Posted on Jun 20, 2014
Should current fratenization policies change to encompass social media?
7.23K
62
30
3
3
0
Real gray area here in a current military that is trying hard to eliminate gray areas.
Posted in these groups: 
Fraternization
Social Media
Fraternization Social Media
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
6
6
0
Simple: If it violates UCMJ in real life, it doesn't change because you did it online. I don't know that more rules are needed.
Really, it is easier to prove that an inappropriate action/relationship took place. 10 years ago, the equivalent defenses were, "I never said that," or "I wasn't there." In recent years, almost every 15-6 I have been involved in alleging "inappropriate relationships," e-mails, texts, and screen shots were submitted as evidence. Sure, SSG Sedlacek, you could claim, "it wasn't me," but that defense gets weak when I'm holding 50+ e-mails, 100+ texts, etc. If someone else is imitating you, hand me your laptop and phone and let's do the forensics and catch this impostor!
I believe all Soldiers have a responsibility to set the standard: if your posts are not for co-workers, don't invite them to see your posts; if your want to engage co-workers via social media, keep your posts professional. This is common sense! If you get caught for doing something stupid, you clearly have brought the punishment on yourself. Shut up about your "rights." You do have the right to say whatever you want, but are not immune from the consequences. You have the right to remain silent too - give that a try.
Really, it is easier to prove that an inappropriate action/relationship took place. 10 years ago, the equivalent defenses were, "I never said that," or "I wasn't there." In recent years, almost every 15-6 I have been involved in alleging "inappropriate relationships," e-mails, texts, and screen shots were submitted as evidence. Sure, SSG Sedlacek, you could claim, "it wasn't me," but that defense gets weak when I'm holding 50+ e-mails, 100+ texts, etc. If someone else is imitating you, hand me your laptop and phone and let's do the forensics and catch this impostor!
I believe all Soldiers have a responsibility to set the standard: if your posts are not for co-workers, don't invite them to see your posts; if your want to engage co-workers via social media, keep your posts professional. This is common sense! If you get caught for doing something stupid, you clearly have brought the punishment on yourself. Shut up about your "rights." You do have the right to say whatever you want, but are not immune from the consequences. You have the right to remain silent too - give that a try.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
I found it odd i received a request from a female junior officer that i barely interacted with professionally. A quick glance at her friends list showed many many enlisted junior and senior sailors on her list that really could not justify the reason for contact outside of normal shipboard interaction.
(6)
(0)
LCpl Steve Wininger
I agree MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca When Me and my estranged wife separated she was nearing 700 on her friends list.
I think what you referred to PO1 Brian Turpen Is way outside the norms, and what is required for professional conduct, especially for an officer.
I think what you referred to PO1 Brian Turpen Is way outside the norms, and what is required for professional conduct, especially for an officer.
(2)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
Well actually sir, you don't have to be Paris Hilton…lol…
I accept anybody and everybody but I learned I have to quickly draw that line of acceptable behavior with juniors AND seniors on social media.
I accept anybody and everybody but I learned I have to quickly draw that line of acceptable behavior with juniors AND seniors on social media.
(4)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Also remember that a junior officer is what, 23-24. Still very young in life and military and someone should pull that person to side and explain fraternization I'm full detail and assist them in handling that situation.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Rudy Lopez
Always a tough debate because let’s be honest, underneath every uniform is a human being and the service member was a human being prior to donning of the uniform; military indoctrination. Usually you get blowhard responses from mid-level officers and senior enlisted professing rules and regulations. From what I have seen it is mostly to beat their chest and show that they are enforcing good order and discipline; also they are married and are most likely involved in an intimate relationship (not just physical) so subconsciously they are probably in the mindset of "I got mine." This serves two purposes, it is to show higher ups they are doing their job and let’s be honest, it is a CYA response in case things go very bad.
I’ve heard it all: “Get out of the military if you don’t like the rules;” “It’s the rules, deal with it;” “You can get in trouble;” “Don’t join the military if you are not going to comply.”
So let us bring some intrinsic and humanistic quality to this conversation. Female/Male Officer is at a bar, out of uniform, talking to Male/Female enlisted personal also out of uniform. They struck up a casual conversation and there is some real chemistry. They start to talk and get serious in a relationship. They are professional about it and neither one interferes with each other’s job nor are they at the same command and neither have influence in one another’s chain of command. How can one realistically expect an artificial institution (military) to suppress Mother Nature (emotions) effectively? The more rules there are constraining certain aspects of personal life the more likely it is to lose control by the way of pushing a service member down the wrong path. Case in point, a service member files for divorce, according to the rules and regulations although the member has filed for divorce he or she is still technically married and thus cannot engage in another personal relationship. We all know that some divorces can take multiple years to resolve, in this situation the UCMJ prohibits the service member from engaging in a relationship outside of marriage or they will be punished for adultery. There is no grey area here; there is no military order that says if you file for divorce you can engage in another relationship. This is one of a many examples of the rules too broad and constrictive. Should the military force the service member to abstain from a relationship until the divorce is final?
I’ve seen quite of Officer/Enlisted marriages, and no, there was not a previous relationship before one ascended into the commissioned ranks.
I think SSG V. Michelle Woods is right in the sense that on social media you gauge your boundaries based on social media conversation and then ratchet it back a bit.
SFC Demond Thomas is pretty spot on with a good majority of Junior Officers are between 23-24 years old and are fairly inexperienced not only with regards to military service, but life in general. At a young age you are still curious and tend to go out exploring the adult world just like when we were kids trying to get to know our environment.
However, for those blowhards out there that would want to tear apart my write-up by reaffirming “rules are rules and that is it” then I suggest you put in a petition with the Department of Defense to have all recruits have their Amygdala removed from their limbic system along with the removal of their hair in basic training in order to eradicate the “unduly” emotional responses that may arise between man and woman, or between two human beings (rank aside) for that matter.
(social media is just another form of "personal interaction" thus my write-up written in the manner in which it is)
I’ve heard it all: “Get out of the military if you don’t like the rules;” “It’s the rules, deal with it;” “You can get in trouble;” “Don’t join the military if you are not going to comply.”
So let us bring some intrinsic and humanistic quality to this conversation. Female/Male Officer is at a bar, out of uniform, talking to Male/Female enlisted personal also out of uniform. They struck up a casual conversation and there is some real chemistry. They start to talk and get serious in a relationship. They are professional about it and neither one interferes with each other’s job nor are they at the same command and neither have influence in one another’s chain of command. How can one realistically expect an artificial institution (military) to suppress Mother Nature (emotions) effectively? The more rules there are constraining certain aspects of personal life the more likely it is to lose control by the way of pushing a service member down the wrong path. Case in point, a service member files for divorce, according to the rules and regulations although the member has filed for divorce he or she is still technically married and thus cannot engage in another personal relationship. We all know that some divorces can take multiple years to resolve, in this situation the UCMJ prohibits the service member from engaging in a relationship outside of marriage or they will be punished for adultery. There is no grey area here; there is no military order that says if you file for divorce you can engage in another relationship. This is one of a many examples of the rules too broad and constrictive. Should the military force the service member to abstain from a relationship until the divorce is final?
I’ve seen quite of Officer/Enlisted marriages, and no, there was not a previous relationship before one ascended into the commissioned ranks.
I think SSG V. Michelle Woods is right in the sense that on social media you gauge your boundaries based on social media conversation and then ratchet it back a bit.
SFC Demond Thomas is pretty spot on with a good majority of Junior Officers are between 23-24 years old and are fairly inexperienced not only with regards to military service, but life in general. At a young age you are still curious and tend to go out exploring the adult world just like when we were kids trying to get to know our environment.
However, for those blowhards out there that would want to tear apart my write-up by reaffirming “rules are rules and that is it” then I suggest you put in a petition with the Department of Defense to have all recruits have their Amygdala removed from their limbic system along with the removal of their hair in basic training in order to eradicate the “unduly” emotional responses that may arise between man and woman, or between two human beings (rank aside) for that matter.
(social media is just another form of "personal interaction" thus my write-up written in the manner in which it is)
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I keep things like facebook for friends/family, period. I've had a few requests from people I work with, but I have to decline. Personal life is personal, professional life is professional. It's important to maintain bounderies.
(6)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
PO2 Pistone - On facebook, I post personal pictures and BS with friends. On here, I tend to keep the discussion to the same level as I would at work.
(6)
(0)
COL Vincent Stoneking
I am with MAJ Dews on this. I consider RP and LinkedIn to be fundamentally different from Facebook, etc. I consider RP and LinkedIn to be primarily professional forums. Which doesn't mean that they can't be enjoyable - just that you are representing your employer and your profession whether you want to or not.
On FB, I have very few work or military contacts. And thus I can be freer in my sharing that would be appropriate for a professional setting (I also pay attention to my privacy settings). On RP and LinkedIn, I will accept almost all friend requests (unless the person is an ass, that I would not associate with in real life) and limit myself to only commentary that I would make either on an Active status or at my place of employ.
On FB, I have very few work or military contacts. And thus I can be freer in my sharing that would be appropriate for a professional setting (I also pay attention to my privacy settings). On RP and LinkedIn, I will accept almost all friend requests (unless the person is an ass, that I would not associate with in real life) and limit myself to only commentary that I would make either on an Active status or at my place of employ.
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
I agree about Facebook its for friends and ways to stay in touch with people from back home. Every one should just get a RP account and use it for proffesional relationships and bug out on their Facebook, not too bad though, we are adults after all.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google