Interbattalion Romances

[C/SSGT Seifer]

Every battalion has at least a few couples within the program. I was just wondering what your opinion on this is. I personally think it is fine as long as it doesn't interfere with what is going on. For example, last year our Unarmed Team Commander was going out with another member of the team. The whole time that we were supposed to be practicing they were kissing :inlove:or arguing :mad:(some times back to back.) Then another member of the team would have to take over and tell us what to do.

[MP_Girl]

Hello C/Seifer (?)

First off, if your display name is your last name, contact Grunt. Violation of the Cadet Protection Policy here at Grunts. Just wanted to friendly point that out to you.

I believe that inter-unit relationships are fine, how ever they should not interfere within the unit and the jobs as well as duties. They should not be kissing, nor displaying any PDA, that is inappropriate, and direct violation of Uniform Policy.

First, you should not allow yourselves to have this in the unit. It is inappropriate, and quite frankly, does not belong in the unit. It is wrong to take these issues to the unit, and you are not suppose to be doing PDA when you have any form of uniform of the armed forces on. My Question to you is why did you allow it to continue? This is dishonor of the unit, corp, and the people in charge.

Punishment should have been discussed within these two people. You should have separated them.

to answer your question, the relationship itself is fine as long as there is no favoritism, and no direct violations of the UCMJ or what ever policies the unit has in place for these types of things.

[Pinpoint_KillerXO]

Siefer,

Its an ok thing mostly to a point. They would both need to understand and respect that they're in uniform. Even if its JROTC, theirs still a rule stated against PDA in uniform. Which them doing that in turn shames your squad, school, and respect. I wouldn't think a person with a lack of emotional control, does not deserve to be a CO in my opinion.

Semper Fi :devil:

[TruBlu]

Every battalion has at least a few couples within the program. I was just wondering what your opinion on this is. I personally think it is fine as long as it doesn't interfere with what is going on. For example, last year our Unarmed Team Commander was going out with another member of the team. The whole time that we were supposed to be practicing they were kissing :inlove:or arguing :mad:(some times back to back.) Then another member of the team would have to take over and tell us what to do.

I think that relationships are perfectly fine in the JROTC/ROTC as long as they don't compromise what they are supposed to be doing. I think its ridiculous when people say, "No high school cadet enrolled in the AFJROTC may date another AFJROTC cadet." I've had, in the past, AS4s telling younger AS cadets that they couldn't date certain people. I really just laughed and said that you make matters worse when you say things like that, and make yourself look like a fool.

But while in uniform, the uniform should be respected. And if two people in a relationship can't control themselves for even one day, or at least publicly, they need to spend a little less time with each other...

[C.A.P. Flight Officer]

I mostly agree with what has been said so far. If two cadets date in the unit and then split up because of an argument or an incident, the unit can pretty much be split like the U.S. House of Representatives. Two parties with a few third parties and independents. :mp:

[TruBlu]

I mostly agree with what has been said so far. If two cadets date in the unit and then split up because of an argument or an incident, the unit can pretty much be split like the U.S. House of Representatives. Two parties with a few third parties and independents. :mp:

Lol, nice metaphor. I didn't even think about it in that way. :D

[MP_Girl]

I mostly agree with what has been said so far. If two cadets date in the unit and then split up because of an argument or an incident, the unit can pretty much be split like the U.S. House of Representatives. Two parties with a few third parties and independents. :mp:

What the heck? This makes no sense..

[TruBlu]

What the heck? This makes no sense..

Lol, don't hate! No, what he means is that if a couple breaks up, usually people will start taking sides if it was a bad breakup. Then people could disagree a lot about stuff for no real reason. Kind of like our government at times, or all the time (did I say that out loud? Oh well...).

[C.A.P. Flight Officer]

Lol, don't hate! No, what he means is that if a couple breaks up, usually people will start taking sides if it was a bad breakup. Then people could disagree a lot about stuff for no real reason. Kind of like our government at times, or all the time (did I say that out loud? Oh well...).

That is exactly what I meant. LOL about your gov comment. Stuff like this happens. When cadets start taking sides the unit will suffer and most likely the JROTC teacher will get ticked off, then everyone is inn for it. :mp:

[Delta Charlie]

I would not presume to tell others how to deal with relationships or their personal lives, so I do not think relationships within the unit should be banned. However, there should be a line drawn when it might mess with the chain of command, or one side of the relationship has authority over the other. Flight Commanders should not date members of their (or really anyone else's) Flight.

This way, during the relationship, they cannot use their influence for favoritism, and after the relationship fails (and it will) they cannot use their influence to make the other person miserable.

It is also true that relationships can and will devide cadets. They will take sides, and you will have a little emotional war within your unit.

Should it be banned, no, because what you do with your life is your business, should it occur, probably not, and definately not within the Chain of Command.

[flyBoy2010]

I would not presume to tell others how to deal with relationships or their personal lives, so I do not think relationships within the unit should be banned. However, there should be a line drawn when it might mess with the chain of command, or one side of the relationship has authority over the other. Flight Commanders should not date members of their (or really anyone else's) Flight.

Then the problem arises, what if two cadets were already dating and both of them were put into the same flight and one of them had to be flight commander? Or other similar situations on drill teams and the like.

[StormCrow]

I for one am completely opposed to cadets dating within the unit. For one thing it creates way to much drama between cadets whether they are broken up or not. Two, what happens when one of them rises to a position of authority? The thing that I have seen happen over and over again...one says the wrong thing to the other and they end up burning the unit down with them...metaphorically speaking. So yeah, there is my take on it.

Storm

[TruBlu]

I for one am completely opposed to cadets dating within the unit. For one thing it creates way to much drama between cadets whether they are broken up or not. Two, what happens when one of them rises to a position of authority? The thing that I have seen happen over and over again...one says the wrong thing to the other and they end up burning the unit down with them...metaphorically speaking. So yeah, there is my take on it.

Storm

I think that cadets are students first, and teenagers above all. You can't stop teens from doing what they want to do when it comes to dating who they want to date. I understand where you are coming from on this, but its just not plausible.

And to flyBoy2010, if it happens it happens. But I do not believe that barring either of them from the position would be very productive as then you would be choosing a less qualified cadet. If a cadet is the most qualified for the Commander's seat, then he/she should know that they cannot allow the relationship to interfere with what they are doing. If they cannot do that, then they are not the most qualified anyways in my opinion.

[StormCrow]

I never said it was plausible. I just said I was against it. Believe me...Been there...Done that...got the t-shirt...wait, is that mine?lol...Just kidding.

Storm

[Delta Charlie]

Then the problem arises, what if two cadets were already dating and both of them were put into the same flight and one of them had to be flight commander? Or other similar situations on drill teams and the like.I wouldn't halt the progression of them based on their relationship, I would, however, do everything in my power to keep them apart when it came to JROTC. But, there is a limit to what can be done, you just have to try to prevent anything from happening. I would avoid having the two of them in the same flight, and certainly would not have one command the flight with their girlfriend or boyfriend in it, if necessary, the lower ranking cadet would be transfered to another flight.

Fraternization is a very touchy subject, but I also would not be afraid to sit the happy couple down and tell them they need to be more discrete.

[PaulR]

This way, during the relationship, they cannot use their influence for favoritism, and after the relationship fails (and it will) they cannot use their influence to make the other person miserable.

It is also true that relationships can and will devide cadets. They will take sides, and you will have a little emotional war within your unit.


For reasons you stated above, they should be banned. In the real military, it is called fraternization to date members of your own unit(if unit size is under 50) and/or in the same chain of command(regardless of unit strength).

It is not a matter of "if" such a relationship will negatively affect your unit... but when. I have been in the military for 18 years. Before that, I went through the ranks of CAP as a cadet to 1st Lt. I have seen it all first hand many times. I am looking to come back on to CAP as a Senior member NCO when I report to my next unit next year. If I see any tidily winks, PDA, or love spats, I will light up the concerned parties like a Roman Candle. Personal relationships have no business whatsoever being persued or maintained "while on the job". It looks tasteless and is completely unprofessional. Just my take.

[C/Major Black]

I for one am completely opposed to cadets dating within the unit. For one thing it creates way to much drama between cadets whether they are broken up or not. Two, what happens when one of them rises to a position of authority? The thing that I have seen happen over and over again...one says the wrong thing to the other and they end up burning the unit down with them...metaphorically speaking. So yeah, there is my take on it.

Storm

Me being in a past 'JROTC Love Tragedy" i completely agre with you storm crow. Myself and a feamle cadet (who was fairly good looking if i should say so myself), took a liking to one another, yet we were constantly arguing over the most dumbest things. Yet the love was still there.

This is where things got touchy. Me being a newly appointed C/2nd Lieutenant at the time, and her being a flight sergeant got in the way. I was on the Cadet promotion board and the diciplline board (kinda like a court martial). She was being brought up on charges of PDA in uniform (even though they were being spied on by a C/airman trying to snitch his way into being an officer). She was cought hugging another cadet in an empty hallway, and a kiss on the cheek. I made my feelings get involved with her hearing and ended up in her being fired and demoted from C/Master Sergeant to a C/Tech Sergeant, and me being put on probation for a month in JROTC; for getting too "hostile" in the hearing. Then people stated to take sides, and more arguments happened....it was a big mess. She then moved back to where she used to live, and I never heard fom her again. All this took place in 7 months.

My point here kids is, office romances do not work, something always goes wrong unless you absolutely know what youre doing.

I still do miss her though. :inlove::mad:

[PaulR]

This is where things got touchy. Me being a newly appointed C/2nd Lieutenant at the time, and her being a flight sergeant got in the way. I was on the Cadet promotion board and the diciplline board (kinda like a court martial). She was being brought up on charges of PDA in uniform (even though they were being spied on by a C/airman trying to snitch his way into being an officer). She was cought hugging another cadet in an empty hallway, and a kiss on the cheek. I made my feelings get involved with her hearing and ended up in her being fired and demoted from C/Master Sergeant to a C/Tech Sergeant, and me being put on probation for a month in JROTC; for getting too "hostile" in the hearing. Then people stated to take sides, and more arguments happened....it was a big mess. She then moved back to where she used to live, and I never heard fom her again. All this took place in 7 months.


You should have removed yourself from the proceedings. Oh well... we all live and learn!:D

[SlightlyCatholic]

The great thing about these cadet programs is that these kinds of life lessons can be learned in what basically amounts to a "life simulator." What you do as a cadet, short of committing a felony, has no lasting effect on the rest of your life. While you may find your passion for military service as a cadet and/or use your time to jumpstart a military career, what C/Captain Black is talking about is a perfect example of learning a very valuable lesson with little or no real life consequences. I learned some GREAT lessons as a Sea Cadet that will serve me very well, and I know many cadets who would say the same. These cadet programs will give you ribbons and rank, but when both of those are stashed away in a box and you're long gone from that program, what you remember are lessons and values. THOSE are priceless and can be taken with you wherever you go.

[C/Major Black]

The great thing about these cadet programs is that these kinds of life lessons can be learned in what basically amounts to a "life simulator." What you do as a cadet, short of committing a felony, has no lasting effect on the rest of your life. While you may find your passion for military service as a cadet and/or use your time to jumpstart a military career, what C/Captain Black is talking about is a perfect example of learning a very valuable lesson with little or no real life consequences. I learned some GREAT lessons as a Sea Cadet that will serve me very well, and I know many cadets who would say the same. These cadet programs will give you ribbons and rank, but when both of those are stashed away in a box and you're long gone from that program, what you remember is lessons and values. THOSE are priceless and can be taken with you wherever you go.

That was deep, and very well put. After High school, we will look back, and know what mistakes we made, and what to do to prevent them from happening. As a senior this year, I have finnaly realized to leave JROTC girls alone. My simple solution now is to date a cheerleader. :D:withstupid:

[C/SSGT Seifer]

Hello C/Seifer (?)

First off, if your display name is your last name, contact Grunt. Violation of the Cadet Protection Policy here at Grunts. Just wanted to friendly point that out to you.

I believe that inter-unit relationships are fine, how ever they should not interfere within the unit and the jobs as well as duties. They should not be kissing, nor displaying any PDA, that is inappropriate, and direct violation of Uniform Policy.

First, you should not allow yourselves to have this in the unit. It is inappropriate, and quite frankly, does not belong in the unit. It is wrong to take these issues to the unit, and you are not suppose to be doing PDA when you have any form of uniform of the armed forces on. My Question to you is why did you allow it to continue? This is dishonor of the unit, corp, and the people in charge.

Punishment should have been discussed within these two people. You should have separated them.

to answer your question, the relationship itself is fine as long as there is no favoritism, and no direct violations of the UCMJ or what ever policies the unit has in place for these types of things.

I would just like to clarify, they were not in uniform, I am not in any position of power (so i can't directly discipline them), and lastly seifer is not my a part of my name (and even if it was, there is no way of proving it is my name.)

[StormCrow]

If they were not in uniform, You have no proof,

Sorry but, guess what...the world is not about what you know. Its about what you can prove. And honestly if it is not in uniform...its none of your business in the first place. People have private lives to.

Storm

[SlightlyCatholic]

Cadets,

I don't mean to butt in, but I found some valuable information that can add to your conversation here. The citation regards fraternization and is found in Air Force Instruction 36-2909. It states the following in section 2.2.1:

Fraternization, as defined by the Manual for Courts-Martial, is a personal relationship between an officer and an enlisted member that violates the customary bounds of acceptable behavior in the Air Force and prejudices good order and discipline, discredits the armed services, or operates to the personal disgrace or dishonor of the officer involved. The custom recognizes that officers will not form personal relationships with enlisted members on terms of military equality, whether on or off-duty. Although the custom originated in an all male military, it is gender neutral. Fraternization can occur between males, between females and between males and females. Because of the potential damage fraternization can do to morale, good order,discipline, and unit cohesion, the President specifically provided for the offense of fraternization in the Manual for Courts-Martial. (See Manual for Courts-Martial, 1998 Edition, Part IV, paragraphs 59 and 83 for a discussion of fraternization and the related offense of conduct unbecoming an officer.)

Section 3.3 states:

Dating, courtship, and close friendships between men and women are subject to the same policy considerations as are other relationships. Like any personal relationship, they become matters of official concern when they adversely affect morale, discipline, unit cohesion, respect for authority, or mission accomplishment. Members must recognize that these relationships can adversely affect morale and discipline, even when the members are not in the same chain of command or unit. The formation of such relationships between superiors and subordinates within the same chain of command or supervision is prohibited because such relationships invariably raise the perception of favoritism or misuse of position and erode morale, discipline and unit cohesion.

Section 3.4 states:

Sharing living accommodations, vacations, transportation, and off-duty interests on a frequent or recurring basis can be, or can reasonably be perceived to be, unprofessional. These types of arrangements often lead to claims of abuse of position or favoritism. It is often the frequency of these activities or the absence of any official purpose or organizational benefit which causes them to become, or to be perceived to be, unprofessional. While an occasional round of golf, game of racquetball or similar activity between a supervisor and a subordinate could remain professional, daily or weekly activities could result at a minimum in the perception of an unprofessional relationship. Similarly, while it might be appropriate for a first sergeant to play golf with a different group of officers from his or her organization each weekend, in order to get to know them better, playing with the same officers every weekend might be, or reasonably be perceived to be, unprofessional.

So let's look at these individually...

In section 2.2.1, we see that fraternization is clearly defined by the Manual for Courts-Martial. Take a look at that definition. Does it state some sort of exemption from the rule should members not be in uniform? It certainly does not.

In section 3.3., it states: "The formation of such relationships between superiors and subordinates within the same chain of command or supervision is prohibited because such relationships invariably raise the perception of favoritism or misuse of position and erode morale, discipline and unit cohesion." Notice how I highlighted the words "raise the perception." What's there is what people can perceive, not what you can prove. If it looks like you're doing something wrong, you're doing something wrong.

In section 3.4., we see that word "perceived" again. See a pattern? It's not what you do, it's the ideas that people can form from what you do. That word "perception" (in one form or another) is used four times in section 3.3. What's my point? You need to make darn sure your conduct is representative of the best traditions of your cadet program and parent service....and READ THE REGULATIONS! Don't think you know what fraternization is considered to be, KNOW what it's considered to be and have the regulation(s) to back it up.

So you're all aware...privacy is not an exemption from the regulations. The concept of "what they don't know can't hurt them" is convenient but ultimately devoid of true character. Your lives, public and private, should reflect an obedience to the regulations of your respective cadet programs that ultimately derives itself from your own sense of honor and respect. Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is watching.

Again, pardon my interruption, but I think some concrete wording would help here to clarify this discussion.

[Airbourne Infantry]

*Thunderous applause* :salute: Well said!

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

Man... my platoon is MADE of couples. It's hard enough trying to keep them apart, but, when I'm NOT ALLOWED to butt in whenever they're doing things together instead of the work planned, it just ticks me off.

I have no problem with people dating, but, when they mix business and pleasure, it begins to tick me off. My LET-1 year, I wasn't allowed to perform because the Drill Team commander was dating a girl I knew (who was on Drill Team), and although she was horrible at rifle drill, she made the cut above me and another cadet who rivaled the first and second squad leaders!

[SlightlyCatholic]

As the Platoon Sergeant, you're the first line of defense against anything that shouldn't be going on. Why aren't you allowed to take care of it? If I were your superior and I saw something like that going on in your platoon, I'd be on YOU for not taking care of a problem like that sooner. It's your platoon, unless the title is nothing more than a title for you.

I have no problem with people dating, but, when they mix business and pleasure, it begins to tick me off. My LET-1 year, I wasn't allowed to perform because the Drill Team commander was dating a girl I knew (who was on Drill Team), and although she was horrible at rifle drill, she made the cut above me and another cadet who rivaled the first and second squad leaders!

That's a great reason to stop fraternization in your unit.

[PhilK]

Cadets,

I don't mean to butt in, but I found some valuable information that can add to your conversation here. The citation regards fraternization and is found in Air Force Instruction 36-2909. It states the following in section 2.2.1:



While all that is interesting, none of it applies to JROTC. No JROTC cadet has taken an oath or signed a contract. It is an elective they can take in High School.

While they agree to certain JROTC regulations, they are certainly not under any UCMJ codes.

Again, while it is good info, it is a bit of overkill for the JROTC ranks.

[Buffa1oso1di3r]

Yeah, this is what happens:

"You, get back to work, you, start studying"

*Company Commander/SAI walks up behind C/SFC*

"They're just High School Students, this isn't the real Army. Remember that."

Me: ...


Seminarian Tim: That actually hurts for you to believe that I'm not at the very least trying to do my job. I'm doing my job, but I have so many restrictions on me (mainly due to past incidents in the program, one of which is the reasons why we can't "grill" the cadets) that I can barely do what I want to do. The only reason I get is: "They're High School students, not the real Army."

My old commanders rocked... they grilled me, they pushed me hard, they kept me in line. (Of course, whenever they grilled my unit, the SAI wasn't around) But, I'm not allowed to do that. (Due to my SAI).

[SlightlyCatholic]

While all that is interesting, none of it applies to JROTC. No JROTC cadet has taken an oath or signed a contract. It is an elective they can take in High School.

While they agree to certain JROTC regulations, they are certainly not under any UCMJ codes.

Again, while it is good info, it is a bit of overkill for the JROTC ranks.

Understood, Major. My intent there was more for the ones who are planning to enter the military, to allow them to see that if it goes on now, it certainly won't be tolerated later on. Also, while they're not subject to the UCMJ in this regard, there's no reason why these cadets can't go back to their units and set the example for others to follow. They can't enforce the policy, but they can certainly practice what it preaches by emulating it themselves.

I'm very surprised that in the JROTC Regulations Manual, the words "fraternization" or "dating" don't even come up once in the entire document. The Sea Cadets have a specific citation about it right in the regulations. Different rules for different programs, I guess.

[AFCougar]

As great as it is that you dug those up Tim, it is a bit much for a High School Program. I know that within our unit, if they know there is a relationship between a Senior/Subordinate, the Senior can't do anything to affect their career. Plus, High School is getting you prepared for life, which makes it a good place to learn some lessons to carry with you. You live, you learn.

Personally, I don't encourage dating within the Corps, but I don't discourage it either. I've dated someone within the Corps my Freshman Year, I know what it is like. But people need to realize there is a difference between the Corps' time with you, and the time you are with your significant other, you can't mix both.

[SlightlyCatholic]

I suppose I may have been looking at the ideal without considering the real. While that wasn't my intention, I see now that posting the UCMJ is probably overkill. I think you have a good attitude regarding the issue, especially in a high school context. I'm someone who constantly pushes for the highest standards, and this would be one of the cases where it's probably okay to have a modified view of fraternization given the unique environment in which the program takes place. I tend to have a hypersensitivity to these kinds of issues and sometimes I end up using an axe when a scalpel is more appropriate. Just trying to give you all a good example to go by at your units, that's all.

[Drill for life]

I have one of those know. I have many relationships. It's fine for me becasue she doesn't do anything after school. I do side with you, they should be able to keep it in there pants long enough that they can get there job done. Especially in uniform, I don't even talk to people who aren't in AJROTC on uniform days. That is how much I respect the uniform.

[PhilK]

I don't even talk to people who aren't in AJROTC on uniform days. That is how much I respect the uniform.

Wow, that makes no sense.

I wear ACUs everyday, and while I respect my uniform that doesn't mean that I am not social with the civilian populace around me.

Whenever you put on the uniform you represent that service. You are to be an ambassador of that service. If you ignore the people around you because they do not wear the uniform then you will be seen as arrogant and stuck-up. That is the last image the service needs in this day and age. We are to embody the values of our component and show that to the people around us and that only comes through interaction.

[Drill for life]

Wow, that makes no sense.

I wear ACUs everyday, and while I respect my uniform that doesn't mean that I am not social with the civilian populace around me.

Whenever you put on the uniform you represent that service. You are to be an ambassador of that service. If you ignore the people around you because they do not wear the uniform then you will be seen as arrogant and stuck-up. That is the last image the service needs in this day and age. We are to embody the values of our component and show that to the people around us and that only comes through interaction.

I don't ignore people. I only do this in Class B's and A's I talk to my Civilan friends when I wear ACU's,BDU's,DCU's and OD's. I just have a lot of respect for the Uniform. I don't talk on the phone, hit on girls,chew gum or even talk loud(except when I am Commanding).

[PhilK]

A uniform is a uniform is a uniform.

Whether it is ACUs, Class A's or Class B's there should only be one standard.

[Drill for life]

I agree with you completetly, I just relax a little bit when I wear Utilities.

[armysc_25b]

Your reasoning has no logic to it. It isn't disrespectful to the uniform to associate with civilian friends, chew gum, talk on the phone, etc. Hitting on girls, I'll leave that one alone. If you want to chew gum, fine, but I usually do so in the privacy of my office when I'm at work. Talk to civilian friends, no problems there, especially in my environment since I work with civilians whose GS grades are higher than my unit's commander and when around the barracks I talk to my friends who are in civilian attire. Talking on the phone, if you get a phone call answer it, just don't stop paying attention to your surroundings (I promise your call can wait 3 seconds while you pay proper respect to the passing officer(s)).

[Drill for life]

I just follow the rules. If somebody calls me I just call them back that night when I have my uniform off.

[armysc_25b]

You obviously don't understand. Being in uniform doesn't make you untouchable, or a perfectionist, or someone that cannot be approached. In no regulation does it state that you cannot have basic human instincts in uniform. If you need to make a phone call, make it. If you want to talk to your friends, do so. At the same time, being in uniform means that yes you need to hold yourself to a higher standard since you are representing the Armed Forces and not be doing stupid crap. But obviously this is falling on deaf ears, so...

::Picks up ruck and walks away::

[Drill for life]

OMG, I have been doing the wrong thing this whole time. I have been acting like a total Jerk. I take things to far.

[MP_Girl]

OMG, I have been doing the wrong thing this whole time. I have been acting like a total Jerk. I take things to far.


THIS was uncalled for. Nice way to show respect to those who serve. My opinion still stands..Your not going to make it through Boot Camp. Quit disrespecting members of the Military, specifically ArmySC, because he is going to be an NCO here soon, and I respect him as a friend and a service member of the Army.

Secondly, I'll tell you now, just because your in uniform does not mean you can't act normal. You can still make phone calls, ect. ect. Why would you hit a girl? I do not agree with PDA..but you get my point..

[Billyd]

Back on topic, please. This has strayed far enough.

[Startingover]

My only advice to this whole thread can be summed up in 2 lines.

1) It aint your problem unless you are the commander in charge of the Flight/ Squadron/ Group/ Wing of the cadets in question. If you have reported it to your appropriate commander in sufficent time and detail, then you have done all you can do, and you dont have to come here and ask us to help you, because yes we can counsil but there is nothing we can do to stop it.

2) Even though the behavior is not tolerated in the military, the ROTC/JROTC programs still fall under the same jurisdictions. PDA of any form is untolerable in uniform no matter the affiliation you have to Military/Gov't programs. Out of uniform though, is up to the descression of your SASI/ASI to lay the groundwork for a classroom policy and many of the detachments I have worked with/ been to have had the same policy adopted as through the uniform Policy of PDA.

extranious thoughts:

In my own opinion, it is not much of a concern what cadets/enlisted/officer/Active Duty/ etc. do on their own time, but if you are in offcial capacity or in official duty gear, then it is not tolerable. What you do on your own time in your own space is your own, but keep the personal life just that, personal. We dont need people showing up and as you described it, clearly disruptive to the thought processes of everyone around you. Not only that, it also opens the door for very scrutinizing processes if it is Off/Enlst. Off/Off/ NCO/Off, etc because then there is the problem of preferencial treatment.

Boiling down, unless you have more stripes on your shoulders, just tell your commander and then drop it. It aint your problem and it aint technically your buisness, just make it a point to report it and then go along about your merry way and watch them destroy their own careers.

Edit in: And after that, I also recommend that this thread be locked pending any helpful information due to the questions of topic being answered and the topic... skewing... a bit from the original standpoint 1 or 2 many times.

[ClearShot89]

If and before this thread gets locked I thought I should let in some personal experiences in this situation.

As repeated through this thread I am like everyone else, respect and obey the rules of the uniform. There's no problem in my eyes, with battaion relationships as long as it doesn't become a public display.

My Sophmore year in JROTC, I was picked by application by the the ASI, SASI, and C/CC all on the fact that they all three knew of one relationship that could and might press the bounderies of PDA and favoritism at drill practice. I was chosen as the C/Flight Commander so that I would watch them and make sure they didn't do anything they shouldn't have been. They also promoted me to C/1st Lt. because at that time he was the C/DT CC and was a C/2nd Lt. They did that so I may take command if necessisary.

Reluntantly enough though I never had a problem from them with PDA or favoritism.

[amarine'slittlegrunt]

I am GLAD someone brought up this topic. In my Unit I see so much Public Display of Affection (PDA), even when in uniform. But every time I try to get onto them it's:"Oh, you are not in charge of me." Sad thing is- I am an Officer. This sets a bad example for 1st year cadets in the unit, and those outside of JROTC that may come in. This is where I think the demerit system in my Unit should come in. But, it's been suggested and denied. :sleepy: This leads me to believe that my Unit has lack of discipline. Our Cadet Handbook states: There will be no Public Display of Affection (PDA) while in the JROTC uniform, for this puts an unprofessional outlook to others. Also, this includes if at least one of the persons is in the JROTC uniform. What do you guys think? Should PDA be allowed while in uniform? How about if only one person is in uniform?



-AMLG :drill: