Bravery is not this
The Washington Times reports that the media has gone apeshit over a gay kiss between two Marines as one returns from his overseas deployment.
“This is TRUE bravery!” reads one [comment on Facebook]. “The most insidious enemy we face in the struggle for equality is internalized homophobia. Kudos to any and every one who comes out for any and all to see!!”
Yeah all of you whiners who’ve been blown-up and shot and carried your friends on your back to get them out of the line of fire, or dragged them from burning vehicles with ammunition zinging around your head, this is what true bravery looks like (content warning – if you don’t want to see two men kissing, don’t click the “More” link. If you don’t want to see an iconic photo ruined by political correctness, don’t click the “More” link);
Yeah, I put it below the fold because I don’t want it on my front page until I write something else – that’s my choice, and in the current climate, who is going to call me brave?
I have nothing against folks being as gay as they want to be in the privacy of their homes, but I’m not having it shoved down my throat with the media telling me what I should think about it. And equating it to the countless truly brave acts that I’ve witnessed and had recounted to me is enough to make me sick.
I’d tell you imbeciles to stick it in your ass, but, well, you know….
Category: Military issues
Yeah, he’s not gonna take any shit from the rest of his unit for jumping on his “boyfriend” like a little bitch.
Sigh
A sign of the times, it was inevitable.
I absolutely DON’T agree with the political message being packaged with the picture, but it’s impossible for me to stand against the simple content of the ‘gay’ photograph unless I’m prepared to stand against the simple content of the other photo.
And while I do think it took a certain amount of courage to publically display his affection like that, I in no way think that equates to the courage it takes to face incoming fire or the constant daily threat of death or injury.
This genie is out of the bottle and there aint no putting it back.
Sigh
Damn, I just threw up a little.
He is in uniform and should conduct himself as such
^^^^^^ THIS.
I served under several COB’s (Chiefs of the Boat) who would have tell the married/dating guys to keep it in their pants until they got home.
It ain’t about who you’re banging, it’s about PROFESSIONALISM. And he’ll still take shit over it.
…counting down the days until retirement. I cant put up with this bullsh….
have tell = have told.
Jesus, even my brain is frozen today. And the snow is coming down like a sonofabitch. 10 inches and counting.
Innappropriate and unprofessional … PERIOD!
All things being equal, that sailor with the hotty in NY should have comported himself better also, right?
Or the husband/boyfriend with the hot wife/girlfriend he hasn’t seen in 12-18 months, right?
Or the soldier/Marine with the waiting family member they haven’t seen in a year?
If your argument is simple military bearing, ok fine I agree, but we then need to reel in a whole lot more than just homosexual displays of affection in that case. The ‘loved one mob fest’ is pretty universal across the country when troops get home these days.
If your argument is that homosexuality is just-plain-wrong, or immoral, well that’s a whole ‘nother kettle of fish, one that’s boiling dry in today’s culture, and is ceasing to have influence.
61 and sunny here today Sparky, supposed to be 76 by Monday. Ya need to move to the South West young man. 😉
Wonder how much fuel this adds to the koran burning riots. If I was one of them mullahs, I would plaster this pic everywhere to denounce the great satan and their corrupted ways. “Look they are sending homosexuals to burn our korans….”
Semper Fag?
The sailor does not have a tassel of flowers around his neck and doesn’t have his legs wrapped around the girl. I’d call that fine for a homecoming the marine pics is strait inprofessional and gives the corps a bad image.
So if he had bent his boyfriend over for the lip lock the way the sailor did the woman in the WWII picture, and he wasn’t wearing flowers, it would be ok?
Just looking for clarification Anon.
Call me homophobic, old fart or whatever. The fact is that I dont like fags in or out of uniform, period. Sexual orientation by choice? WTF? so, having a sick desire is ok and aceptable behavior?
Next will be the pedophiles, they need love too, dont they? they are just as sick and perverted as a fudgepacker.
John,
Any reason why your trying to piss me off today. The friggen libs and their social engineering agenda have friggen won.
You see, the worst thing about all of this is that the fellow with the jeans on was trying to enter a secure and prohibited area, when this daring and brave marine ran up to perform the latest in U.S.M.C. hand-to-hand combat moves. …and he did it in textbook fashion, too!
First, you run up to your attacker/enemy/opponent, and jump on him from the front. Wrap your arms and legs around him/her. Clasp hands and cross feet, if possible, to maintain better control and prevent your opponent from escaping or counter-attacking. Now, suck all of the breath out of your opponent. Alternately, if the breath-stealing effort is not working, then jam your tongue all the way down his/her throat in an effort to strangle them to death. When performed correctly, this maneuver is the most lethal move in the marine hand-to-hand arsenal.
Now, the media all went and assumed that this was some sort of “affection”. Pure garbage. Total spin doctoring. Sickening.
@ #15
See, now THAT response is honest and straight. No tiptoeing around the elephant in the room.
I appriciate that response because I can now clearly identify what I’m dealing with and religate it to it’s proper slot, right next to the folks who still think “All n****rs need to move to back of the damn bus, what’s the world coming to.”
I can’t prove a gay guy is born that way, and you can’t prove that they’re not. Most of your expression is simple hyperbole. In the absense of proof it’s easy to give into fear and strike out at things you find confusing or unsettling.
And comparing behavior between two consenting adults to child predation? Sigh , like I said above, at least I know what I’m dealing with now.
No it isn’t. Among most Marines it would be considered conduct unbecoming. We don’t normally enforce the prohibition against public displays of affection when in uniform, but whether straight or queer, this is unsat.
As for those of you who are pissing about the photo on the left, one, he is a sailor, and two, in 1945 there were no regulations existing as to public displays of affection per se. Plus, he was on liberty in the only clothes he was allowed to wear. In 1945, civilian attire was forbidden to be owned by enlisted men while on active duty. The homo Marine was at a unit formation/function in uniform at the time of this nonsense. Not at all the same thing.
I gotta say, as a liberal, I find his professionalism whilst in uniform, offensive. There is no need to act like that, be it gay or straight. You don’t see Hetero couples jumping into their partners arms like they’re Yogi Berra and the Yankees just won the series. I don’t want to see a straight couple playing tonsil hockey in public. PDA should be kept to minimum and not look like you’re chewing someones face off. Straight or gay. Damn… Guess they’re gonna take my liberal card away now.
I’m inclined to agree with you Steve.
The more I think about it the more I put it in context with a female Marine or Soldier in uniform jumping into her civilian boyfriend’s arms. I wouldn’t care for that either. I don’t find public affection necessarily disagreeable, but more decorum and or class could be shown. You’re still going to have reactions like Abnmdc’s, but I doubt a simple embrace or simple kiss would be as widely objectionable.
At 14 in my opinion it wouldn’t have been ok no matter what he did if that puke was in my infantry squad while I was in I would have hazed him everyday till he offed himself or left my unit. I was just saying he went way to far and made the corps look bad. The only way it would be ok was if a girl had her legs wrapped around him.
As for your statements in #20, if one is honest, the issue most people have with the photo on the right doesn’t have a thing to do with regulations, it has to do with their personal morality being offended, I believe claims other wise are mostly whitewash, not all, but most. Your arguments in defense of the photo on the left are null in that context.
Jacobite–see my comment above. I don’t want to see two guys doing it, I don’t want to see two women doing it, I don’t want to see a guy and a gal doing it–not like that.
And believe me, had some of the “boat wives” tried that, there would have been ambulances and spinal boards needed. They don’t call ’em “Bremelos” or “Grotopautamuses” for nothing.
Perfect example of my point in #24 Anon. Your reaction to the photo is based more on emotion than on reason.
Interestingly this is one of the situations where men may exhibit unreasonable emotional response more than women will.
“Grotopautamuses”
Awesome! I hadn’t heard that one (or herd that one?) before, that’s hilarious!!
Concur completely with the calls for this act (by any gender) in uniform, at an official function……totally unbecoming for any service.
Jacobite: you might want to re-think your comparison of race and sexual orientation above. You’re equating the two, IMO invalidly. The two are not directly comparable.
Race is innate and determined by heredity; it requires no voluntary action for its expression. However, whether innate or learned sexual orientation is only manifested through voluntary action.
One cannot control one’s heredity. However, one can control one’s conduct.
I personally had no problem with DADT, as it was a prohibition on conduct – not belief. And conduct in general can be lawfully regulated.
Whether a particular type of conduct should be regulated is an entirely different discussion than whether or not racial prejudice should be allowed.
Hondo nails it–whether sexual preference is genetic or learned, CONDUCT is the question at issue here.
Damn, I’m off today. First sentence of para 4 above should end ” . . . on conduct – not orientation.”
Conduct is certainly the issue in this particular case, but speaking generally, sexual orientation is about far more than conduct.
It’s also about biological attraction and emotion. I could become celibate (not going to happen though), but would still remain distinctly heterosexual.
I view this with the same yawn as I did a couple months back when they had the Navy chick sucking face with her girlfriend when her ship came into port. big whoop. If they’re that starved for attention, then they have bigger issues in their life that need to be addressed.
However, I believe this is a media driven story in order to get a certain amount of “buzz” going, or to sensationalize the concept of a Marine jumping into his boyfriend’s arms as something more than it really is.
CI: that is true. And if married, except with regard to your spouse you’d damn well best remain celibate if you want to avoid potential charges of adultery under Article 134 of the UCMJ.
Conduct may be regulated.
@34 – “Conduct may be regulated.”
Absolutely, if based on a logical rationale….(at least in a perfect world. Much of the regulations we labor under aren’t logical). I think PDA in uniform, especially at an official function should fall under that restriction.
And I am married, though thankfully retired. And Mrs. CI doesn’t have to worry, I married up and am damn grateful that I did!
“One cannot control one’s heredity. However, one can control one’s conduct.”
I agree, conduct is the question. And I wasn’t drawing a comparison between race and sexual orientation, I was drawing a parallel between racism and moral bigotry, specifically as it related to Abnmdc’s response. They are both unreasonable reactions to admittedly different stimuli, and usually rooted in either ignorance or fear.
Being upset with the conduct by its self is understandable and supportable. Being upset with the conduct because it’s “fags” doing it, is harder to justify.
And like OT, I believe this is hugely media driven. I’m way more upset by the political manipulation of the whole thing than I will ever be by the photo.
@ 25 Sparky, I’m with you. I don’t want to see two ANYONEs trying to inhale each others heads. My wife and I will either, depending on the situation, hold hands or she will take my arm and if we get real racy I might put my arm around her waist! We rarely kiss in public and I mean rarely.
Something I remember about graduation day from MCRD was one of our DIs reminding us about excessive DPA. I remember thinking, I haven’t seen or talked to my girlfriend in three months and all I can do is shake her hand?!
I may vomit. A lot.
Back in the day,we were not even allowed to hold hands while in uniform…His conduct is despicable!
Gentlemen,
As a former United States Marine, I do not care about what you do off -duty and in your own home. This display of affection in uniform is absolutely uncalled for. I could a rat’s rear-end what their personal preferences are, but that was an absolute disgrace to my uniform. When I graduated boot camp we were strictly told that we would not act like a bunch of horny apes when we were dismissed, we couldn’t even hug our mothers in uniform. Same-same coming off of deployment. To Beretverde, I don’t appreciate that particular comment. I am not trying to get into a pissing contest with you, just please don’t.
Semper Fi.
I find it interesting that Edith Shain (the woman in the 1945 photo)didn’t admit to being the woman in the photo till around 1970 because she was too ’embarassed’ by it.
That sailor that kissed her may not have had any class, but she certainly did. 🙂
Guess we know who is the top is, and I ain’t talking ’bout the first sergeant.
I wouldn’t even care if he gave him a hug and a peck, but Jesus man nobody wants to see you dry humping your partner.
@34 – “Conduct may be regulated.”
Absolutely, if based on a logical rationale.
Yeah, CI. And the old DADT had a very logical rationale. You didn’t understand it. CI isn’t the judge of what is and isn’t logical rationale.
We had this argument before. It seems like a moot point now because the policy is gone. The military can tell you what to do. It isn’t a violation of your “liberty” to do so. If you don’t like it, there’s the door.
“Concur completely with the calls for this act (by any gender) in uniform, at an official function……totally unbecoming for any service.”
Wow!
And it’s happening anyway, much to the delight of the media. Speak out against it and you’re a bigot.
Told you so. This is beyond predictable.
I remember when we were having this DADT debate, the pro-homosexual normalization side claimed that we wouldn’t have to worry about rampant gayness because “the gays would have to follow all the same rules as the straights.”
Ergo, no kissing while on night guard duty, no PDA, no hooking up in the back of the humvee in Iraq.
I had two things to say about that. One, the “straights” violate those rules too. When they’re caught they get punished but it happens all the time. Having a rule against it doesn’t mean that it simply doesn’t exist. Ever since there have been women in the military, those rules have been violated. I saw it. But with “straights” you can at least segregate them by sex at certain times. Not so with homosexuals.
And secondly, I didn’t believe for a moment that homosexuals would be punished for breaking the rules. They would break them with impunity and be treated with kiddy gloves.
So…who was right?
All Marines are brave for being Marines.
These guys are not extra brave for being perverts.
Today, the Sailor in the left picture would be prosecuted for sexual assault (more than likely, as he didn’t even know the woman).
As for the other picture, when I was in the Marine Corps, it was against the rules to even hold hands with your wife/girlfriend.
Brave? This crap is now legally protected. Brave.
That would be like me displaying bravery by planting grass in my own backyard.
Except I would haven’t to tolerate the grass and feign guilt for years of rejecting it’s abhorrent lifestyle.
Lessee here: One just got back from a mere six month deployment, may have seen some shit, may not have. Jumps into the arms of his “lover” like a little girl.
The other, is in New york on leave, and just found out the war he’s been fighting for the last 4 fucking years that has killed upwards of 80 fucking million people, has forced everyone in America to sacrifice food, goods, and services for the war effort, put 16 million men and women in fucking uniform and another fucking 8 million in direct support of the war effort.. is finally won and over with the fucking socialist monster dead and fucking defeated. And he finds the one person that symbolized all that is good and kind and caring with America, and plants a big fat wet one on her in gratitude and thanks.
yeah, I can see where they compare…..
…that last sentence is sarcasm, thick heavy fucking sarcasm.