WTF? (**NSFW**)

[dream big]

6 hours ago, torqued said:

https://nypost.com/2022/06/20/west-point-cadets-being-taught-critical-race-theory-report/

 

Nothing new, at an unnamed conus based ops sq, members were pressured by leadership to attend book clubs where the book “White Fragility” was discussed. I’m pretty sure it resulted in an IG complaint that went nowhere. 

[gearhog]

4 hours ago, dream big said:

Nothing new, at an unnamed conus based ops sq, members were pressured by leadership to attend book clubs where the book “White Fragility” was discussed. I’m pretty sure it resulted in an IG complaint that went nowhere. 

There’s a seemingly an increased urgency, rate, and volume in which this propaganda is being forced upon military members. 
 
The Navy, of course: 

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/pride-month-heres-how-the-navy-is-training-sailors-on-proper-gender-pronouns/

[Boomer6]

1 hour ago, torqued said:

There’s a seemingly an increased urgency, rate, and volume in which this propaganda is being forced upon military members. 
 
The Navy, of course: 

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/pride-month-heres-how-the-navy-is-training-sailors-on-proper-gender-pronouns/

Oh don’t worry, AFN is playing that shit as well.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

10 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Admittedly, I don’t know enough about HIV but even with no detectable viral load etc in the release, isn’t it still spread via blood/fluid exchange? Therefore, isn’t that putting other members at risk if there are no restrictions?

No, not detectable = not enough viral load to be spread to someone else. At least that’s what the HIV drug commercial that keeps playing on my TV says.

[nsplayr]

14 hours ago, Danger41 said:

Admittedly, I don’t know enough about HIV but even with no detectable viral load etc in the release, isn’t it still spread via blood/fluid exchange? Therefore, isn’t that putting other members at risk if there are no restrictions?

You've identified the root cause...now what's your instructional fix?

No detectable viral load = not transmissible. We've basically cured AIDS with modern medicine (for those who can afford it and get it and take as prescribed) and frankly it's a miracle unthinkable to folks back in the 80s.

The difference re: COVID vaccine is a person refusing the vaccine is disobeying a lawful order and choosing not to get protected against a deadly virus, while the person with undetectable AIDS who wants to stay is following doctor's orders to reach undetectable virus levels and has done what they can to protect themselves and others from disease.

Edited June 21, 2022 by nsplayr

[nsplayr]

6 hours ago, torqued said:

There’s a seemingly an increased urgency, rate, and volume in which this propaganda is being forced upon military members.

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." It's not a popular POV at this point in history, but you can just come out and say it. It's ok...this is a "safe space" 😆

I'll be fair to you vs just snarky and say point taken that perhaps some of our "celebration" months go a bit overboard on identity itself vs accomplishments of people of that identity. I agree. I don't care if you're gay and in the military, but if you're gay and did something worth celebrating while in uniform I'd love to hear about it and share that story.

But overall, if people wanna fly flags and be proud of who they are or celebrate their heritage then by all means go for it! I do all of those things for my identities as an American, an Italian, an Irishman, and an active service member.

Feel free to grill a hamburger, eat a spicy meatball, down a pint of Guinness and blow some shit up in July to celebrate with me!  🇺🇸 🇮🇹 🇮🇪🎖️

Edited June 21, 2022 by nsplayr

[frog]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." 

 

I think that misses the mark for most people. I really have no problem with what personal choices people make in the bedroom, nor with how they choose to party. I am, however, weary of the requirement for the masses to celebrate everyone and everything. It’s not just a “pride” thing - it’s a much larger toxic narcissism that is endemic to our society. 

[nsplayr]

47 minutes ago, frog said:

I think that misses the mark for most people. I really have no problem with what personal choices people make in the bedroom, nor with how they choose to party. I am, however, weary of the requirement for the masses to celebrate everyone and everything. It’s not just a “pride” thing - it’s a much larger toxic narcissism that is endemic to our society. 

Fair enough. Like I said, I would rather celebrate the accomplishments of a diverse group of service members rather than just their identities as this or that.

I know some who hold genuinely anti-gay views and they are feeling emboldened to try to turn back the clock 20 years, strike down legal gay marriage, and send folks back into the closet if not worse.

I would like to see them fail in those efforts and not be unknowingly helped by folks like yourself that might be anti-celebration or against highlighting different identities or whatever rather than truly anti-gay.

Edited June 21, 2022 by nsplayr

[Boomer6]

4 hours ago, nsplayr said:

I would like to see them fail in those efforts and not be unknowingly helped by folks like yourself that might be anti-celebration or against highlighting different identities or whatever rather than truly anti-gay.

@frog it would appear you’re too ignorant to realize your weariness of toxic narcissism makes you an enabler to homophobics. It doesn’t matter why you don’t agree with the celebrations, only that you disagree. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”

[nsplayr]

19 minutes ago, Boomer6 said:

@frog it would appear you’re too ignorant to realize your weariness of toxic narcissism makes you an enabler to homophobics. It doesn’t matter why you don’t agree with the celebrations, only that you disagree. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.”

Nah, don’t put words in my mouth. All I’m saying is that it’s a short road from, “Man this pride celebration is stupid” to “Haha yea man we should kick all the gays out again.” I’ve heard it.

Maybe none of y’all feel that way and ok, I’ll be wrong on that. But like I said, I’ve heard it.

Acceptance of gay people is still very young in terms of the list of “who gets full human rights?” and I don’t want to see any backsliding. I know too many good friends who are gay and who serve in uniform and they’re an absolutely critical part of our military team.

Edited June 22, 2022 by nsplayr

[VMFA187]

7 hours ago, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." It's not a popular POV at this point in history, but you can just come out and say it. It's ok...this is a "safe space" 😆

I'll be fair to you vs just snarky and say point taken that perhaps some of our "celebration" months go a bit overboard on identity itself vs accomplishments of people of that identity. I agree. I don't care if you're gay and in the military, but if you're gay and did something worth celebrating while in uniform I'd love to hear about it and share that story.

But overall, if people wanna fly flags and be proud of who they are or celebrate their heritage then by all means go for it! I do all of those things for my identities as an American, an Italian, an Irishman, and an active service member.

Feel free to grill a hamburger, eat a spicy meatball, down a pint of Guinness and blow some shit up in July to celebrate with me!  🇺🇸 🇮🇹 🇮🇪🎖️

If you have an American flag, an Italian flag, an Irish flag, and a USAF symbol bumper sticker on your car/truck... You're a tool. And so are these people who have to advertise their "identities." 

[Boomer6]

5 hours ago, frog said:

I really have no problem with what personal choices people make in the bedroom, nor with how they choose to party. 

15 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

Nah, don’t put words in my mouth. All I’m saying is that it’s a short road from, “Man this pride celebration is stupid” to “Haha yea man we should kick all the gays out again.” I’ve heard it.

Idk if you realize it but putting words in other people’s mouths, namely frog’s, is exactly what is done in the second sentence. Anecdotal evidence of hatred for LGBT ppl being applied to anyone that doesn’t fully support LGBT events happens constantly. I’ve heard it, I’ve seen it. 

There’s a large number of ppl in the AF that believe gay ppl should be protected under the constitution and afforded the same rights as everyone else. They’re just sick of being told if they’re not signing up to be an ally then they’re the problem.

[Danger41]

I’ll take the L for turning another thread into a monkey shit fight. I just thought people with HIV shouldn’t be in the military. Didn’t really want to start a referendum on seven topics.

[ClearedHot]

17 hours ago, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." It's not a popular POV at this point in history, but you can just come out and say it. It's ok...this is a "safe space" 😆

That is a very toxic statement, in my opinion that certainly does not match the vast majority of this forum or folks in uniform.  There will ALWAYS be outliers in any population distribution which sadly means a few bigots will get through the screening.  That being said I think most people believe you should be allowed to be free and love who you want.  The issue in my opinion is when you FORCE it down the throats (sts) of everyone.  I liken it to other forced training...Airman snuffy in services got a DUI so we are going to lecture EVERYONE about DUIs before the long weekend.  Or...There was a rape in one of the squadrons so rather than focus on holding that person accountable we are going to have a stand down and lecture everyone about sexual assault. 

Now we have the absolute lunacy in the video below.  How about we focus on being warriors, lets have training on how to knock down the S400, get to the target, deliver ordinance and get EVERYONE home...that is inclusion training.

 

[brabus]

@nsplayr What’s interesting is every gay friend I have absolutely cringe at the “pride movement/celebration” in its current form. It disgusts them. They, as a group, sought out years ago to have the same rights as others, namely marriage (and the legal, tax, etc. implications that went along with it). It wasn’t about “water boarding” society in gay pride. In fact, their views today are very in line with many espoused above…you do you, let me do me, and we can coexist without giving a shit about each other’s private lives. Sounds good to me, but attempt to shove your personal lifestyle choice down mine or my kid’s throat? Yeah go fuck yourself (that’s a general GFY, not directed at you personally).
 

With the shit that’s in schools these days, maybe all the hetero people should start replacing those window sticker families with silhouettes of dudes banging chicks, you know, to show their hetero pride. Don’t like it and fully support it, than you’re a POS bigot! In reality I would not support that one iota more than I support this current pride bullshit. Your sexuality should not define you, nor should it be plastered all over in public, whether you bang chicks, dudes, or trees.

 

[tac airlifter]

19 hours ago, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." 

The video subject is proper pronouns for trans and gender fluid menstruating people, I cannot believe you would be such a myopic sexist as to assume the video is about gays.  You are old and trapped in the early 2000s structure of thinking about the queer experience.  Get out of the way dinosaur, let a new generation spread their wings.. and you better get the terminology right; not their responsibility to make you feel good about your misgendering mistakes.  In fact the term “misgender” is outdated, it presumes gender exists rather than being an imaginary social construct.

/s

For real though: be as crazy as you want to be, it’s a free country (for now). And I am free not to join your deluded make-believe world.  I will call people he or she as applicable.  The video is not about gay people, and it’s hilarious you assumed it was.

Edited June 22, 2022 by tac airlifter

[nsplayr]

2 hours ago, brabus said:

@nsplayr What’s interesting is every gay friend I have absolutely cringe at the “pride movement/celebration” in its current form. It disgusts them. They, as a group, sought out years ago to have the same rights as others, namely marriage (and the legal, tax, etc. implications that went along with it). It wasn’t about “water boarding” society in gay pride. In fact, their views today are very in line with many espoused above…you do you, let me do me, and we can coexist without giving a shit about each other’s private lives. Sounds good to me, but attempt to shove your personal lifestyle choice down mine or my kid’s throat? Yeah go fuck yourself (that’s a general GFY, not directed at you personally).

That checks with a lot of people I know. Others are mad at the corporate feel of pride now vs being an organic thing.

I am highly supportive of leaving people alone but some of the rub (sts) comes in when gay folks are still targeted for what would be normal for a straight person. “My husband and I went to Mexico on vacation, it was fun!” and oh no, that’s a foul if you are a dude teaching in a school for some reason. If that person was a straight woman, no prob obviously. That’s not what acceptance and equal rights looks like.

Maybe I also just know enough conservative Catholics who are now quite publicly, openly anti-gay again seemingly all of a sudden and they want to go back to the 90s with hide it away, pray it away 🤷‍♂️ I humbly ask how well that has worked out for the Church in the past? 😬😬

Glad everyone replying here is mission focused and supportive of gay service members fighting on the same team.

Edited June 22, 2022 by nsplayr

[brabus]

21 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

Maybe I also just know enough conservative Catholics who are now quite publicly, openly anti-gay again seemingly all of a sudden and they want to go back to the 90s with hide it away, pray it away

That’s unfortunate. Can’t say I really know anybody like that nowadays; plenty of people who don’t morally agree with it and that’s totally cool, but they’re not actively/publicly supporting or pursuing anything limiting the rights of gay people (and I’m referring to lots of conservative people). The concept of we don’t have to believe the same, but can still be friends/mutually respectful is a wide miss for so many people in America these days; it’s very frustrating. 

Edited June 22, 2022 by brabus

[Majestik Møøse]

The Veterans Parking spots at Lowes and Home Depot are dumb. We’re not all handicapped with PTSD, and even if we were, when offered the luxury most of us are the types to automatically refuse the help anyway. I saw the instructions for applying a military discount at HD once, it says to most importantly “ensure you thank the member for their service.” Dude could be a CMOH winner or awaiting NJP, and the cashier is required by company policy to pander to them because of an attribute. Just like the gate agent lets you board before the families, or the commissary makes old ladies wait for uniformed personnel. Nah, I’ll wait my turn.

I imagine many gay people feel the same way about Pride Month when they see dudes slinging dong in public during the small town parade. FFS, just act normal and get on with it.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Majestik Møøse

[uhhello]

11 minutes ago, Majestik Møøse said:

The Veterans Parking spots at Lowes and Home Depot are dumb. We’re not all handicapped with PTSD, and even if we were, when offered the luxury most of us are the types to automatically refuse the help anyway. I saw the instructions for applying a military discount at HD once, it says to most importantly “ensure you thank the member for their service.” Dude could be a CMOH winner or awaiting NJP, and the cashier is required by company policy to pander to them because of an attribute. Just like the gate agent lets you board before the families, or the commissary make old ladies wait for uniformed personnel. Nah, I’ll wait my turn.

I imagine many gay people feel the same way about Pride Month when they see dudes slinging dong in public during the small town parade. FFS, just act normal and get on with it.

Nailed it.  I was thinking the same as your second paragraph reading your first.  I have a relative who is an admissions counselor and they have annual training to "deal with veterans".  She has explained some of the training and its very disheartening.  Basically walk on egg shells around them because they could explode at any moment and offer accomadations above and beyond anything offered to "normies".  Like you said, could be a guy who didn't complete basic training or follow on training.  

And the shitbags amomgst the veteran community will be the first to demand accomadations and adulations that the majority of veterans want nothing to do with.  

Edited June 22, 2022 by uhhello

[Negatory]

6 hours ago, brabus said:

plenty of people who don’t morally agree with it and that’s totally cool

I mean, this statement here is actually more telling than you realize, and it’s indicative of the centrist “everyone is right” attitudes that are extremely troubling to some of the LGBT folks I know. THIS subtle implicit non-acceptance is what they’re still fighting against.

You don’t personally actively hate or oppress LGBT folks, I’m sure. Most people and military officers I know don’t. But some don’t oppose those that do to the level that shows any moral courage. Implicitly, statements like these normalize and equalize f’d up beliefs.

Try these hypotheticals on, imagine you heard one of your buddies say one of these statements:

“I don’t morally agree that black people should be able to marry white people. In fact, they shouldn’t be allowed in the same place as white people, it’s just not right.”

“I don’t morally agree that a woman should be allowed to have a job. That’s a man’s right. They just shouldn’t be doing this stuff, their place is at the home.”

“I don’t morally agree that a person with a different sexuality than me should be able to get married or serve in the military. It’s just not right.”

If you heard someone say one of the first 2 things, you’d tell that person to fuck off. You’d tell them they’re wrong. I doubt you’d say “I respect your opinion” - in fact, I would expect you not to. Why is the third one different?

Just because someone has different morals doesn’t make their opinions “totally cool.” In fact, their morals can be pretty fucked up and oppressive. The first amendment makes it legal to say whatever dumb shit a person wants, I get that and am not going down that rabbit hole. But you don’t have to respect someone’s beliefs, and you surely don’t have to say that “it’s totally cool” for them to believe something that marginalizes a group of humans for an immutable characteristic.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Negatory

[Lord Ratner]

23 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Nah, don’t put words in my mouth.

That's fucking rich.

 

On 6/21/2022 at 12:46 PM, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff."

Seriously, do you pause for even a second before stabbing your justice boner straight through your keyboard?

 

Pathetic

[bfargin]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

I mean, this statement here is actually more telling than you realize, and it’s indicative of the centrist “everyone is right” attitudes that are extremely troubling to some of the LGBT folks I know. THIS subtle implicit non-acceptance is what they’re still fighting against.

You don’t personally actively hate or oppress LGBT folks, I’m sure. Most people and military officers I know don’t. But some don’t oppose those that do to the level that shows any moral courage. Implicitly, statements like these normalize and equalize f’d up beliefs.

Try these hypotheticals on, imagine you heard one of your buddies say one of these statements:

“I don’t morally agree that black people should be able to marry white people. In fact, they shouldn’t be allowed in the same place as white people, it’s just not right.”

“I don’t morally agree that a woman should be allowed to have a job. That’s a man’s right. They just shouldn’t be doing this stuff, their place is at the home.”

“I don’t morally agree that a person with a different sexuality than me should be able to get married or serve in the military. It’s just not right.”

If you heard someone say one of the first 2 things, you’d tell that person to fuck off. You’d tell them they’re wrong. I doubt you’d say “I respect your opinion” - in fact, I would expect you not to. Why is the third one different?

Just because someone has different morals doesn’t make their opinions “totally cool.” In fact, their morals can be pretty fucked up and oppressive. The first amendment makes it legal to say whatever dumb shit a person wants, I get that and am not going down that rabbit hole. But you don’t have to respect someone’s beliefs, and you surely don’t have to say that “it’s totally cool” for them to believe something that marginalizes a group of humans for an immutable characteristic.

Wow, Ok thought and moral police. Forever, humans have identified homosexuality as a fringe and unhealthy sexual activity, Science literature confirms that fact, social science literature confirms that (even back when it was abnormal psychology), and moral teaching confirms that. I have to temper myself big time to not verbally bash on homos and trans. They deserve mutual respect as humans but earn no respect from anyone for their personal moral choices. We as a society tolerate plenty of things we don't personally condone. Comparing homos to people of color is incredibly offensive and not accurate. Just cause you might be a homo, doesn't mean you can force your choice onto other's value system.

[ViperMan]

On 6/21/2022 at 10:46 AM, nsplayr said:

I know it's uncomfortable to admit, but some of y'all can just come out and say (sic), "I don't like gay people and don't want to see/hear/think about gay stuff." It's not a popular POV at this point in history, but you can just come out and say it. It's ok...this is a "safe space"

This conception of other people is not fully "covering." i.e. there are other reasons to oppose gay marriage besides bigotry. But such is nuance, which is not popular these days.

23 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Nah, don’t put words in my mouth. All I’m saying is that it’s a short road from, “Man this pride celebration is stupid” to “Haha yea man we should kick all the gays out again.” I’ve heard it.

...

Acceptance of gay people is still very young in terms of the list of “who gets full human rights?” and I don’t want to see any backsliding. I know too many good friends who are gay and who serve in uniform and they’re an absolutely critical part of our military team.

The thing about marriage is that it has been around since before time. Marriage between a man and a woman was always a thing, and it was enacted for reasons - to ensure children were cared for by those who made them. This tradition cuts across cultures, societies, epochs, civilizations, etc. It just so happens that in our modern conception of a state, we have elected to legally "codify" marriage, and confer social and economic benefits to those who get married, but that is secondary to the innate fact that it has historically been only understood to be that relationship between a man and a woman.

Numerous religious traditions have their reasons for teaching whatever they want to teach about religion. I don't subscribe to any of it. I just think that redefining marriage in order to conform to the "due process" and/or "equal protection" clauses of our constitution was done on dubious grounds and is blinkered to historical tradition.

IMO, the correct way to approach it would have been to define something called "civil unionship" and then let that legal umbrella cover everything from "marriage" between straights to "marriage" between gays. Then, let the different churches sort it all out how they best saw fit. All the legal benefits would accrue and people could keep their bigotry where it belonged: within their own backyards.

Don't get me wrong: people should generally be allowed to do what they want, but in this case we chose the culture war path and decided to allow everyone to park in the handicapped spot; in effect, nullifying the very reason why it exists in the first place.

[ViperMan]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

I mean, this statement here is actually more telling than you realize, and it’s indicative of the centrist “everyone is right” attitudes that are extremely troubling to some of the LGBT folks I know. THIS subtle implicit non-acceptance is what they’re still fighting against.

You don’t personally actively hate or oppress LGBT folks, I’m sure. Most people and military officers I know don’t. But some don’t oppose those that do to the level that shows any moral courage. Implicitly, statements like these normalize and equalize f’d up beliefs.

Try these hypotheticals on, imagine you heard one of your buddies say one of these statements:

“I don’t morally agree that black people should be able to marry white people. In fact, they shouldn’t be allowed in the same place as white people, it’s just not right.”

“I don’t morally agree that a woman should be allowed to have a job. That’s a man’s right. They just shouldn’t be doing this stuff, their place is at the home.”

“I don’t morally agree that a person with a different sexuality than me should be able to get married or serve in the military. It’s just not right.”

If you heard someone say one of the first 2 things, you’d tell that person to fuck off. You’d tell them they’re wrong. I doubt you’d say “I respect your opinion” - in fact, I would expect you not to. Why is the third one different?

Just because someone has different morals doesn’t make their opinions “totally cool.” In fact, their morals can be pretty fucked up and oppressive. The first amendment makes it legal to say whatever dumb shit a person wants, I get that and am not going down that rabbit hole. But you don’t have to respect someone’s beliefs, and you surely don’t have to say that “it’s totally cool” for them to believe something that marginalizes a group of humans for an immutable characteristic.

Dude you left off the active clause of @brabus point - which was that people he knows can disagree with something but not be actively working to disabuse anyone of their rights. Lurking behind your post is the thought police. Because you don't believe what I believe, you are an immoral person. I am the only one who gets to determine what is true.

Of course we all agree that discriminating against people based on their immutable characteristics is bad. The disagreement in this case is that benefits which society historically conferred (effectively) only on mothers and fathers shouldn't be extended to cover anyone else who decides they want them. It's not even a moral position in my case - it's a legal/financial one.