Internet butthurt
Andy11M sends us a link to a story about Vanessa Hicks who is a veteran and a photographer who took this picture of her 8-day old baby and her husband. When she posted it, the internet lost it’s shit;
On one Facebook page an unidentified poster put up her picture writing and wrote they found it was “disrespectful, rude, tacky, disgusting, and against the U.S. Flag Code.”
[…]
“I have seen first-hand what is desecration of the flag,” Hicks said of her time in the military. “At the end of the day I didn’t do anything that disrespected this flag.”
Hicks, whose husband is still on active duty in the Navy, said the flag is a symbol of U.S. freedoms including the First Amendment right to free speech.
From USAToday;
“Not only the photo, but the service member that was in the photo – saying he should be reprimanded; he should be kicked out; he’s dishonoring the uniform,” Hicks continued.
I’ll admit that it’s a little corny, but, it’s certainly not disrespect for the flag. There’s enough real disrespect out there to the flag, the country, the constitution, but this ain’t it. I just saw Ms. Hicks on Fox & Friends and I don’t think she meant it the way that the internet police think she meant it.
Category: Dumbass Bullshit
Yeah, call me when liberal dumbass hippies stop wiping their collective asses with the flag cause I’m all internet butthurt about THAT. Oh and Obama. And Hillarity Clinton.
Thanks
I posted this comment this morning over at RightScoop.com
“She’s not burning the flag, urinating on it, spitting on it or defiling it in any way……I think what she did is beautiful. Period!
Now let’s talk about something important….like that idiot Hillary.”
The joy of the internet is that someone will be butthurt about something, no matter what it is.
The new FCC regulations will take care of THAT!
Huh. My first thought is it’s a metaphorical promise to this baby that the US/US military will stand watch and keep baby safe and baby’s liberties sound. A little corny? Maybe. A desecration? I don’t see it. I guess it all depends on perspective. I’m all for respect; but I think some folks need to broaden their horizons and tolerance just a wee bit.
Those internet police? Oh, they’re just not happy with anything that people do. You just can’t please them. Good reason to not do social media.
Very Cute Baby factor X 100. (IMHO)
Thanks for posting this, it seemed much ado about nothing to me…in fact to my line of thinking the photographer as an artist could make the claim that due to the service of the parent there is an artistic statement that the child is wrapped in the flag of the father’s service as is the nation the father is sworn to protect and defend from all enemies.
When some idiots wear flag shorts all summer or flag underpants and bikinis it’s hard to get upset about this. I am far more offended by assholes burning and stomping on the flag than I am about a veteran wrapping his child in it for a photograph.
” … the photographer as an artist could make the claim that due to the service of the parent there is an artistic statement that the child is wrapped in the flag of the father’s service as is the nation the father is sworn to protect and defend from all enemies.”
That’s how I see it, too. Very poetic …
Agreed, VoV. It might also be pointed out that not only is photography a form of art, but that art itself is supposed to provoke an emotional response even if it might take you out of your normal comfort zone.
Hicks deserves some credit here. She took what could have been a routine baby picture assignment, and worked a flag-uniform theme to make a statement. Anybody who thinks her intent was mean spirited is not only wrong, but also missing the point. The parents got a remarkable effort; the flag-as-cradle image is approaching a gallery-grade level of work.
I’m also not sure I agree with Jonn that the image is corny, because corny is usually something a majority of people can agree on. The image posted above seems to have provoked responses from all over the place.
Great Comment. I can’t see a combat veteran or a patriot doing anything but smiling and saluting this photo.
In my opinion SFC, your comment is a perfect, brief and to the point remark.
I gotta say that when I see someone on TV wearing a shirt that resembles The Flag, I have a negative (internal) reaction… but I don’t rail about it on Facebook.
I think what was done in the photos linked above was classy, respectful, and tasteful. To me it does not seem gratuitous in the least. And like Chip said, I have seen The Flag treated a lot worse.
Makes a great Windows background.
To quote Moochelle “All this for a flag”. /sarc
Two letters, U, C.
Some folks need to step away from their damned computers! It is not just this case either, where someone gets their butt hurt about some supposed slight or another, and set out with like minded idiots to ruin somones life.
No, I don’t find this to be disrespectful but if I was offended by it I would probably just get over it. I offend people on an almost daily basis, and honestly I could give a shit less 99.99% of the time when it happens. 98% Of the time, I am not trying to be offensive. When I am trying to be, it is usually deserved.
Sounds like somebody’s trying for a Navy-Marine Corps Commendation Medal.
Or maybe 1SG Moerk is now in a joint billet.
Oh crap that was funny. Well Done!
Watch it, you are coming close to needing an on the spot correction.
CC HQMC
You beat me to it!
She’s expecting at least a Bronze Star for this one!
Sounds like that anal anon FB poster, and Orrin Hatch are political blood brothers.
Orrin (I just CAN’T call that desiccated ancient RINO “Senator”) for awhile there was attempting to either get a law passed, or a Constitutional Amendment, that would make it a crime to desecrate the US flag, against all 1A sense.
Can’t say I’m too thrilled at seeing the US flag used as a baby hammock. But I’m also not going to go ballistic over it, either.
Could be worse Hondo….
http://www.dcrtv.com/swim1.jpg
Yeah, I see that as kinda being in poor taste too – even if it’s not actually the US flag being used, like it is in the photo above. But that’s just me.
Dude, that was just fucked up. you need to put a warning on those kinds of things. Think of the children…
It’s all about the kids man
YOU tell that to G. Gordon Liddy!
Let me see if I can muster up some give a shit………….. Nah.
My fellow Americans can pay no bigger tribute to my service than being free to express themselves. That includes their right to ridicule my service and the things I honor the the most.
This is hardly one of those moments.
I think the internet police are annoyed because the photograph very effectively shows a connection between the United States military and a father’s love.
My thoughts exactly: our love of country and willingness to defend her is very much akin to a father’s love of his child and willing to do just about anything to keep them safe.
Maybe its because I am a father but what you said was pretty much what I said to CINC House (see post bellow). While she never served and has at times wondered by I stayed in till retirement, when she saw that picture and showed it to me, one of her first comments to me when I asked her what she thought before I answered her was: “I think I understand now, just how deeply you feel and felt about your service.” That one picture was able to convey the emotional meaning and mentality more than countless words and conversations we’ve had about why I stayed in and why part of me will always be very emotionally tied to my time on active duty.
Maybe I’m just being corny and reading too into things from an emotional standpoint, but then again maybe not enough people are.
CINC House showed me that picture last night and wanted my take on it. I’ll have to be honest and say my very first thought was of the symbolism of the picture: A helpless baby wrapped in liberty and protected by the safety and security represented by our flag and the US Military (Navy in this case). In my mind this picture it does a good job of summing up many of the feelings emotions that are hard to put into words about one of the core reasons many of is raised our right hands to defend this great country.
Does it desecrate our flag? In my mind NO, rather the contrary, it attempts to show what our flag and by extension all of us stand for: protecting those who can’t protect themselves.
One could argue that it may not show the proper reverence our flag deserves and that its against the Flag Code. Again one has to look at the intent behind the picture and what it is depicting. I can think of many examples of people disrespecting our flag, not showing any kind of reverence, and doing very vile things to Old glory, this is not even in the same class/category.
All the hubbub and butt hurt about this picture is a Tempest in a Tea Pot, IMO, there are MUCH more important things to be focusing on.
This is what I was going to write, and Isnala beat me to it. I can’t say it any better. I don’t see any desecration in that picture, and I absolutely HATE to see a flag desecrated.
Probably the same Internet police who will say “well that’s free speech!” when a hippie or protestor burns the flag, flies it upside down, etc.
They really need to give people more work to do because so many have so much extra time on their hands.
so the Flag Fetishizers strike again, huh? I guess everything else is going so great in the world that this is the only thing they have to be pissed about.
Get over it. It’s just a symbol, it’s not a holy icon with magical powers and when you treat it like a holy icon you just look like those muslims who get their turbans in a twist every time somebody looks at a Koran crosseyed.
In both cases the Perpetually Offended are clutching their pearls and acting shocked – SHOCKED I say! – because someone is “misusing” an inanimate object in a way that does not hurt anybody.
Yep. Haters are gonna hate … same ol’, same ol’.
You know what really bothers the shit outa me about the photo? That damned stupid Aquaflage uniform the poor bastard is forced to wear.
He’s a squidie. We are lucky he isn’t wearing a teal speedo and a light coating of weapons oil.
ROFLMAO!!!!
I always wondered, how do they find them if they fall overboard. I mean, camo is great to hide but not so much to find.
What’s wrorng is it’s not 2 pictures of me in Dress Blues with a big EGA on the belt. Joe
Forgot to ,write one picture for each of my girls. You guessed it I like What it means to me. Joe
As I recall, the US Code prohibits the use of Old Glory for commercial purposes, among other things. Consequently, you will not see a full representation of her on clothing and other items. Instead, you will some number of her stars and some number (more or less) of her stripes, all to escape the law’s prohibition. Do people threaten boycotts of mattress companies and tee-shirt makers because their ads or items disrespect the flag and violate the spirit of the law? Hell no. So what’s this really all about? Perhaps it’s about the same thing as the UC-Irvine matter: It is anathema for some people to embrace Old Glory as a symbol of goodness, let alone innocence. I have no problem with the pic. In fact, it gives me pleasure both in knowing that the child will likely be raised to respect Old Glory and in knowing that this sort of ‘indoctrination into capitalist and imperalist Amerika’s’ belief system is pissing the Lefties off.
Especially since those lefties would be the first to defend some terrorist wannabe’s right to burn the flag and the president in effigy as part of their free speech rights…
Fuck. Those. Guys.
I guess we all know what college that kid WON’T be going to…
not disrepectful. Not something I would do, but my wife thinks its cute.
I’ve been following this for a few days now as the photographer is fairly local to me.
Out of curiosity, I went to a couple of the sites that are bashing her, and a lot of the morons are stating “Flag Code” violation and link to a website that was last updated in 1995.
I did a bit of research and came up with this from 2008.
https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30243.pdf
Report to congress. Now all my questions are answered. LOL
I don’t know. I kind of like it. The flag is supporting the baby, the Dad is supporting the flag- in more ways than one.
fuck you, hippies!
Nice observation. Very nice.
Yes. Very nice.
These days there is ALWAYS someone who is “offended” no matter what the *BLEEP!* it is. As for me, I like that pic, it says something to me. AS TO the booger-eating betwetting slobberheads that are “offended”, I say the same thing my Dad does to critters like that, “Here’s a nickel, GET A LIFE!!”
I actually thought the image was almost poetic. A child is protected by the laws and values of this nation as represented by the flag. Those in turn can only exist when protected and supported by those in uniform.
My opinion, but it seems much less offensive than seeing the flag used as a political backdrop.
This is getting better all the time. I think you and Dutch have really nailed it.
What Air Cav said.
Personally, I think it’s kinda cool. I get the symbolism they were going for, and I like it. I don’t see it as desecrating the Flag, but rather as an expression of the most important things the Flag stands for.
Then again, maybe I’m just a dumb redneck who gets sentimental about this kind of thing.
I am really surprised this came up. Its not a big deal.
No one complains when everyone from State Governor’s to local politicians take it upon themselves to raise and lower the flag at will.
No one complains when Olympic athletes that can only pronounce about five coherent words in the English language run around after they win cloaking themselves in it or dragging it around on the ground after them.
Nobody complains when Obama refuses to salute it.
Just some observations.
Wonder if those who object to the image of an infant wrapped in a US flag see any irony in their own stance. Naw. They never will.
Meanwhile, this is the type of photo that says great things. It epitomizes “art” in that it touches people is so many ways, mostly positive.
I seriously can’t work up any concern at all for those who find it objectionable. Their opinion just doesn’t matter.
If I were to get worked up about the misuse of the flag (spoiler: I won’t) I would be much more upset about the car dealerships that think a comically oversized American flag is some kind of talisman that will lure customers to their store.
And that would go double when that same oversized flag that’s been up there for a years gets faded, frayed and worn so badly that it resembles the Fort McHenry flag but with bird shit in place of the cannonball holes.
Those objecting to this photo are a bunch of racists.
There. Somebody had to say it.
or better yet, Nazis!
Racist Nazi Zombies!
So glad I’m not the only one who thinks the complainers are idiots. I see no disrespect.
The idiots also apparently thing this photo is stolen valor:
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/6c6a3e35d9e9a2ba37df6f63f375971590afd578/c=0-77-960-799&r=x383&c=540×380/local/-/media/2015/03/12/USATODAY/USATODAY/635617415179276144-baby-flag-picture3.JPG
Dear Hippies,
1. You don’t give a shit when someone sets the flag on fire.
2. The Flag Code isn’t something anyone can be arrested over.
3. Go fuck yourselves.
I see powerful imagery here. First, the baby is somewhat protected, by the flag. Also, the baby is also a future protector of the flag. The baby needs the flag now, and the flag will need the baby later. The military in the background is the guardian of both.
I love it!
Spot on.
I’ve also been thinking about this picture for a couple of days and trying to put into words what the image means to me. Here goes, “This is why we serve.”
Exactly!!!
This is one of the reasons I keep returning to TAH. After reading certain thoughtful comments in this thread regarding this baby and Old Glory, I am both humbled by the insights and very grateful for them because, quite honestly, I didn’t see nearly all that others of you did. So, thanks.
Great picture!
To all of the people in an uproar about this being against U.S. Flag Code. This is from the U.S. Flag Code website run by the governments, governing body, on the subject.
“While wearing the colors may be in poor taste and offensive to many, it is important to remember that the Flag Code is intended as a guide to be followed on a purely voluntary basis to insure proper respect for the flag.”
So basically your opinion on that photo being against U.S. Flag Code is meaningless. Not only is it on a “purely voluntary basis” but nothing in that photo did not show “proper respect for the flag.”
*end rant*
If this had been a gay couple’s adopted baby, or the baby of illegal aliens, the libs and the media would think this pic was the greatest thing since sliced bread.
It would definitely be “art” if the gay couple was using a rainbow flag to support the baby while they were standing on a US flag. Or any couple/single using a foreign flag.
America (the flag) supported by the strength of our military (the hands and the uniform) protecting America (the sleeping child).
Good visual metaphor.
It’s a great photo. And I see a whole bunch of peple who need to really ge a life . . .
A lot more tasteful than when Larry Flynt wore the flag. Just saying…
A Sailor holding a baby with a flag it’s like an American baptism
People are complaining about THIS? Ok, ok, which one of our Stolen Valor “heroes” is whining now? I can only imagine that the doofus (or doofi in the plural) that whined about this has to be a 3XL, diabetic, walking coronary poster boy, “Special Seal, Navy Ranger Forces” vet whose “really been there” and gets pissed whenever anybody disrespects “his” flag.
Ok bucko, what the hell did you ever do to earn this level of ire? If you are who I suspect you are, some lardass puke who wasn’t smart enough, strong enough, or tough enough to serve and now have to whack off to every Rambo and Missing an Action flick, sit at home in your Barca lounger pounding diet Mountain Dew and Cheetos while playing Call Of Duty IV, all the while listening to Metallica and Megadeth in your mom’s basement playing pretend soldier.
Fair disclosure here, I’m a lifelong civvie, have a deep interest in military subjects and history as well as being the son of a Navy vet who “saw the elephant” in ways I cannot, nor wish to imagine. The bonehead that whines and complains about this really needs to take a chill pill and listen to some Yanni.
As to the picture: Its a touch corny, in the same way a lot of Norman Rockwell stuff is, but just like Mr. Rockwell’s work it is Americana, personified. BRAVO ZULU Ma’am. Well done. God Bless and Keep you, your husband, and child always free and safe. May we be worthy of your service.
Love it. Symbolic on SO many levels.
The day after September 11, a young lady named Eliza Gauger published a very moving picture. It was Liberty, clutching a flag-wrapped infant to her chest with one hand, and a big revolver with the other. The penciled-in caption was:
“The most dangerous place in the world is between a mother and her children.”
I lost the original link, but saved this moving image. Here are two links to sites that have it and the story.
http://www.werismyki.com/lyrpo/liberty.html
http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/09/47102
This is such a non-issue.
America cradles her children. And the American military supports America.
Beats seeing a photo of some Occu-tard wiping his ass with it.
An artist and or photographer captures an image … I find it to be a beautiful!
OUT!
I cannot believe no one here came up with Obama’s logo as more disrespectful c’mon y’all! I love the pic!