What's all this about Barbara Boxer correcting a General for calling her ma'am

[devilgrrl]

Someone just unfriended me on facebook because I defended her.

Was she as whacked out as rightards suggest?

[Obamanaut]

1. yes. nt

[cloudbase]

2. It was unbecoming of her

to publicly admonish the general for calling her "ma'am" instead of "senator."

[hlthe2b]

10. She did so firmly but politiely after he continued to do so for some

time. She was well within her rights to request he refer to her as he did the male Senators.

[kestrel91316]

12. I disagree, since what the general did was rude and disrespectful.

He should have addressed her as "Senator" the first time, then following that "Ma'am" would have been acceptable. And he should have known that.

[Sinistrous]

19. Do we know for a fact that he did not initially

address Sen. Boxer as "Senator" at the start of the hearing?

If he did, then, as you noted, the use of "Ma'am" is proper, and Sen. Boxer was out of line.

[alfredo]

35. He called the male Senators "Senator" but not Boxer. After the hearing

the General and Senator Boxer talked, there was no confrontation, they were quite amiable.

She was well within her rights because it is protocol, and the military is subservient to the civilian government. She outranked him.


One other thing about that hearing, the General was being evasive by not fully answering the panels questions. That is not what a soldier does when brought before the Senate. Sen Boxer showed restraint.

[Sinistrous]

36. Rank had nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, addressing a female superior in the military as "ma'am" is the proper and expected protocol.

[alfredo]

40. Boxer is a Senator, not an officer.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[undeterred]

22. It was belittling of him to fail to acknowledge her status.

[madokie]

3. Barbara Boxer is never and I repeat never whacked at.

don't ever forget that :hi:

[SidDithers]

4. Nevermind...nt

:hi:

Sid

[tularetom]

5. I don't think she was whacked out at all

She merely insisted on the proper form of address for a US Senator.

That general would've had a shit fit if one of his subordinates failed to observe proper protocol, so he should do the same.

Fuck him if he can't take the truth.

[spanone]

13. it would have been the same as her referring to him as 'mister'. he would have been pissed.

[Sinistrous]

21. No, it was the same as her calling him "Sir", which is a proper term of address in the military.

[devilgrrl]

25. I would think "General sir..." would be more appropriate for him...

would it? Any in the military know the correct term to address a General?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

27. no, sir will do nicely

Sir and Ma'am are effective pronouns or place holders for longer titles. You do not use both together in normal discourse. The general's use was proper and perfectly correct. That said, once asked, he should have referred to her as she requested. I am sure no military witness will call her anything but Senator again, no matter how strained it makes the dialog.

As for Boxer, she took offense where none was intended. Protocol was being followed. She got testy over nothing and looked like an pompous ass for it. It made the national media. Her opponents are using it as an example of hubris and regalism. It won't work and has no legs.

Finally, as anyone who has been in uniform knows, referring to someone exclusively by rank is one of the more contemptuous insults a subordinate can do.

[devilgrrl]

28. Thanks for the info.

I obviously have never served.

Thank you for your service. :patriot:

[Cid_B]

39. I usually look through a thread...

to see if anyone has already made my points and here they are.

[hlthe2b]

41. never mind...

[QC]

6. I love Mame!

[kestrel91316]

7. " 'mame"??? Do you mean "ma'am" which is short for madam?

[hlthe2b]

8. During a Senate Hearing a General kept referring to her as

"ma'am," which is a common practice in the military. However, in the Senate, one refers to those questioning you as "Senator," whether male or female. She asked him to comply. I don't blame her a bit. While it may have been accidental and not the General being a sexist idiot, this is normal protocol that he of all persons should have followed. Had he ever watched a hearing for just five minutes, he would have known better. That's why I think it was intentional, yet subtle way to put the "antagonistic female who was harshly questioning him in her place"..

[Hekate]

14. You know, you could be right about that. Women of Boxer's age have fought long and hard for respect

... so she may well have seen something over the time of the hearing that I didn't in the clip I saw.

Hekate

[hlthe2b]

16. I have seen men do it to female physicians too...

and believe me, it is intentional (referring to the male as "Doctor" but the female physician as Ms. or ma'am). It is a subtle but very intentional attempt to diminish the woman. Sadly, many males don't see it and will defend the man who does it, while branding the woman as being "rude" or "elitist" for demanding the same respect. Some insecure men can be incredibly petty creatures, I'm afraid.

[LuvNewcastle]

9. I read about that today.

She corrected him for calling her ma'am and suggested he call her Senator. She said she'd worked hard to get that position. Republicans is California are trying to make political hay out of it. I don't think it will come to anything.

[timeforpeace]

18. This happened months ago.

[LuvNewcastle]

23. The story that I read was really about

the Republicans who are challenging her for her seat. They have a website about it http://callmebarbara.com/ and are raising donations from there. That's why I was just reading about it today.

[Hekate]

11. I was a bit startled, but she was within her rights as a Senator. I just thought the General ...

... was using it in the military sense, as the equivalent of "sir" because female officers are called "ma'am," I believe.

Hekate

[DURHAM D]

15. It happened months ago.

Senator Boxer was out of patience with the old fart. She should have done it much earlier - she let it go on for way too long.

[WeDidIt]

20. If you intended this thread as a wingnut trap

it couldn't have been more effective in that regard.

:evilgrin:

[devilgrrl]

26. It was unintentional but if it rid us of some bad rubbish - then awesome!

:headbang:

[catnhatnh]

24. Umm...

Ma'am is extremely deferential and commonly used by military to refer to any female officer or superior. However it would be impolite to refer to anyone by a title they had rejected. If a male officer somehow was offended by referring to him as "Sir" I would then refer to him by rank...Captain, Major, Colonel, etc...
Edit: You know, on reflection, there's only 100 senators all of whom are probably higher on the chart than generals and admirals all of whom are subservient to civilian control. So yes, if continued insisting, not merely defaulting to Ma'am he was wrong.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. Referring to a superior only by their rank is one of the more contemptuous

things a subordinate in the military can do.

[catnhatnh]

30. Yeah...

But if they object to sir or ma'am your options are limited. In this case I don't know what options remain. I do remember "Loo" or "Cap" being fine.Just seems to be the higher they rise the pricklier they get...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Never seen a military officer object to Sir or Ma'am in context

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

32. It wasn't a very good showing.

[donheld]

33. I thought she was spot on!

[A-Schwarzenegger]

34. Goddamn civilians sapping and impurifying our precious bodily fluids.

:*

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Did she call the general "Mr."? Or, by the more apt title, "Shithead"? .

[A-Schwarzenegger]

38. .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheisskopf