putting Bette through the wringer to make sure she can cut the mustard before she shifts to a more (subtly) supportive instructional technique and builds her up into the sort of fighting machine she has the potential for.

Date: 2011-09-17 05:58 pm (UTC)
whitesycamore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] whitesycamore
The methods used to break down the individual and rebuild them are much more subtle and psychological, relying on a continual high-stress environment and repeated drilling to obey orders instantly and without question, so that even if your brain runs off into a corner and hides, you'll still be able to function under fire. The classic "Strip the bed! Make the bed! Strip the bed! Make the bed!" and "Empty the pack! Pack the pack! Empty the pack! Pack the pack!" routines are examples of this; they seem like pointless things, but it's intended to both make following orders instinctive, and build an instinctive attention to detail.

That makes more sense, but I still don't agree that it is "breaking down an individual and rebuilding them." For one thing, that sounds ridiculous and hyperbolic, and for another that's not actually what's happening, is it? They are being trained to deal with extreme and unusual situations in an quick and instinctive way - that's hardly the annihilation and rebuilding of a personality,* that's adapting to and becoming skilled in a high-stress environment. I've always had a problem with the phrase precisely it's hilariously imprecise, and it has a disturbing power-tripping feel to it - part of me just think that any institution that would proudly claim to do such a thing must be either stupid or malign.

As for the sense of comradeship that beasting engenders... Well, I could believe that it was the most effective method of encouraging teamwork if the military didn't have such a terrible reputation for bullying, corruption and sexual violence - and a culture that provides a convenient smokescreen for such behaviour under the guise of 'training.' It's the same ethos that made English Public schools a hotbed of bullying, corruption and sexual violence when the fagging system was in place.

Hence Kate's behavior; she's putting Bette through the wringer to make sure she can cut the mustard before she shifts to a more (subtly) supportive instructional technique and builds her up into the sort of fighting machine she has the potential for.

If by "cut the mustard" you mean be subservient to a bloviating asshole, then sure. It isn't fun to read about though.

*Well ok, I have met one person who proudly claimed to have been broken down and rebuilt by the military, but if that was true then the military rebuilt him into a spineless, dimwitted dick. He was also the only murderer I've ever consciously known (murderer in a civilian setting, although he was still in the army when he did it).

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

October 2014

S M T W T F S
    1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags