Frat boy Navy captain gets relieved

[Anguirus]

Saying a word doesn't mean anything

Without commenting on any other aspect of this case, I'd like to ask an open question.

Are there any homosexuals on this board who agree with the statement I have quoted, as it relates to the word under discussion?

[Akhlut]

As for his career being ruined: shit, I wish someone would ruin my career so I could get a $96,000/yr pension.

Yeah, he gets a shiny pension when he retires, he earned that, and that's a completely separate issue from what I'm talking about. From now untill he retares his career is effectively over, no more promotions, no more commands, and all the work he's put in training to be an effective officer (never mind the millions of tax dollars that went into that training) are now all gone right into the shitter.

Well, firstly, he's still employed with the Navy, so if we need his expertise on anything, he can quite easily be consulted on the matter. Thus, he can still be useful to military endeavors, so it's not like everything has irrecoverably has gone into the shitter.

Further, I can't think of any other non-comedian who would still have their job if a video like this came to light, regardless of training, time, effort, and money spent on that person and their position; why should a naval officer be exempt?

[RogueIce]

I feel I need to expand on this point a touch.

To expand some more:

But seriously, Navy:

Senior military officials said they were trying to determine who among Navy leaders knew about the videos when they were shown repeatedly in 2006 and 2007 to thousands of crew members aboard the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier.

They need an investigation to figure out if, oh I don't know, the Captain of the ship at the time knew about this?

But it gets better!

Last week, the Navy said the videos were intended merely as "humorous skits" and stopped airing immediately after other senior officers became aware of them.

So they stopped airing when "senior officers" became aware of them (and the Navy didn't seem too upset) but now they're "investigating" to if any senior officers knew about them?

Quotes from the same article

So yeah, I'm smelling scapegoat here because the Navy got some bad press.

EDIT: Which is not to say that I don't think CAPT Honors deserves punishment. Just that the motives of the Navy are, well, questionable.

So I do think the Navy is throwing him under the bus here. And don't be surprised if his former CO (who I read is now a one-star Admiral) has no punishment levied. Despite, you know, certainly being responsible for what his own Executive Officer did?

[Metahive]

Did Tojo become less of a war criminal just because the US refused to go after his boss, Hirohito? I don't think so, so why would the Navy not going after Honors' former CO make Honors less of a bigot who displayed extremely poor judgement? That the USN leadership might be behaving hypocritically here does not blot that out.

Also, that there were four years between the event and the sacking can be used against Honors as well, he had so much time and the knowledge that he did gratuitously offend some of his crewmen, yet he never came down to actually apologizing for it. That also means for me that this wasn't a momentary lapse as some try to whitewash it here, or would any of you, who I presume are all non-bigots, not seek to make up for it if you "accidentally" offended someone by dropping a slur and a nasty stereotype right in front of them?

[Mr Bean]

Did Tojo become less of a war criminal just because the US refused to go after his boss, Hirohito? I don't think so, so why would the Navy not going after Honors' former CO make Honors less of a bigot who displayed extremely poor judgement? That the USN leadership might be behaving hypocritically here does not blot that out.

He was the Captain of the ship on which this occurred. Again your lack of familiarity with the military is glaring Metahive. The Captain of the ship always gets the blame or credit for anything that occurs on the ship.

If a ship runs aground because the helmsmen screwed up? The Captain is going to be relived of command
Even if he's one thousand miles away on leave at the moment he's going to get axed and so will the officer in charge at that time (Typically the XO) because they were the ones who helped make this happen. It's always the Captains fault whenever any shit goes down on the ship he is assigned to because he is in a very real sense he is legally responsible under Naval law for every damn thing on that ship from the day he takes command to the day he turns it over to the new Captain.

[Ritterin Sophia]

I would add that the same applies to almost every military leadership position in every branch. Be it commissioned or not, the personnel in your unit under your command are your responsibility and it is your responsibility to hold them accountable for their actions, otherwise your leadership will hold you responsible for your inaction.

[Redleader34]

I have to point out the reason the XO was promoted fairly quickly is more of a reason of Physics, the Enterprise is the only carrier of its type, making the amount of people qualified on it very small, so promoting from within would prove to be cheaper than re-training someone from say a Nimitz class. As someone soon to be in the Nuclear field I have to say I am quite.. I feel that the Captain's actions reflect poorly upon our community, and show that everyone is held to the same standards, as it should be. I fundamentally disagree with Mr. Coffee here, as fun as it is on the internet, you are a representative of not only the Navy, but the United States of America, and even something meant to be harmless fun could reflect poorly upon us. (Has everyone here seen the videos yet?)

[Metahive]

Again your lack of familiarity with the military is glaring Metahive.

Sorry, but even the US military, guilt and responsibility are not exactly transfered 100% upward, or do you really think that if a helmsman gets himself shitfaced and runs the ship aground, he will go off scot-free while only the officer in charge has to face punishment as you're rather blatantly (and rather simplistically) claim? No, depending on the circumstances, whoever was responsible for the helmsman might face charges for some degree of negligence, but ultimately, the helmsman will be punished as well. So yeah, sack Honors' former CO for overlooking his underlings misdemeanor too for all I care, but that won't get Honors off the desktop and back in charge of the Enterprise.

EDIT:
And before you think of it, do not try to apply Command Responsibility AKA the Yamashita/Medina Standard here, where indeed it's the CO taking all the blame. That applies only to war crimes and human rights violations and requires the CO to actively refuse to take action against them. Making bigoted videos doesn't fall under this as far as I know.

[SCRawl]

So I do think the Navy is throwing him under the bus here. And don't be surprised if his former CO (who I read is now a one-star Admiral) has no punishment levied. Despite, you know, certainly being responsible for what his own Executive Officer did?

If Captain Honors has had to pay a price for his actions, then his former CO certainly should as well. He should have been exercising some sort of final editorial control over his XO's morale-boosting program, and anyway he's responsible for the actions of his subordinates. I would imagine that this is the sort of thing that will come up when promotion time comes around, though of course I'm not familiar enough with the process to know for certain.

[Todeswind]

Guys sorry to sidetrack this a bit but the XO was not the only one in the videos, and frankly he wasn't the person doing the most offensive stuff but for the life of me I can't seem to find any record of anyone else being penalized for participating in the videos. Does anyone know anyone other than Honors got punished for this video? It seems like an unfair standard to only punish him.

[SCRawl]

Guys sorry to sidetrack this a bit but the XO was not the only one in the videos, and frankly he wasn't the person doing the most offensive stuff but for the life of me I can't seem to find any record of anyone else being penalized for participating in the videos. Does anyone know anyone other than Honors got punished for this video? It seems like an unfair standard to only punish him.

Could the other participants not merely claim that they were following orders? Honors was, after all, the superior officer to almost everyone on that ship.

[Mr Bean]

Again your lack of familiarity with the military is glaring Metahive.

Sorry, but even the US military, guilt and responsibility are not exactly transfered 100% upward, or do you really think that if a helmsman gets himself shitfaced and runs the ship aground, he will go off scot-free while only the officer in charge has to face punishment as you're rather blatantly (and rather simplistically) claim? No, depending on the circumstances, whoever was responsible for the helmsman might face charges for some degree of negligence, but ultimately, the helmsman will be punished as well. So yeah, sack Honors' former CO for overlooking his underlings misdemeanor too for all I care, but that won't get Honors off the desktop and back in charge of the Enterprise.

See you still don't understand
The Helmsmen is going to get it, but so are the Captain and the XO because they signed off on the Helmsmen being in that position when they took command.

And I'm sorry Metahive but by your standards we are going empty out our military. We are not a politically correct bunch. And we used gay slurs often, we used racial slurs (Except for the N-word which was off limit to those not of African descent) we swore, we cussed and and we said shit that apparently would horrify you and qualify all of us as bigots. What Captain Honors did was a rip off of jokes from SNL circa 2000 and stole jokes from Caddy-shack.

This is the military, shit be rough here. If your offended you (wo)man the fuck up and get on with it. Unless it's directed harassment at a sailor or establishing a hostile environment neither of which Captain Honors did. Has the fact that openly gay members who served under Captain Honors when these videos where made were not offended might you want to ask why your so damn offended if no one was offended at the time?

Guys sorry to sidetrack this a bit but the XO was not the only one in the videos, and frankly he wasn't the person doing the most offensive stuff but for the life of me I can't seem to find any record of anyone else being penalized for participating in the videos. Does anyone know anyone other than Honors got punished for this video? It seems like an unfair standard to only punish him.

Could the other participants not merely claim that they were following orders? Honors was, after all, the superior officer to almost everyone on that ship.

Just following orders has not been an acceptable defense since Nuremberg and more to the point he was XO at the time so the sailors could have appealed to the Captain at the time and chances are they volunteer for the video. It was something made during ships down-time so it would have been a BB style posting, hey XO Honors here I need X number of people for some MWR style videos apply here.

[Todeswind]

Guys sorry to sidetrack this a bit but the XO was not the only one in the videos, and frankly he wasn't the person doing the most offensive stuff but for the life of me I can't seem to find any record of anyone else being penalized for participating in the videos. Does anyone know anyone other than Honors got punished for this video? It seems like an unfair standard to only punish him.

Could the other participants not merely claim that they were following orders? Honors was, after all, the superior officer to almost everyone on that ship.

Just following orders has not been an acceptable defense since Nuremberg and more to the point he was XO at the time so the sailors could have appealed to the Captain at the time and chances are they volunteer for the video. It was something made during ships down-time so it would have been a BB style posting, hey XO Honors here I need X number of people for some MWR style videos apply here.

It seems highly inconsistent to only go after one guy out of however many were in the videos simply because he's in the most politically visible position. Axing him makes the strongest statement I suppose but if the sexual harassment is being applied for his use of the word fag then it ought to be applied to every sailor who simulated masturbation and the like. If the rule isn't applied equally to everyone then it defeats the purpose of even having it.

[SCRawl]

Could the other participants not merely claim that they were following orders? Honors was, after all, the superior officer to almost everyone on that ship.

Just following orders has not been an acceptable defense since Nuremberg and more to the point he was XO at the time so the sailors could have appealed to the Captain at the time and chances are they volunteer for the video.

You're exaggerating. The Nuremburg standard would involve the orders being unlawful -- do you really think that this would rise (or sink, if you prefer) to that level?

According to our good friends at wikipedia, here's the 1998 Rome Standard of the International Criminal Court with respect to this issue:

1. The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless:

* (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question;
* (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful; and
* (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.

2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.

So, yes, following the orders of a superior is a valid defence in many cases, and probably would be in this case.

It was something made during ships down-time so it would have been a BB style posting, hey XO Honors here I need X number of people for some MWR style videos apply here.

If those involved were volunteers, and enthusiastic participants in making the videos, then they ought to face some portion of the consequences suffered by their XO. (Of course, if Captain Honors' punishment is nothing more than political CYA, then his participants are probably anonymous enough to avoid any responsibility.)

[Metahive]

The Helmsmen is going to get it, but so are the Captain and the XO because they signed off on the Helmsmen being in that position when they took command.

So yeah, sack Honors' former CO for overlooking his underlings misdemeanor too for all I care,[...]

I know it's not very popular, but it helps to read my posts in full and with some diligence. Avoids getting caught up on irrelevant tangents.

And I'm sorry Metahive but by your standards we are going empty out our military. We are not a politically correct bunch. And we used gay slurs often, we used racial slurs (Except for the N-word which was off limit to those not of African descent) we swore, we cussed and and we said shit that apparently would horrify you and qualify all of us as bigots. What Captain Honors did was a rip off of jokes from SNL circa 2000 and stole jokes from Caddy-shack.

We already established that the higher you go up the hierarchical ladder, the stricter the standards of decency you have to abide by become, or don't you agree that the First Officer should watch his tongue more closely than a lowly greasemonkey? The greasemonkey isn't the person who can boss all but one person on the ship around after all.

This is the military, shit be rough here. If your offended you (wo)man the fuck up and get on with it. Unless it's directed harassment at a sailor or establishing a hostile environment neither of which Captain Honors did.

Yes, it's always easy for a member of the privileged majority to tell the minority to just suck it up and as long as they don't get beaten up it's alright. I really can't hear that shit anymore, it just never becomes any less condescending and ignorant.

Has the fact that openly gay members who served under Captain Honors when these videos where made were not offended might you want to ask why your so damn offended if no one was offended at the time?

You are aware that complaints about Honors' video were filed already back when the video was first circulated onboard, right? Honors himself acknowledged the complaints in a video right afterwards ("Got offended, why don't you tell me that in the face" being more or less being his reaction)? I hope that was just you being sloppy and uninformed and not you being dishonest.

[Lonestar]

Dropping anonymousness complaints in the suggestion box outside of the ship's store doesn't really count. Unless it's written down(as in, someone went to the ship's office or the Chaplain) then the prevailing attitude is "whoop-de-fucking-do".

I really do believe that no one made the actual leap to file a real complaint, and if they had it would have stopped immediately.

EDIT: To expand on that a bit, there is an extremely common phrase in the Navy "A complaining sailor is a happy one." In other words, enough whining goes on that the "gives-a-damn" switch is put firmly in the "off" position by TPTB unless something gets written down in an official capacity. Bitching about it at muster or dropping notes in the suggestion box does not count as "an official capacity".

[RogueIce]

I know it's not very popular, but it helps to read my posts in full and with some diligence. Avoids getting caught up on irrelevant tangents.

Perhaps you should follow your own advice?

Did Tojo become less of a war criminal just because the US refused to go after his boss, Hirohito? I don't think so, so why would the Navy not going after Honors' former CO make Honors less of a bigot who displayed extremely poor judgement? That the USN leadership might be behaving hypocritically here does not blot that out.

When I had this in my message:

EDIT: Which is not to say that I don't think CAPT Honors deserves punishment. Just that the motives of the Navy are, well, questionable.

If the Navy wants to say, now, that the videos are offensive (even though, as mentioned earlier in my post, they originally didn't think so) than fair enough; they get to set the standards on this, after all. That does bring up a bit of the ex post facto thing of course (well, it wasn't offensive or "bad" at the time you made it, but now that we've decided it is we're going to punish you for it).

Where the "scapegoat" and "throwing under the bus" comments come from is that they obviously didn't need an investigation to sack Honors. But now they need an investigation to figure out if the CO would have known what his XO is doing? As Bean has pretty much pointed out, if the CO did know and did nothing he should be punished. If he somehow "didn't know" he should still be punished for the obvious negligence he showed. This is not some dumbshit E-3 getting a DUI in port: it's his own Executive Officer airing videos on the ship's TV channel.

And arguably the Navy is simply bowing to media pressure rather than finding the videos objectively wrong; remember in the story I linked to that they reversed course from defending the videos to sacking Honors. That, I think, plays in to a lot of the "support Captain Honors" stuff out there, as it seems the Navy is pretty much saying that if there's enough bad press they will hang you out to dry. And only you, not going after anyone else who may have been responsible (especially if those people today wear stars). And I gather that this will do far more damage than any offense sailors may or may not have taken to those videos in the first place.

I know you're horribly offended that Captain Honors used the F-word and you perceive him as making jokes about homosexuals with the shower thing* but please try to step back and realize that, yes, there are more things to this story and what's happened than just those videos.

*And unless you've seen a different video than the one Coffee posted, I don't see where you got the gay thing from the showers, except as someone said projecting your own bias. There was no real dialouge over those scenes, after all. And according to someone on Facebook who apparently served on the Enterprise those "chicks/dudes in shower" thing was in a segment about water conservation aboard ship. And I'll let the Navy guys answer whether or not the concept of 'buddy showering' is a common joke regarding conserving freshwater aboard ship (and not some "lol teh gays like teh secks" as you made it out to be).

[Metahive]

Perhaps you should follow your own advice?

I can read my own posts just fine, thank you.

When I had this in my message:

Myself in the post above yours wrote:
EDIT: Which is not to say that I don't think CAPT Honors deserves punishment. Just that the motives of the Navy are, well, questionable.

Dude, it might sound incredibly outrageous to you, but there's more people than just you and me in this thread, people who make different arguments than you and who therefore get different responses. Yeah, sometimes other people get my attention, I know that must horribly offend you.

If the Navy wants to say, now, that the videos are offensive (even though, as mentioned earlier in my post, they originally didn't think so) than fair enough; they get to set the standards on this, after all. That does bring up a bit of the ex post facto thing of course (well, it wasn't offensive or "bad" at the time you made it, but now that we've decided it is we're going to punish you for it).

The guy wasn't charged with anything, so Ex Post Facto doesn't apply. Shuffling personnel around is a purely administrative decision.

Where the "scapegoat" and "throwing under the bus" comments come from is that they obviously didn't need an investigation to sack Honors. But now they need an investigation to figure out if the CO would have known what his XO is doing? As Bean has pretty much pointed out, if the CO did know and did nothing he should be punished. If he somehow "didn't know" he should still be punished for the obvious negligence he showed. This is not some dumbshit E-3 getting a DUI in port: it's his own Executive Officer airing videos on the ship's TV channel.

I already said I don't give a shit if they sack his former CO too over that. We're back to the whole "read Metahive's posts in full and diligently" issue.

And arguably the Navy is simply bowing to media pressure rather than finding the videos objectively wrong; remember in the story I linked to that they reversed course from defending the videos to sacking Honors. That, I think, plays in to a lot of the "support Captain Honors" stuff out there, as it seems the Navy is pretty much saying that if there's enough bad press they will hang you out to dry. And only you, not going after anyone else who may have been responsible (especially if those people today wear stars). And I gather that this will do far more damage than any offense sailors may or may not have taken to those videos in the first place.

Or they are saying "Make bigoted videos and you'll eventually be put in a more apporpriate place". Much better than the conspiracy theories offered here.

I know you're horribly offended that Captain Honors used the F-word and you perceive him as making jokes about homosexuals with the shower thing* but please try to step back and realize that, yes, there are more things to this story and what's happened than just those videos.

The only "more" I see is people trying their darndest to downplay Honors' bigotry out of some misguided desire for "fairness".

*And unless you've seen a different video than the one Coffee posted, I don't see where you got the gay thing from the showers, except as someone said projecting your own bias. There was no real dialouge over those scenes, after all. And according to someone on Facebook who apparently served on the Enterprise those "chicks/dudes in shower" thing was in a segment about water conservation aboard ship. And I'll let the Navy guys answer whether or not the concept of 'buddy showering' is a common joke regarding conserving freshwater aboard ship (and not some "lol teh gays like teh secks" as you made it out to be).

It's OK, they never said "gays are sex-crazed maniacs" directly and some guy on Facebook said it's totally about something else. Sweet Polly Oliver Jesus. I'm convinced...not.

The only thing sadder than Honors' bigotry is you apologists violently grasping for all that straws. You must have emptied several barns by now and I am getting concerned about what the cattle and horses get to eat for the rest of the winter. Just take a step back and look at all the arguments that have been offered so far, first it's Coffee claiming that a First Officer should abide by the same standard of decency as a comedian, then comes Sanchez who claims that "fag" isn't so bad a slur and Mr Bean claiming guilt transfers 100% upward the chain of command (from which he silently backpedaled) and bigoted slurring is just the norm for Navy crews (including top brass). Everyone does it, so it's OK.

Hey, I hope you apologists have been paid generously to offer this nonsense, because I myself can't see how anyone could do so for free.

BTW, this will be my last post for this thread as it looks as if this debate isn't going anywhere. Goodbye and thanks for the debate everyone.

[Lonestar]

Where the "scapegoat" and "throwing under the bus" comments come from is that they obviously didn't need an investigation to sack Honors. But now they need an investigation to figure out if the CO would have known what his XO is doing? As Bean has pretty much pointed out, if the CO did know and did nothing he should be punished. If he somehow "didn't know" he should still be punished for the obvious negligence he showed. This is not some dumbshit E-3 getting a DUI in port: it's his own Executive Officer airing videos on the ship's TV channel.

There was also an Admiral embarked, and other O-6s on the ship as well, so it isn't like there wasn't a whole mess of superiors and personnel of peer rank who knew or should have known about the videos. You can throw in the CMC for good measure.

Here's the deal Metahivem which you seem to not fucking get not a single one of us(military-types) is saying that he should be absolved from punishment, what we're saying is that if he is hung out to dry, there should be a LOT more people out there with him.

[Lonestar]

To expand on the above(sorry, edit function expired) I'd like to copy somehting form a Navy Blogger I follow. He's on the conservative side for my tastes(although he was all about repealing DADT), but he can articulate my feelings on the matter better than I can.

As Captain Honors finds himself looking at the Executive TAP schedule for FY11, there is something that keeps coming to mind. It was there in the beginning, expanded a bit more the next day - and set yesterday with the help of Senator Webb.

Following the path from almost half a decade ago to him being relieved of Command there are some simple truths out there that are much more important than Captain Honors.

1. There are no other positions of more importance to our Republic's Navy at the rank of Captain than that of Commanding Officer of an aircraft carrier and a ballistic missile submarine. These people are the select of the select. They are exceptionally well known in their communities.

2. Few positions outside Command are more visible to your community than that of the "Big XO" of a carrier. You are an XO of a ship full of other Commanding Officers, former Commanding Officers, and Commanding Officer-Selects. You and everything you do is well known and discussed.

3. As we have been reminded repeatedly through the rash of firings of Commanding Officers (CO) this year - a Commanding Officer is responsible for everything that goes on within the lifelines of his ship. Everything.

4. There is a very real thing called a Senior Officer Present Afloat (SOPA). Like that of a CO, if you are SOPA - it is your ball of goo; especially if you have knowledge of it.

5. We have a tradition in the Navy that when you do something out of line, discipline is at the discretion of the CO. As long as everything is legal and above board - you take your punishment and go forward. We do not practice double jeopardy.

6. We also have a tradition, perhaps an ethos - at least I thought - of standing up for your crew and defending your decisions - or at a minimum accepting responsibility for them.

With 1-6 above, this is what continues to bother me. Since last Friday, we have seen none of CAPT Honors former Commanding Officers - the ones who "owned paper" on him, the ones who signed his FITREPS and recommended him - speak up. Where are they?

We have only heard from Admiral Harvey - the poor guy who as CFFC was left to pick the best option from a slew of sub-optimal options. He did what he had to do given where the larger situation was by the time it got to his desk. He made the call he felt he had to.

I'm not worried or concerned about CFFC. Where are Rear Admirals Spicer and Rice? Where is VADM Holloway? This is/was their ball of goo. Those are the men who knew Honors when he was Big XO - who saw those videos - those who did or did not give him a nod, wink, thumbs up, thumbs down, or shrug.

As we demonstrate by our actions what we do to the select of the select - the message that is screaming out to our young leaders is this;

Code: Select all

You are on your own. When the going gets tough, don't expect us to do anything for you - especially if we might get some of the blame our selves. Forget what we told you. Forget what we promised you. The truth will change as I need it to change in order to fit my needs.

The Blue Falcon may be from the USAF - but we like her too. Nothing, absolutely nothing, is more important than political self-preservation. Ignore what you were taught, ignore what you read, ignore all the examples we like to tell you of combat leadership. They are all fairy tails. 

I may help carry you out of a burning space or put my life on the line to defend you from an enemy in combat - but when the shooting stops I am no better than the junior partner at a large law firm. I will step on and over you to protect my own professional viability - even if I were the one who knocked you down.

Watch your back - I don't have it. I don't want it. You are dead to me - I have me to think about.

Really?

I guess we really didn't learn anything from Tailhook. I guess all those things we told each other in the bars in Souda Bay, Rota, Caan, Norfolk, San Diego, and that part of Thailand we dare not speak; over dinner at each others houses - I guess all that "We would never do that to each other .... " was just a bunch of talk.

OK, bad on me. Bad on me for having hope.

My advice to the young naval officer; love your Nation, love your Navy, love your Sailors, but under no circumstances trust your leadership until they prove worthy of your trust - even then, really don't. Follow orders, but watch your back. You don't have friends, you have co-workers. Minimize social contact that may lead you to believe that you have any type of bond with them. You don't. You are expendable if needed. You only matter to most if you help their careers. Do not expect help from anyone but yourself.

What a pathetic bit of advice for leaders - but if memory serves me right - that is what my generation learned from Tailhook - and tried to forget.

Don't like it? - well ask those senior officers who went to sea with Honors over four years ago why it should be any different. Their limp, flaccid silence screams.

[Norade]

I've never served, but even at a younger level the Canadian army cadets end up being pretty off color for our age group and a lot of us were pissed when they started telling us we couldn't use certain marching songs anymore. Besides, when a group of 12-18 year old youth are allowed to make more controversial skits than that it makes me think that sometimes minorities and their supporters need to realize that not every joke about them has a bigot behind it.

[Aaron]

I've never served, but even at a younger level the Canadian army cadets end up being pretty off color for our age group and a lot of us were pissed when they started telling us we couldn't use certain marching songs anymore. Besides, when a group of 12-18 year old youth are allowed to make more controversial skits than that it makes me think that sometimes minorities and their supporters need to realize that not every joke about them has a bigot behind it.

After the Somalia incident and the subsequent disbandment of the Airborne, all that went away in the military. By the time I was released in '03, most of the outright racism and homophobia had disappeared, with a surprising lack of grumbling. The guys I served with usually spent more time bitching about civvies anyways.

[Norade]

I've never served, but even at a younger level the Canadian army cadets end up being pretty off color for our age group and a lot of us were pissed when they started telling us we couldn't use certain marching songs anymore. Besides, when a group of 12-18 year old youth are allowed to make more controversial skits than that it makes me think that sometimes minorities and their supporters need to realize that not every joke about them has a bigot behind it.

After the Somalia incident and the subsequent disbandment of the Airborne, all that went away in the military. By the time I was released in '03, most of the outright racism and homophobia had disappeared, with a surprising lack of grumbling. The guys I served with usually spent more time bitching about civvies anyways.

I'm not aiming to say that racism or homophobia is a good thing or that it should be accepted, I'm just saying that the skit would be seen as harmless among some cadet corps.

[Aaron]

I'm not aiming to say that racism or homophobia is a good thing or that it should be accepted, I'm just saying that the skit would be seen as harmless among some cadet corps.

Oh I don't doubt it and I'm sure it would be seen as harmless by some of the guys I used to serve with. Its just that even if the intent is not racist/homophobic etc, its probably best that folks not engage in the behaviour. This very thread demonstrates that someone will find it offensive regardless.

[Todeswind]

I'm not aiming to say that racism or homophobia is a good thing or that it should be accepted, I'm just saying that the skit would be seen as harmless among some cadet corps.

Oh I don't doubt it and I'm sure it would be seen as harmless by some of the guys I used to serve with. Its just that even if the intent is not racist/homophobic etc, its probably best that folks not engage in the behaviour. This very thread demonstrates that someone will find it offensive regardless.

I'm honestly surprised it was reported at all. Not because it's not homophobic but because unintentional homophobia is a big part of military culture.