Leaderboard

A buddy of mine has a picture on his desk of him and his college buddies on a deep sea fishing trip. They're cheering as they hold up a marlin they just caught. They're completely naked, aside from board shorts. You can clearly make out their naked chests. How dare he take pride in such a moment and present said image at work! The horror! You can even see his nipples! It's sexual! Porn even! We're all equal... can you imagine if a FEMALE posed in swimwear?!?! Some A1C of any gender could be (gasp!) offended! Won't SOMEONE think of the children?!?! Ladies and gents, I give you AF Management. Sure, you'll say "why does he need a picture of him in his free time at his workplace?" Ok, you're right. Which is exactly why you and your peers have made this organization, which demands so much more sacrifice and surrender of personal freedoms than our civilian counterparts, and involves a gargantuan amount of bullshit getting in the way of doing our duties, into just another job. Meanwhile, the shit that actually matters goes ignored. Fine. We'll treat it as just another job, decide we don't like where said job is going, and take our services elsewhere. At least you have the balls to come around here and plead your side, as ridiculous as it is. Seriously, thanks...that's more than most of your peers will do. Still waiting on that vector we were promised in January 2013...

Runners World - offensive. Got it. According to the strict interpretation of Sharia law, men might go on a rape fest (not sure if they sing rape songs while actually committing the act but I will look into that) if they view so much as an ankle or wrist or the form of an arm or leg. Not actually viewing said arm or leg but just the form, hence the all encompassing clothing. So, Liquid, what is acceptable? Give me a definition of what I can see or what can be shown. Now, you keep saying leave this stuff at home but my understanding is that military members are in the military 24/7 and therefore subject to the UCMJ even off base, off duty, etc. So which is it? Is this material acceptable or not? I think you are trying to go down a road of policing behavior that will stir up far more hate and discontent than problem solve. Side story. Best line ever from a flight atttendant. I am riding the jumpseat of a 777 from Chicago to Dallas enjoying the conversation with a pair of Captains flying this thing when a flight attendant comes up and sits down in the other jumpseat. She is very, very attractive. Mediterranean features, great figure. She starts complaining about the status of her love life and the inability to find that special person. She says to the guy in the right seat, "Married?" Gets a yep. Looks to the guy in the left seat, "Married?" Another yep. Looks at me, "Married?" I say yes. After a heavy sigh, she says, "I'm just looking for man who likes to eat Italian...and if he's hungry, I can cook, too." Stunned silence was best description of the flight deck environment. Oddly enough, the jet did not spin violently out of control, the cockpit did not burst into flames, the crew found DFW and actually landed on the correct runway with the gear down. Going down the road towards Warrior Monk status is not going to make the military a better fighting force because not everybody wants to be a Warrior Monk. I'm not sure what world you live in but somehow you want our military members to completely disregard everything they see, hear, or read that is circulated in the public realm or at least be able to flip some type of internal switch so that this world they live in for a MAJORITY of their lives, vs the 8 hour work day, does not rear its deemed offensive head (Can I say head?). You can get the military you want but you are going to need a whole lot of crosses to crucify those that do not meet your criteria.

You guys at the top were fine with it a year ago...if it so offensive, then why didn't you all get fired for condoning it for so long? If you were at least just to say "We're doing it because that is what our civilian bosses are telling us to do", then I will respect you for telling it like it is. But when you guys jump on board all of the sudden, preach the talking points and then try to appear like you always believed in the new policy...well, it's disingenuous. And you if are being disingenuous with this issue, I question what else you are doing that is disingenuous. If you all are only a political yes man then please don't be upset when a bunch of yes men is what you get at the lower levels.

Liquid, I won't argue they make me a better warfighter...they don't. You need to understand that it isn't about the women or dirty language that is pissing everyone off. Its the fact that the USAF is riddled with serious problems and leadership has gone full retard to stamp out things that anyone with a 69 IQ can tell is not really a problem and is just for show to the politicians. Instead of finding the real issues, the USAF has focused on fighter culture because it is visible. You want some of the best/brightest officers to work 14 hour days, work on weekends and think you can get that by treating them like A1C dumbass? See where this gets you in a few years.

Well they were extremists...to the Loyalists.

Why don't you?

"Subjected"? My wife is hot, fuck you! No pictures to follow, wouldn't want to offend you.

Ya, I threw up when I read that.... And i don'tont mean a little bit either.

The secret to get these guys to leave you alone is to never break eye contact. And moan.

Recently on the no fun list. They were all illegal features, then were made legal by the 10-rd fixed magazine and 'bullet button' tool-required mag release, then recently made illegal again. So glad to be out of CA and not have to worry about the knee-jerk effect. So...how long until FrankenFeinstein starts back at it again?

LA Police Chief repeatedly refers to the shooters weapon as an 'assault rifle'. From the photo it looks like either a Mini14 or AR-15. Hard to tell from the angle. I'd be willing to bet my next paycheck though that it isn't an actual 'assault rifle'. Additionally, it has a pistol grip, detachable mag, and looks like a telescoping stock...which are all on the No-Fun list in California. How could this be??

What a load of shit. I didn't even make it all the way through the article. Is there one shred of empirical evidence anywhere in there? If GO's are being forced out at an unprecedented rate, surely this could be documented and compared with historical rates. If morale is at an "all time low" this implies that you have quantified and compared today's morale with historical rates. Personally, I think the AF is going to shit, but it has almost nothing to do with the POTUS. There were useless, asinine policies under Bush and there are useless asinine policies under Obama.

Wait, how could this have happened...is LAX not a guns free zone?

Don't know anything about Baker, but Boykin is well-known to be an assclown. WND is a hive for birther fanaticism and is slightly less credible on defense issues than the "Washington Free Beacon."

That "culture" already exists within certain bases/squadrons. It's tragic.

This article uses two sources: both generals, one that retired in 2007 and another in 1993.

Liquid, I don't agree with everything you say, but the maxim, ect ok fine. The picture of my wife and kids at the beach wearing what every fucking American wears at the beach because we aren't Iran is not sexually offensive. You want leaders that combat sexual assault? I can't be one, because your rules and standards defy any fucking common sense, that I don't even believe it when I hear it. I will fry the first person I see making unwanted sexual advances, slapping a female coworkers ass ect, but I can't keep up with the current list of what is sexually offensive I today's AF. Any and all respect I had for you or anyone in leadership, is gone.

Well, what I wouldn't do is water down important issues with knee-jerk reactions like removing family photos, magazines sold on base, and pictures of females brought in by AF leadership (cheerleaders on a USO tour, for example). It's not just a matter of whether it makes us better warfighters or not. Hell, you want to pull that argument, let's ban people from having families, since it makes them reluctant to work long hours, nights, and weekends. My biggest problem with this is that we have an actual, serious issue with sexual assaults, and our response has been to classify everything as a sexual assault. It would be like the police attempting to catch a serial killer by arresting every jay-walker. When leadership spouts this idea that a magazine with swimwear (sold at the BX, no less), or a picture of a wife in a bikini, or a Maxim, are the same as a rape, you are only serving to dilute the seriousness and severity of the real offenses. Instead of looking for real ways to solve our actual problems, we bring in briefers who tell me I'm committing sexual assault if my wife has a drink or two before we go to bed for the evening. Do you really think I'm going to listen to the rest of what that guy has to say? I'll also leave you with this article about the recent "bikini photo sting operation". http://www.jqpublic-blog.com/?p=558

Who sings dirty songs at work? Have you been in an operational squadron lately? The only place songs get sung, and explicit songs get played is during a roll call, behind closed doors and after hours. If you don't wish to take part, then leave, you're not required to be there. I have never witnessed inappropriate pictures in a flight brief. You keep bringing up shit that I don't think anyone is fighting to keep. It was in the break room... Not mine, but I assume people read them on their union breaks or lunch break. I've never bitched about such things. Thankfully, the AAD ridiculousness has yet to hit the Guard. Ah the classic, I'm not a fighter pilot but assume we walk the hallways singing "rape songs" type of person. Had a few of those types in my pilot training class (former Navs), biggest haters of fighter pilots I've ever seen. Turns out, little if any of the shit they told us about fighter pilots was true. Weird how guys who've never spent any time in a fighter squadron didn't know shit about what really happens. So...it was ok for you to do when you we're younger but not for us. Love the hypocrisy. It's true! I have pics if anyone wants to see!

"Everyone is an adult who volunteered to serve their country. Thank you for that...along with the privilege of having one of the best professions in America, you now have shouldered the responsibility to act like an adult who is payed directly by the American taxpayers. Do you job, do it well, don't waste anyone's time, work well with your peers regardless of your personal opinion of them, and above all accomplish our critical mission. If you feel like you have ever been treated as anything other than an adult and a valuable asset to our national security, come and talk to me directly and I will address the situation with you personally and take swift and direct action as appropriate. In addition, see my policy memo which gives specifics on some pretty obvious behavior that will not be tolerated (i.e. drinking & driving, racism, pornography on GOV property, etc.)" Yep, wouldn't ban any of that stuff if it didn't interfere with the mission and was dealt with at the appropriate level. As other posters have pointed out, you enter a never-ending slippery slope when you try to outlaw very specific things...there's always something else the kids will think up next. I learned this from my 2 year old...it's futile to attempt to ban specific behavior (Don't eat crayons!) because she'll just start putting them up her nose next and, damn, I didn't tell her specifically not to do that. You set the example, lead with a firm but fair attitude, and give those you're leading a frame of acceptable standards within which they can operate freely. Is it probable that she will start putting crayons in her socks within my "acceptable frame?" Sure, been there done that, but at the end of the day such lesser offenses aren't detracting from my mission to run a successful family and I'm willing to appreciate her creative BFMing of my authority up to a certain point. I cannot legislate naughtiness out of a 2 year old and you sir cannot legislate sex or anything related to sex entirely out of the American culture of your airmen. Attempting to do so will be a waste of time and will just piss everyone off. Then again I don't have to CYA my parenting style to Congress like you guys do so...I'll chalk it up to that. My message to first-term airmen is relatively the same as I put in quotes above, perhaps with a little more detail or sternness to disuade anyone from choosing to f*ck around and not respect my authoritah. I though most of this was common sense...

That is an understatement. Time to move on to the airlines and make use of my 20-year letter if this bull$hit gets any worse.

I'm chief of safety for my wing. If any aircrew member walks into my unit wanting to know what happened on a particular mishap, I'll gladly let them read the report. Standard reminders of privilege apply and the report itself doesn't leave the office, but you are free to find out the causes and recommendations of any SIB. Every safety shop should operate that way.

Lots of talk about what you wouldn't do to prevent the unacceptable and disgusting number of sexual assaults that occur every day in our Air Force. What would you do as a squadron commander, wing commander or CSAF? Hold offenders accountable? Like Wilkerson? Protect victims? Of which half don't want to report unrestricted because they think/know they won't be protected? Got it, you wouldn't ban bikini pics, videos about drinking horse urine or saying sts after someone says package. What would you tell 35 first term Airmen that just arrived at your base about your philosophy on sexual harassment and sexual assault? Like I've said, I'm not easily offended. I still don't want to see the pic. At work or in a bar. Keep it in your damn wallet or your phone like normal people do.

Comment on how a picture of my wife in a bikini is offensive.

I have yet to see this crap come from people that actually employ weapons...

A picture of a woman in a bikini is not sexual harassment but it is sexually offensive material. It is inappropriate for the workplace and should not be displayed on your desk, whether it is your wife, sister or favorite supermodel. We should regularly correct inappropriate behavior. Not with the "paperwork" you are all so concerned about, but with direct language and action that demonstrates your intolerance for sexually inappropriate material, language and actions. A major factor in this discussion is the "at work" part. I could care less that nsplayr says he would "hit that" on a message board when he looks at an official photo of an Air Force officer, but I would put a boot up his ass if he said that in the squadron, while in uniform or deployed. On a forum he thinks he is being funny. At work, he may still think he is being funny, but he would be absolutely failing his duties to be an officer, a leader and a professional. Many of you think it is easy to keep your off duty humor, language and actions separate from what you do at work and in uniform, but it is not easy. The Shaw CDI clearly showed inappropriate behavior, a hostile work environment and leadership's failure to enforce standards. You cannot defend how playing a cartoon video at Balad that showed a horse d*ck and sang a song about drinking horse urine called sweet lemonade. Many argue that as long as you stop doing it when someone says they are offended, you are ok. You are not. The standard is not whether someone is offended. The standard is whether it is appropriate for work and professional. Discrimination, sexual harassment and sexually offensive material should not be tolerated at work, period. Whether anyone in the group is offended or not is irrelevant. When you try to keep it separate with "bros", you actively condone the behavior and fail. Sure some people make bad decisions and judgments about what is sexually offensive material. People, including commanders, make bad decisions every day. Challenge them directly and make your case. Work towards the right decisions, not against the entire concept. I do not think most squadrons or flyers put up with this shit. Which is why I find it interesting why so many on this forum strongly defend the value of a culture and traditions that tolerate sexually offensive actions and language at work. Nobody cares if you say package. Everybody should care if you say package, then so to speak, changing the conversation from aircraft and mission to your obsession with sex and your junk. It is juvenile and you should be swiftly corrected for doing it at work. If you are an officer doing it in front of enlisted, you should probably find another profession. Maybe Delta airlines will be more tolerant of your jokes towards the stews. I doubt it. The USB analogy does not work. We failed to enforce standards and guidance to not use USBs on SIPR and we paid the price. Hammering people after the enemy has exploited our vulnerabilities is not a good strategy. Ensuring a strong defense, of the network or the installation or our Airmen, is much better than only punishing those who fail to follow standards afterwards. Training, standards, enforcement, defensive and offensive measures, and the ability to rapidly adapt to the most effective procedures are important tools that must be used together. Neither does the old car or disabled brother analogy. Our government, department and Air Force has a zero tolerance for sexual harassment in the workplace. There is a big difference between sex jokes and old car jokes. Should we outlaw all jokes? No. But we have outlawed sexually offensive jokes and racist jokes. If you haven't figured that out or you don't agree with it, you probably need to look for employment elsewhere. You won't last long. The recent actions taken by commanders to prevent hostile work environments (sts memo, bikini test, black eye) may not be effective, but they are not wrong. They show commanders are serious about preventing hostile work environments, mentoring their Airmen and making sure they understand what they should do when they see something wrong. These actions, and the recent efforts to change the inappropriate culture that exists in a small portion of our force, will not ruin our Air Force. They may piss you off, and make you long for the times when the word games, songs, posters, panties and call signs were allowed at work, but we will get over it and move on to other more important issues. I don't think these actions alone will make an impact on the number of sexual assaults, but as part of a comprehensive effort to educate our force, investigate allegations, deter and punish offenders, take care of victims and stop tolerating illegal behavior, we will reduce the number of sexual assaults. Reducing them is the right thing to do and we owe it to the mothers and fathers of the young sons and daughters they trust us to lead.

Allow me to retort...... This is about spreading money around, not about your or my health care.

Nice! That would be a good strat.

LLLAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNAAAAAAA!!!!!! Danger zone

Molly Ringwald needs to go back to sucking Long Duck Dong. What the fuck is the "next governor of Houston, Texas?!?" Dumb bitch, just like the woman she's "endorsing"...

No way! Once a general retires, they are immediately banned from all communication with current generals! There are no retired generals lurking around the Pentagon in cool "advisor" positions. lol, that would be pretty impressive though. "Yeah, I was drinking with current General X, Y and Z, and they all say the POTUS is a tool", matter of fact, I have it on tape just in case someone thinks it's gossip!, since it was said at my house, please don't hold them accountable." I bet they just retire, grow mullets and sit on their porches drinking PBRs . (OK, that may just be what I am going to do!)

"Vertigo", aka the Libertairan who almost always supports Obama. Had you had quoted from the Huffington Post, Vertigo wouldn't have questioned the source. Here's an idea Vertigo--the article quotes certain people saying certain things. Why don't you comment on the reputation of the guys quoted and/or the substance of their quote? I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the retired Generals, but I'm also not just making a worthless response the the source of their quotes. Focus on substance not emotion.

WND. GREAT source. Can you post an article from the National Enquirer next?

The problem with your argument is you want leadership yet you rail against it. Undermining your boss does not make you one of the "bros." Didn't we just have a thread where everyone cried foul about the OGV dude who said "It's the boss's policy" instead of "I don't like hats." Make up your damn mind... Yes, there are shittastic leaders in the AF. There are also great ones. I have no personal knowledge of Liquid, so I cannot quantify him as either...but you just crucified him for what you (the collective) cried about in the "What's wrong with AF [sic]" thread. I'll raise Liquid one: it's time for the sorry-ass FGOs and "senior" CGOs to stand the fuck up, stop whining, and fix shit. AKA "Lead, Follow, Or Get The Fuck Out Of The Way."

Why don't I obsess about it? Because we received CSAF guidance to take down the sexually offensive and inappropriate material, so we did. No paperwork, no courts-martial, no tears. We took them down, even the beloved WWI nose art, and we moved on. We started correcting people for saying stupid inappropriate shit like "that's what she said". No firing squads, DNPs or Q-3s. Immediate, direct verbal feedback to knock it off. No big deal. No whining. Focus on leading and warfighting. Not sure if you've been paying attention, but we have some serious challenges with funding, threats and readiness ahead of us.

Did you read the quotes by the ret Generals? “People I’ve spoken to would like to see..." "I talk to a lot of folks who don’t support where Obama is taking the military..." "I hear from many off the record who are upset with the current military leadership..." A lot of "I hear" and "I talk to" yet no "I witnessed" "I can show proof" or "I can verify". Sounds like gossip to me.

Why should I or anyone else be subjected to a picture of your wife in a bikini? Why do you want other people to look at this picture? What message are you trying to send those you work with? You shouldn't wear a bikini to work, display calendars of models wearing bikinis or put up a picture of your wife in a bikini. It is clearly sexual in nature and not appropriate for the workplace. However, the picture of the wife in the bikini is not that big of a deal. It is probably on the lowest end of the sexually offensive material scale. That is probably why the sq commander used a picture of a model in a bikini. It is not so offensive that it crosses the line of performing sexual harassment exercises by actually sexually harassing people. It is an example of a commander being creative and aggressive in the effort to prevent sexual harassment and assault. Nobody is arguing for paperwork or NJP for inappropriate material at work. Most are encouraging self policing, awareness and a better understanding of what is inappropriate at work. No clear line, but a clear objective: clean up the workplace by removing sexually offensive and inappropriate material. Like Tony Carr points out, putting the fake picture on a Lts desk in a predominately enlisted workplace was not smart.

I may appear as if I almost always support Obama because I look at things with a neutral eye first, whereas 99.69% of the members here come in with a predetrmined mindset on the president. And Obama was elected when?

How does singing dirty songs, displaying Hooters calendars, listening to sexually explicit songs, using sexual innuendos or putting pictures of sexy women in your crew briefs (all at work) make you a better warfighter? Don't go after the red herring that is a photo on your desk of your wife in a bikini. Comment on how our tradition of glamorizing sex makes us better.

I don't think Runners world magazines are sexually offensive, unprofessional or inappropriate. I don't know why anyone would need to display their favorite magazines in the workplace. Put your recreational reading down and do what you are being paid to do. Read your magazines on your own time, not at work. With as much bitching about how you can't read the -1 or the SPINS because you have to get your bullshit AAD, I'm surprised how many people want open and visible access to their magazines. If you need them or want to read them during your break, just put them in the damn drawer. And keep your stupid ass mermaid handle mug at home. Some stews like to talk about sex with the pilots while they fly. Some female pilots say "sts" and 69. So what? That doesn't make it right. Ask your chief pilot or union rep if you can hang your Maxim calendar on the back of your seat without being hassled by "leadership" and let me know what he says. Maybe you can convince him that it makes you a better pilot.