Talk:Tailhook Association

untitled
What happened to the Tailhook scandal?

This reference says the women who went to these parties year after year knew full well there would be sex there. So Wikipedia should have an article which balances the public perception of nasty unfair men taking advantages of innocent, pure women with this source's contention. Uncle Ed 21:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Sources?
I have removed the following claims that contradict the sources given in the article.


 * Despite claims to the contrary, no sexual assault was reported, but the sexual aspect was siezed upon by the news media, since the controversial Supreme Court hearings for Clarence Thomas had ended just two weeks previously.


 * Years later, it was determined that the abusers may have numbered as few as a dozen, including foreigners and members of other U.S. armed forces.

To quote one of the sources :
 * While some of the women were there willingly, there were 80 to 90 victims — including six officers' wives — who were not. Secretary of the Navy H. Lawrence Garrett, III, immediately ordered the Navy and Marine Corps to begin disciplinary action against some seventy officers. Over 50 were implicated in forcing women to run the "gauntlet" and six were accused of blocking the investigation.

And another :
 * I have five separate reports of young ladies, several of whom had nothing to do with Tailhook, who were verbally abused, had drinks thrown at them, were physically abused and were sexually molested. Most distressing was the fact an underage young lady was severely intoxicated and had her clothing removed by members of the Gauntlet.

Also, what is an "official cover-up"?

- Kwi &#124; Talk 15:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

A response to this article
I'm flagging this to be checked for its neutrality as it is so openly one-sided and makes poor use of citations. I can't respond to it further or more specifically as I found it so sexist that I could barely stand to read it. Would appreciate the review of someone more willing to deal with this. Unsunnedsnow 05:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)unsunnedsnow

Agreed. Flagrantly one-sided. 128.195.106.76 23:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Definitely one-sided. This article is in serious need of repair. --Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The 21:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

This whole article reads as an apologia for the conventioneers. Blatantly violates NPOV.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tailhook Association. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070808003736/http://www.tailhook.org/ChairFa02.htm to http://www.tailhook.org/ChairFa02.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)