This again?
Military Honor and Decency Act
Long term readers may remember this post.
And so once again we have a group of people that think they know more than the rest of us should.
If you have any respect for our soldiers, or value freedom in any way, you should contact your Representative and tell them that you don’t support this.
I first saw this on my regular Internet news sites and at first I thought, “Eh, I’ve written about this before.” But then one of my readers, Patrick, sent me this site. As I read Mrs. Proctor’s arguments and her defense of them, I found myself getting angry. And then I realized that an unfortunate reality is that silence equals consent.
I do not consent to having our soldiers privileges sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
I do not consent to freedom of speech being limited to only things that are bland and fail to offend the tender sensibilities of the sexually repressed.
I do not consent to politicians, who as a group are typically some of the most horrifically amoral people on the planet, deciding that they get to dictate proper morality for the rest of us. Generic Levitra cost at http://howmed.net/order-levitra-vardenafil/ and how to use Vardenafil.
I do not consent to allowing people to get away with pretending that their moral decisions are more valid than mine.
I do not consent to lazy parents abdicating their responsibility and instead demand that society at large eliminate anything they don’t like, to prevent them from ever having to have an awkward conversation.
I do not consent to a magazine being banned from sale because someone doesn’t like it.
I do not consent to our brave soldiers being bullied in this manner.
Now to answer some of the obvious responses to my statement.
“Pornography is harmful to women”
-How so? I have run a careful experiment exposing my wife to pornography. She has yet to catch fire, develop cancer, or run off to become a prostitute. Okay, maybe if a pallet of dirty magazines was to fall on you it would hurt. But I think you’d be just as crushed if they were bibles.
“Pornography leads to rape”
-I’m sure that this is following the logic that some person once read porn, and then went on to rape someone. There are also rapists who have read the bible, sang pop songs, and driven automobiles. I think I am safe in saying that most men in the U.S. have looked at porn at some point in their life. And most of us have managed not to rape anybody so far.
“Think about how porn affects the women on military bases”
– With the possible exception of that Air Force SGT that posed for Playboy last year, I would have to say, “Not affected in the slightest”. Unless they are buying and reading it, in which case I might go with “they are titillated.”
“They can always go somewhere else to get it”
-Not always. Some might be stuck on post for some reason. Or they may be deployed to a country where it is not readily available in the economy. Maybe they don’t have a car. Perhaps they are on a ship.
“It’s degrading to women”
-How so? The women who are getting told, “You are so beautiful that we will pay you thousands of dollars for the privilege of looking at you” don’t seem degraded to me. Are other women degraded simply by the magazines being nearby? Because men are looking at the pictures? Because men are thinking impure thoughts after looking at those magazines? So in this logic chain no one but the model, the PX, the magazine, and the man who bought it are involved. I’ve heard some people say that the magazines make men look at women who are around them with lust, but let me tell you, men don’t need magazines for that, we are quite capable of perving out without them.
“Think of the children”
-You know what I think? I think that a kid with one or more parents overseas with a serious threat of bodily harm has more important concerns than a magazine sealed in plastic. And even if it wasn’t sealed in plastic: “Oh noes! Teh naked boobies! I am scarred for life!” Seriously, it’s one thing to not want your kid exposed to something. It’s another to think that everyone else needs work around your hang-ups. Also, Playboy magazine wasn’t involved in a nasty series of child rape cover-ups in recent years. Things more important than magazines could be banned from post if people are allowed to start trampling on rights over “protect the children”.
“But they don’t need it”
-You absolutely right. They don’t need it. But the fact that the PX keeps selling it tells us that they want it. If porn was eliminated soldiers could still do their job. There are lot’s of things that soldiers don’t need to do their jobs. Video games, alcohol, cigarettes, movies, the Internet. We could ban all of those things from post and soldiers could still function. Just because someone doesn’t need something doesn’t give you the right to take it away. Soldiers also don’t need to have families on post. And judging from the behavior of some military wives, I think an argument could be made for keeping them off-post only. One just as strong as banning Penthouse and Playboy.
I think people should be free to practice, or abstain from the practice, of any religion they so choose. And if your faith tells you that you should avoid dirty magazines, well then that is a great reason to not purchase or look at dirty magazines. But it is a horrible reason to try to make other people stop having them. Your right to practice your faith ends at your neighbor’s right to practice his.
So in closing, the human body is nothing to be ashamed of, sexuality is a valid form of expression, and “Family Values” is just a dirty way of saying censorship.
Follow
April 30th, 2008 at 9:05 am
Isn’t denying porn not supporting the troops? I fully support the troops and will gladly send them porn.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 9:59 am
I have written my representative and have engaged Amy Proctor.
Reply
skippy reply on April 30th, 2008 10:21 am:
Yeah i checked out your comments, she is starting to come unspooled.
Reply
Michiel reply on April 30th, 2008 11:24 am:
I noticed. I have that effect on people, sometimes.
I’m not sure you are helping her much either.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I too have written my congress-critter. I feel it won’t make a difference, but I tried.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 10:57 am
I probably could have worded my post a little better.
Oh well.
Reply
Michiel reply on April 30th, 2008 11:25 am:
You’re doing fine. Hang in there soldier.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Porn leads to rape. there’s some really mind blowing (no pun intended) research on this topic. Univ of Wisconsin did transference studies (and a lot of other studies on porn in the late 80’s early 90’s), ie: does viewing porn during a date lead to agressiveness, and they never had any results to support this conclusion. They did however find that constant viewing of porn did eventually lead the seeking out of more deviant porn, but the studies I saw never went any further to see long term effects of the viewing of the deviant porn.
now you get to the degrading of women. most of this is spouted by the femminists, but even they can’t come up with a consistent opinion (there’s actually four of them). the most common of the opinions is the one against it because it portrays the woman as be inferior and dominated by their partner’s desires and needs(notice it is not male or female, it is partner). the real off the wall ones feel sex itself is bad because one person is always at the mercy of another’s desires, and pornography is just a pictorial representation of this so it is bad. this seems to be ms. amy’s view.
now you really want to see how wacked out people are with porn, check out the meese commission on pornograpy (yes the federally funded multi volume set which is quite disturbing with all it’s case studies, there are some really messed up people out there). so the government has been well aware of this for years and it was never very important before so why the change?
Reply
Alyssa reply on April 30th, 2008 3:35 pm:
Porn does not lead to rape. That’s a common misconception. There is a correlation between watching porn and rape, but there’s also a correlation between ice cream sales and rape. Just because a guy watches porn, doesn’t mean he’s going to go out and rape someone. Correlation is not causation. Watching porn does not CAUSE an increase in rape. Rapists just like to watch porn. So, I guess it could be the other way around. Rapists cause and increase in porn viewing.
Reply
grumpyhammer reply on May 1st, 2008 12:39 pm:
alyssa, sorry for the misunderstanding. when i wrote porn leads to rape, it was meant as an indicator to what i was responding to in the original post. that’s why the rest of the paragraph states no causation was ever found in the studies.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 11:56 am
*Slow clap*
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 11:58 am
That was directed at Skippy, by the way.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I’ll preface this by saying I’m not in the military. Now that that’s out of the way, the only argument I could honestly see the point to regarding this (from her point of view, not Skippy’s) would be that the cessation of “release” would make the men more aggressive in their combat duties (ie, the athlete who abstains before a match/game, etc.). But even so, women buy these magazines on ocassion as well, and to be honest, no one even needs them to have the thoughts the magazines are supposedly “planting” in soldiers’ minds. And the argument of rape is just correlation, not causation (as is so often the case): rapists and serial rapists have a tendency to take the same path to sexual assault (porn/rape fantasy, peeping tom, rapist), so all porn must be to blame. That’s like saying that 20 percent of humans are suceptible to alcoholism, so let’s ban that (cuz that worked so well in the Roaring 20’s). Politicians are just playing a game, and if you notice, it’s the ones who’ve accomplished nothing in their careers and who are in danger of being booted out of office who bring up “family values” and “think of the children” and all that sophist rhetoric bull. Sad part is, fewer and fewer people can see through it.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
As an army wife, let me just say that this whole thing is BS. I am actually disturbed by the thought of soldiers no longer having porn. When my husband goes to the sandbox, I expect him to be going over with a bunch of men (infantry unit), not a bunch of pansies. I don’t trust a bunch of pansies to cover his ass. Send the bible thumpers over there for 18 months and deprive them of all the comforts of home, I’m sure they’ll be thrilled to get a free trip to the holy land. Let them get shot at for a few months.
Reply
paula reply on August 23rd, 2008 5:12 am:
I like your thinking, Kat! Yeah, let’s give ’em all a totally free, all-expenses-paid trip to see the holy land! (And don’t hurry back this way on MY acount, y’hear?)
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
AAAAAAAAAAAmen!
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Perhaps we should ban all religious material from the BX/PX also, after all more harm has been done for religious reasons than by humans viewing naked humans. Or perhaps the church of Hefner should become a recognized religion and thus the magazines that the congresspersons are trying to ban would become protected under “religious freedom”
Hugh Hefner showing the Glory of Gods finest creations since 1953.
I had no problems when they took the Hustler mags out of the Stars and Stripes back in the 80’s, frankly some of the stuff in that magazine was flat out scary, but playboy and penthouse and similar mags were a celebration of the female form, its not like they are selling Bondage weekly or Fabulous Furries or other such questionable materials. Or perhaps I should demand that congress allow High Times Magazine to be sold on base since i am a Rastafarian and it is a religious magazine. Next thing you know congress will be trying to ban any movie over a PG rating on base.
Reply
Kat reply on April 30th, 2008 8:38 pm:
Heh, hey, if scientology is classified as a religion, I don’t see any reason why old Hugh can’t start a Church. Yay for religious freedom in American, you can worship god, I’ll worship naked women, lmao.
Reply
Drew reply on May 1st, 2008 6:44 pm:
perhaps we can get the Wiccan’s to stand up for playboy and penthouse magazines, after all they worship the Goddess and what better example of her handy work than the women in those magazines
Reply
Michiel reply on May 3rd, 2008 4:39 am:
Most pagans I know, don’t have an issue with porn.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
suck on THAT proctor
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Good job Skippy! Good post and interesting comments. Although I am surprised that no one has raised the positive health benefits for a man’s prostate that porn provides. Studies show the regular “release” achieved with the assistance of porn makes for a healthy prostate.
I am ever at the service of my favorite Naval Consort in ensuring his prostate health. When he is on the tip of the spear, I make sure my “care packages” provide for all his needs.
RE: Amy
The funny thing about Amy is that before this particular issue, she was one of my favorite YouTube channels. She always had good pro-military, pro-“Victory” soundbites and she had good Pope coverage. I was saddened to find her so out of touch with me on this issue.
And finally to Kat whose comment is above mine…..It isn’t a religion? Then why do they keep saying “Oh God! Oh God!”?
Reply
grumpyhammer reply on May 1st, 2008 12:45 pm:
Maggie,
thousands of skippy readers are now trying to figure out how to say…”but honey i was only trying to keep my prostate healthy!” with a straight face.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
I replied to her (extensively – oi) and wrote my rep. Are any of the other women on here offended by her “I’m female, therefore I speak for all females” attitude?
Reply
Janice Schwarz reply on April 30th, 2008 10:23 pm:
Absolutely. Anyone that presumes to speak for me irks me, especially when they are easily damaged by being in the same room with an inanimate object. This was actually a point I was writing up for too! :-)
Reply
TheShadowCat reply on May 1st, 2008 11:15 am:
You bet your sweet bippy I object to her attitude that she speaks for me. I can speak for myself quite well, thank you very much. I don’t need some bible thumping, soapbox preaching, sexually frustrated nit wit to tell me or anybody else what to believe.
Reply
Cathaine reply on August 23rd, 2008 3:17 am:
Amen sisters! It’s people like her running her mouth which makes me itch to pick up a tire iron and simply silence them – but that would be imposing my personal feelings on someone, and that is wrong.
*signifigant look at Mrs. Proctor*
Reply
paula reply on August 23rd, 2008 5:16 am:
Damn straight I’m offended by her! I’m MORE than competant to speak for myself, thankyouverymuch, and that lump of self-righteousness does NOT speak for me!
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
first, i am stuck in the bible belt with a state full of people who are shocked that i married a man with different beliefs than me, and let me say DON’T TAKE PORN!!! everyone has the right to decide for themselves what they choose to read. censorship like this is unheard of (except maybe in nazi germany) but to let a handful of prudes and zelots decide what the rest of us can look at is obsene. anyone who has a problem with servicemen (and women, i do own porn in my own right) looking at naked pictures should be drafted and sent on one of the army’s new fun 2 year deployments. if they really wanna enforce their veiws on everyone around them let them do it with a gun.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
This is a stupid bill, and will probably gain far more support than 2 other bills that would actually help the average service member – S.22 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-22) and H.R.2702 (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-2702), the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007. You want to impress me as a voter and a member of the Armed Forces? Push those two through and forget this Decency Act BS.
Reply
April 30th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
amen sister.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 12:15 am
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 04/30/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 12:20 am
Someone may have already mentioned this, but rape has nothing to do with sex. It is completely about taking power from another.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 2:58 am
“I do not consent to lazy parents abdicating their responsibility and instead demand that society at large eliminate anything they don’t like, to prevent them from ever having to have an awkward conversation.”
Words do not begin to express how much I agree with the above statement. People, you can’t just HAVE children, you have to raise them too. That or get on the birth control band wagon. I agree with your list as a whole, but that particular statement gets SEVERAL amens from me.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 6:16 am
You can have a very healthy and active sex life and still be against porn, so the comment about only the sexually repressed want to get rid of porn is a bit off isn’t it?
Let me play devils advocate for a moment…
If I try to remove porn from military instalations world wide I’m forcing my morality on everyone. Correct? But if I ensure the sale of porn on all military instalations world wide (with respect to the local governments like in the Middle East) am I not also forcing my morality (or lack there of in some people’s opinion) on everyone as well?
It should not be the governments responcibility to control what people view. The parents of the Children on the instalation should be more mindful of what their children are doing if they don’t want their kids looking at porn.
Once their kids are in the military it is up to that person.
However, allow me to place this out there: I can’t vouch for the Army, Navy or the Air Force, but in the Marines we were taught to live to a higher code than that of the average civilian. This included a higher code of Morality and sence of honor. We have already voluntered our life to our country if needs be, why then is it so much to ask that we sacrifice porn at the PX/AAFES/NEX for the good of our community?
Reply
skippy reply on May 1st, 2008 7:16 am:
My take on your comments
1) I think my comments on repression are valid. If you don’t like porn you can avoid it no problem. But if you demand it’s removal because you think pictures of naked people are actually harmful, that is a pretty solid sign to me that you are sexually repressed.
2) There is a difference between banning something, and insisting that it not be banned. If I was to demand that bible not be sold in the PX I would be viewed as trying to inflict my beliefs upon others. If I was to insist that their sale be allowed, then am allowing the PX customers to make their own decisions on that subject. I’m not insisting that people have porn. Only that they be allowed to have it if they so desire.
3a) You kind of answered your own question here. Because solders, Marines, Airmen and Sailors have already given up so much, it seems (to me anyways) worse to take even more from them without having a very good reason to do so.
3b) No one has ever established that porn is harmful to a community. Some people don’t like it, but actually *harmful*? Nope. It doesn’t cause injuries, or give people cancer. It’s just ink and paper. Bear in mind we are now talking about Penthouse and Playboy. Playboy is so tame that people actually read the articles. So asking soldiers to give things up for the good of the community holds no weight with me, if you can’t demonstrate how it actually helps the community.
3c) I think baning adult magazines from sale at the PX actually harms the military community. It tells our servicemen and women “We will take things away from you to make religious extremists happy” and “You do not deserve the same consideration other American citizens get”. And it tells the religious extremists that America condones their meddling with our soldiers. And once someone volunteers to go overseas and fight religious extremists for my safety, I find it unconscionable to be willing to sacrifice them to domestic ones.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 7:10 am
This debate, the argument and the outcome are the same as in the 60’s and 70’s during the the great sexual revolution. (Those were the good old days.) The religious-right have been trying to recover from that ever since. We can only hope that repression will be outlawed and not porn. Like the song says “Waiting for the world to change.” It hasn’t yet. But, maybe this time. Support the troops – Support porn for the troops. Vote!
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 7:56 am
i dont think ive ever bought a porn mag(we here at the navy barracks trade porn through external harddrives, “hey hector you got dirty latin maids?” “sure bro, toss me a gig of whatever you got” or “hey guys, im paying for a subscription to bangbros, heres the password”) but i dont agree with religion going in and taking some freedoms from us, thats like me and a bunch of other athiests having a sit-in at a church.
as long as the bible thumpers dont take out booze from the shopette we will survive…because then i dont think the Navy would be able to function.
and skippy, all the navy personnel here in korea find your site awesome. props.
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 10:26 am
Amen brother, buying dirty books is every American’s constitutional right. Just because some morallity facist gets a bug stuck up their behind about a few dirty books doesn’t mean the whole military has to suffer. I for one will be taking every opertunity to send “special” carepackages to the troops overseas in protest.
Rock on!
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 11:07 am
That woman has a very bad case of cranial-rectal inversion. She should see a doctor about that.
I can understand her not wanting it in her own house and not wanting her husband to look at such magazines. But to dictate her beliefs and her own sexual frustrations (let’s face it, with 4 kids, she’s probably *very* frustrated) on everyone else is wrong on so many levels, I can’t even begin to count them.
My congressmen has been contacted. I just hope it helps
Reply
May 1st, 2008 at 2:18 pm
SUPPORT THE TROOPS!!! SEND PORN!!!
Honestly, if you don’t want to see boobies, close your damn eyes. I don’t know anybody who can’t close their eyes when they don’t want to see something. It would take a lot less effort and piss off a whole lot less people.
Reply
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:18 am
Ya know, they said that violence in video games increased violent behavior in children. I’ve done multiple research papers on this.
Those games give people, including children, an outlet for violent practices. Grand Theft Auto games reduced car theft in areas. I can’t remember the exact percent it went down by or in which areas off of the top of my head, so look it up.
I’m sure that porn has the same effect on soldiers. It gives them an outlet to vent rather than go out and vent on women. It’s a safer alternative.
Reply
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:58 am
Why is it that some blame the religious nuts or “biblethumpers” for things? As an athiest I think porn is retarded. People who waste their money on it don’t deserve their money in the first place.
The sexually repressed are the ones that need the porn. If you can’t get laid and need porn to offset the “stresses” in your life, then your are definatly the sexually repressed and yes being on ship is sexually repressing/depressing. (But you can still get some on ship ;) )
I can agree that the porn being sold in the PX/whatever doesn’t really hurt the community, but honestly does it really help? And say they did a trial where they removed the porn for a month, would you really notice? Are you that hard up for porn that you need to buy it on base as well as all over town?
Reply
skippy reply on May 2nd, 2008 8:13 am:
“Why is it that some blame the religious nuts or “biblethumpers” for things?”
In this case it’s 2 reasons.
1) Because the site I linked to when I wrote this post was made by a bible-thumper.
2) Pattern recognition. The same reason I assume most people I meet are not hermaphrodites. I can count the amount of non bible-thumping anti-porn activists on the fingers on one hand.
I agree that having porn on post doesn’t necessarily help anyone. But I have stated why I think removing it hurts. It’s not a matter of the porn itself. Its the principle of not allowing people to force our soldiers to abide by their religeon. I figure as an atheist you can probably appreciate that.
Reply
Bubba Tex reply on May 5th, 2008 10:44 am:
“I can agree that the porn being sold in the PX/whatever doesn’t really hurt the community, but honestly does it really help?”
Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t. The same can be said for nearly everything sold at AAFES/NEX. Giant, flat screen TVs? We don’t need them, they cost far more than a 20 inch black and white TV, but dammit, if I want one I’m gonna get one, if i don’t I won’t. The softcore porn sold at the BX is the same, just like the Marlboros and Crown Royal. Perfectly legal, buy it or not it’s up to you just as it’s up to me too.
Reply
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:40 pm
I’m always a little wary when it’s claimed that porn isn’t degrading to women. xD It’s certainly at least objectifying them. I’m pretty close to 100% sure that a guy isn’t really thinking “Wow, I bet she’s a strong, intelligent, independant woman” as he jerks off to a magazine.
Reply
SKD reply on May 2nd, 2008 9:29 pm:
To be honest the people who are going to objectify all women based on those magazines are going to do it regardless of whether or not the magazines are available to them. It is in the mindset of the person.
And how should we guys feel about magazines such as Playgirl. The only reason there is more stuff aimed at the male audience in my experience is that most women are more covert or worried about embarassment than men.
Reply
Mill reply on May 3rd, 2008 2:48 am:
That is true, but porn hardly helps the cause–younger guys can (and depressingly often, do) get conditioned by it.
Actually, in my experience, it’s less that women are covert/worried about embarassment and more that we just aren’t wired towards porn. We aren’t really wired towards casual sex, either. Obviously there are exceptions to every rule, but it’s really hard to find a woman who honestly wants a one-night-stand. (Believe me, I’ve tried.)
I’d also like to point out that there’s a lot more porn-for-men involving girls getting squirted with semen/shit on/pissed on than there is porn-for-women involving guys having the same. In fact, almost every piece of porn targeted towards women I’ve ever seen has been completely vanilla, whereas porn for men, even if it is vanilla, usually shows the woman involved as (at the very least) a dumb slut, and is way more likely to include the examples I gave. To be honest I’d almost rather they hire a hooker.
Reply
SKD reply on May 3rd, 2008 6:53 pm:
1)Never understood the stuff involving bodily wastes myself. That would just completely ruin any sexual or romantic mood for me cuz I ain’t about to touch someone who I just relieved myself on.
2)I haven’t seen guys as being represented as being much more intelligent than dumb sluts either.
Michiel reply on May 3rd, 2008 1:53 am:
Well, even when having sex with my girlfriend, I never think about how strong, intelligent or independent she is. What a ridiculous thing to think about while having sex, solo or with a partner.
Reply
Mike reply on May 3rd, 2008 7:55 am:
Hey, you hit that one on the head.
Reply
Cathaine reply on August 23rd, 2008 3:23 am:
I have to agree with the guys on the intelligence issue, and agree that women can objectify men as much as men do women. Not just in marketed nude images either.
For instance, when I go to the beach and spend a good five minutes just staring at the lifeguard, blatantly drooling over a nice stretch of tan, I’m not really considering if this is his summer job between med courses.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:32 am
I think she’s ignoring us now.
Reply
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:30 am
Okay, so I agree with everything you said in theory, which is all that I think really matters, but, because I am an insufferable know it all I feel the need to point out:
“Pornography leads to rape”
I think the proof, or evidence behind that is that, when shown rape porn for about a week 62% of males admitted that they would rape a woman if they knew they wouldnt get caught. Which, of course, does not mean that 62% of males are out there raping someone, but does provide a basis for the argument
Reply
Michiel reply on May 3rd, 2008 8:37 am:
OK, I have to know where you got this info. You can’t throw that out there and not give a source. Honestly I doubt the percentage of guys saying yes is actually that high. I just don’t think that many guys are that big of an asshole, even in a hypothetical context.
So, give us a source.
Reply
latrans321 reply on May 8th, 2008 8:46 pm:
SOURCE:
http://www.dilbert.com/2008-05-08/
Reply
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:15 am
pornography leads to rape just like spoons made rosie o’donnell fat
Reply
May 4th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Damn, it’s true. It’s all true.
Reply
May 4th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I saw probably the same post on a news site that you did Skippy. I said to myself, oh great, not this again. My problem with the whole law when it was passed the first time has been stated here and on Ms Proctor’s posts. It’s an inane push of somebody else’s values on to the military. The one thing too that bugs me about these sorts of laws is that you take a segment of the population who’s sworn to protect and defend the constitution of the US and say here, yet again we’ll go ahead and take away an right provided by said constitution. Yeah, stateside you can go off base and buy anything you like, but in communities like the one I live in in Germany you can’t. Unless of course you’re fluent in German or Dutch. Playboy has some socially redeeming qualities (I actually read the articles). All I can really say after reading Amy’s blog is, wow, I feel sorry for her husband.
Reply
May 5th, 2008 at 10:47 am
HA, one of the passwords I have to type in to make this post is, “feminist”. Is this someone’s idea of a joke??? hahahahahaha
Reply
May 7th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Amy is losing credibility with every post she makes. How DARE she say that I don’t support my buddies’ families? And then there’s this shit:
“If you’re talking about a single soldier buying porn, he has every “right” to do so, but at the expense of wives and their families. So much for an Army of One. Its’ the Army of Me, Myself and I.”
How is it at their expense? Because it makes her uncomfortable? Where does she come up with the gall?
Reply
skippy reply on May 7th, 2008 11:31 am:
Eh she’s just another military spouse with an entitlement complex, whose discovered that the world doesn’t revolve around her personal issues and that soldiers aren’t here for her convenience, and so she’s lashing out.
Really she deserves your pity more than anger.
Reply
McNally reply on May 14th, 2008 6:32 am:
This woman just doesn’t get it. You’re absolutely right, Skippy. As a fellow Catholic, I’m going to ask God to bless her with the same reasoning and deductive skills he blessed upon monkeys and children who ate too much wall candy so that she might figure it out.
Reply
June 5th, 2008 at 1:16 am
I just wanted to check up on the saga today and saw that the comments section has been closed. Gotta love when you can’t argue intelligently just take your ball and go home
Reply
SKD reply on June 5th, 2008 6:12 am:
What a hissy fit.
“I’ve never seen so many whiney men in my life complain like babies who need their pacifiers. Pathetic.” – Amy Proctor
Was it just me or did anyone else noticed that she is an unregistered commenter on her own blog? And I never got the chance to tell her that the military has never revolved around the single male :( (Rather I forgot to in my previous posts there.)
Reply
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:50 am
Skippy, this is why we love you. You see through the BS instead of spreading it around. And you have such a way with words….*lightbulb!*
Who votes for Skippy to be the PR man for the Church of Booby Worship? He gets free membership and merchandise, as well as voting authority for any wet T-shirt contests he might happen upon!
Reply
paula reply on August 23rd, 2008 5:28 am:
hmmm, “the Church of Booby Worship”….. for some reason, I’m picturing the church building as having this wavy, sorta double-domed roofline…..
Reply
February 9th, 2011 at 10:56 pm
This is why I cal myself a fiscal conservative and a social l iberal.
In othwords stay out of my pocket and my bedroom. If it takes a clown in a barrel in the corner squirting me in the ass with a sqqirt gun for me to get off, damnit as long me, her and the clown are all consenting adults then it shouldn’t be anyones concern.
Reply