- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 230
ArmyVern said:The US military has already stated that it was not a political purpose, but was an educational one.
Round and round we go.
After the fact, correct?
ArmyVern said:The US military has already stated that it was not a political purpose, but was an educational one.
Round and round we go.
RDJP said:After the fact, correct?
RDJP said:After the fact, correct?
ttlbmg said:Question to pose though: would you feel the same if it was a photo of two women, in uniform, bottle feeding their children? What if the photo was promoting women bottle feeding their children as a healthy alternative to breastfeeding their children? Would there be all this fuss? Probably not, amazing how much stir a boob causes. As soon as there is a possible connotation of "sexuality" then there is an issue.
Also, I wouldn't akin the abortion issue here; that opens an ENTIRELY different can of worms.
ArmyVern said:They are the ones whose opinion counts - and they are done with it and have decided it wasn't political or pro-money. Pretty cut and dry to me it seems. It's done. No biggie.
RDJP said:Great attitude. Easier to ask forgiveness later than permission first.
Try that out for a few weeks at your unit. Let us know how well that goes.
ttlbmg said:You still didn't answer the question though, would it bother you to see a woman bottle feeding her child in uniform?
ttlbmg said:You still didn't answer the question though, would it bother you to see a woman bottle feeding her child in uniform?
ObedientiaZelum said:Is her shirt unbuttoned and breasts partially exposed?
ObedientiaZelum said:Is her shirt unbuttoned and breasts partially exposed?
RDJP said:If you are, no. If it was a female member doing it for a photo shoot without their CoC's permission in order to advance a political agenda - yes.
ArmyVern said:Mine were; I was breastfeeding. The intent was not to 'expose' myself; it was to feed my kids.
I didn't mean that satirically. I'm trying to understand why people would even have an issue with this and guess that maybe the nudity or something bugs people?PMedMoe said:Seriously? :
ObedientiaZelum said:I'm trying to understand why people would even have an issue with this and guess that maybe the nudity or something bugs people?
ArmyVern said:What they [the website] do is advocate for ...
MCG said:Indeed. If the photographs were done for the purpose of a health service message to new mothers, they still would have required the approval of the involved soldiers' respective chains of command. Both that is not what happened either. The issue was uniformed service personnel participating in policical advocacy.
The issue continuing to push this thread is that Military personnel should not be using their status to support polical advocacy for any cause. In this case of the photoshoot in question, it was for a cuase that most Canadians would support - but does that make it right for service member to deliberately allow themself to become a tool of this advocacy?
ArmyVern said:There was no intent to promote a personal cause or to promote a political agenda outside of that authorized support group (which is against the rules). The photograph in question was originally meant to educate other military women on that base that breastfeeding in uniform is allowable and acceptable
Bruce Monkhouse said:I guess just telling them that wouldn't do it??...cause we all know women are stupid and all. :
I love how you make this stuff up out of thin air.............unless you're a mind reader you have no idea why they published it.