Sergeant in trouble for Playboy spread

Member2019

Member2019

Don't need to say much more ...

Roughneck said:
Yeah! What's the big deal?!!
I mean, what's with a Non-Commissioned Officer posing in nude anyway? It's not like they have a code of conduct to adhere too!
:confused:
cheers,
R.
PS: I am VERY surprised that a STAFF SERGEANT thought this WOULD NOT cause controversy (in her own words). I would assume that by now she could tell the difference between "posing" [therefore consequentially (fortunately or unfortunately) "representing"] .... and "civillian".
Click to expand...
Basically said everything I was going to say.

It's funny.
Some people in this thread who said "what's the big deal?" are the ones that also say "what's the big deal?" when it comes to military service.
The big deal is the same, it's about what you give up when you are no longer a civilian.

Me? I skipped the Marine RTOC scholorship and went to college, got fat, became an engineer in the defense/space programs.
That means I got paid far more, had hazards far less, and got to do what the hell I wanted.
I hold very high regard for those who serve and, as Roughneck said it best, the real "tragedy" in this whole thing is her attitude.

It's not that she got nude.
 
A

Aegis

********** said:
Those who want to restrict a military woman's right to take off her clothes for money and wear camouflage while doing so etc, would perhaps be more welcome in the countries our country shamelessly bombs in the Middle East, where no women are allowed to take off their clothes, in certain countries, they must even be covered from head to toe in public at all times. Nobody sees the irony of this. It's dressed up in "well it's not the nudity but the fact that she is wearing the uniform..." but wait... it IS the nudity. Because think about it, if she wasn't nude, she could make money using the uniform by selling her story, apearing on TV shows, anything else she wanted... but not taking off her clothes. So it is the nudity, it is the puritans, modelling your naked female body is still seen as a disrespectful and disrespectable thing, even though we're supposed to be the pioneer nation of those sorts of rights.
Click to expand...
Bleh. Why must everyone opposed to what she did be compared to how others oppress women around the world. :rolleyes:

Personally I don't care whether a person is in the militery or work at the postal service. If you want to use a uniform you wear in your work for something like this, or other public appearances, then I think that it's fair enough for a company to demand that you seek permission first. Many companies wouldn't want to be associated with certain things. Whether those things are nudity, hardcore porn, various political statements, racism or whatever. If people think that it's too difficult to seek permission before they use someone's name/brand/image/uniform for their own personal gain, then I don't feel sorry for them if they get in trouble for it.
 
I

Iamforever

Banned
********** said:
I know what you mean iaf. I hear it every day, constantly. "Let the voice of freedom ring throughout this land, this is our country" on every Chevy commercial. The anthem before every sports game. All those other songs. And in every other bar Toby Keith's "courtesy of the red white and blue" blasting.
Click to expand...

obviously not.

********** said:
I'm sorry, I know what it is, why it is, what it means, what it's used for, and why it's forced down every American's throat from birth until you believe it's essential to who you are... and I hate patriotism, hate it, think it's one of the most violent divisive and segragating concepts in the history of humanity.
Click to expand...
then leave. and, nothing was ever forced down my throat except my finger when i drank too much. i CHOSE to believe.
 
I

Iamforever

Banned
you dont question patriotism fox. you said that you hate it. would you like me to bring your post up? i always tell people that if you wont accept being a patriot to the country that you live in, then get the hell out. you are no different. you somehow think that you are bulletproof. that whatever country that you live in will accept you. nice safety net there.:thumbsup:
 
C

cowboynm69

i don't think she should get in trouble for it, i am glad she did it isn't it a free country:thumbsup:

I don't yhink she should in trouble for it and I am glad she did it isn't it a free country
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sanduleak

Sanduleak

I was looking at the pictures, and then readed as much as i can of this therad.

Where does she wear the uniform in those pics?... I mean, yes, she wears camo clothes... but that´s not a uniform!.

She wears the uniform in pics where she is working (so i think that´s no offense to the army) and where she poses nude she doesn´t wear that or any uniform.

I don´t get it.
 
poggy

poggy

I've actually gone through this thread now and boy did it get boring. It went from a woman stripping out of her uniform to patriotism and I can't see it really questioning patriotism at all. All she did was strip out of a uniform and pose nude, I honestly can't understand where patriotism comes into it :confused:

I do this every night when I come home from work. Yes they are pictures of this a friend of mine took or should I say ex who's now a friend and they aren't pretty :D

Many companies and such pay for models to do this to advertise or promote their name and image, including the Army. So in the end thinking about it, this is double standards.

That's it my last post on this as I'm totally bored with the subject now.

P.S
I still can't see a problem with it ;)
(Plus I've never seen the actual pictures anyway. As the links are forbidden!)
 
I

Imagine

a country doesnt grant rights?!

tell that to the people in countries who dont even have the right to oppose their leader. tell that to the people in countries who dont even have the right to live their life the way they want to. i live in a country that grants those rights and many more. and to say that the country you live in exists to serve you is as wrong as wrong can be.
Click to expand...

And still, you've completely failed to get the point. A country doesn't grant rights any more than a chair allows you to sit on it. It's a non-living, abstract entity. As you may or may not be aware of, not existing severely impairs somethings ability to do much of anything. Actually, a chair is more likely to allow you to sit on it, if only because it actually exists. What you speak of has nothing, squat, nada to do with the country, it has to do with leaders who (ab)use their powers and those who support them, i.e. people. It's quite possible for people to love their country but hate their leaders (as opposed to some American views you get to hear a lot about these days that anyone who dare to disagree with Bush & Co. is "unpatriotic" or even a "traitor", which of course is a convenient way to avoid actually using a proper argument since words like that catches the attention of the average mob well enough).

And yes, a country is meant to serve me (or us). Why not? We invented it. I'm certainly not going to acknowledge something fictitious to the extent that I'd die for it. I might die for what I believe in if I really feel like it, but I'm not going to die because country A wishes to take some land from country B. Nor am I going to die for something I don't believe in. For example, let's say that the country you and I live in allow you to, oh I don't know, sodomize your sister. Our neighbour frown upon this practice to the extent that they decide to invade us and outlaw it. If you come telling me "they want to take away our right to sodomize our sisters! Spring forth brave patriots, to battle and repel the invader for our beloved motherland!", I'll say "screw you, I'm not getting killed for some dumb shit like that". And I won't, unless you can give me a very good reason why I should.
 
Member2019

Member2019

Turn of "Send Referrer" ...

iamforever said:
2 and 3 still work for me.:tongue:
Click to expand...
The links don't work if your browser sends Freeones.COM (or probably many other sites) as the referrer.

With that said, she's got a killer hourglass form!
She's been serving 13 years? In her 30s? Deeaammmmnnnn!!!
 
Member2019

Member2019

Has nothing to do with morality ...

YMIHERE said:
I never thought I would say this but, it would have been more moral if she posed completely naked. What a world, having clothes on makes a picture immoral. If she did not have the uniforms on would it be OK?
Click to expand...
First off, this has nothing to do with morality.
If anything, it's more about uniformity and conformity.
You are no longer representing yourself, but a unit of a larger unit of a nation.

But secondly, yes, she would have not violated certain rules of the Code of Conduct.
She would still be guilty of select offenses, but not as many.
She signed and agreed to those rules, and when doing such, they are not optionally enforced.

Again, repeat uniformity and conformity.
 
I

Iamforever

Banned
Re: Turn of "Send Referrer" ...

woy said:
right click and select "properties" on the link. Select the URL and paste it in a seperate window. They work fine for me now. :eek: She's a hottie!
Click to expand...

nah dude. i was talking to prof about sending freeones.com as a referrer?:dunno:

the links work for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Q
Jehovah Witness women are HOT! True Story!
Replies
0
Views
1K
Qwerty696969
Q
S
True story from a few years ago - This is long so I'll need to do it in 2 parts.
Replies
6
Views
12K
Wifelover
W
O
The Carnal Couple: Angels v.1 - Grace (FFM, ATM, BBC, ORGY)
Replies
7
Views
7K
onyxandpearl
O
A
Prostitution as a last resort
Replies
2
Views
14K
bearcat22
B
M
trump's Coronavirus Failures and Lies
22 23 24 25 26 27
Replies
535
Views
63K
gmase
gmase
Top