Opinion: RAF bans on pin-up girls for nose art are stupid.

[Ifreann]

So what super-sensitive minorities and political action groups were involved? Seems to me that the RAF leadership decided all on their own that it wasn't appropriate to have pin-ups painted on the planes when there are women in the service.

Quite an interesting stance to come by considering that not a single one of the thousands of women in the RAF were bothered enough by this issue to file a complaint.

I guess that rules out women in the RAF as the super-sensitive minority being catered to, eh?

[South Pacific Republic]

Always need to appease the muslims?

[The Serbian Empire]

Sure it has. When WWII vets were in their 40s-50s, it was entirely fine to smoke, drink, and spank women in a sexually suggestive manner in the workplace. This, as well as pinup art in the workplace, is an unfair distraction in the workplace.

Smoking carries health issues for those around, and spanking is sexual attention directed at a particular woman. The two really aren't equivalent to theoretical attention directed at women in general (not even brought up in conversation!) in terms of distraction or harm.

While that material does carry the potential to be offensive, I don't see why we're focusing on it and not, I don't know, fashion ads. If that's offensive than fashion ads certainly are.

Government cares more about those ad revenue pounds than the freedom of expression for pilots.

[Eastern Equestria]

Quite an interesting stance to come by considering that not a single one of the thousands of women in the RAF were bothered enough by this issue to file a complaint.

I guess that rules out women in the RAF as the super-sensitive minority being catered to, eh?

Yes, which is why the ban is silly.

[The Serbian Empire]

Quite an interesting stance to come by considering that not a single one of the thousands of women in the RAF were bothered enough by this issue to file a complaint.

I guess that rules out women in the RAF as the super-sensitive minority being catered to, eh?

I bet it's the stodgy old Tories who are the super-sensitive minority as they are merely a plurality of political power.

[Dazchan]

Always need to appease the muslims?

Considering that Muslims were mentioned as an afterthought in an article on what is essentially the print edition of Fox News, no.

[The Black Forrest]

I have no problems with the pinups.

That's nice. They're not your planes, though, so you don't really get a vote.

The argument of ownership is irrelevant. The op states opinion so I have a right to express mine.

If the guys want girls, fine. If the gals want guys, fine.

They don't own the planes either.

Well? The parties who might be offended have no say in the matter then as they don't own the planes either.

[Ifreann]

Smoking carries health issues for those around, and spanking is sexual attention directed at a particular woman. The two really aren't equivalent to theoretical attention directed at women in general (not even brought up in conversation!) in terms of distraction or harm.

While that material does carry the potential to be offensive, I don't see why we're focusing on it and not, I don't know, fashion ads. If that's offensive than fashion ads certainly are.

Government cares more about those ad revenue pounds than the freedom of expression for pilots.

Usually when people express themselves by painting someone else's property without permission they get slapped with an ASBO.

---

That's nice. They're not your planes, though, so you don't really get a vote.

The argument of ownership is irrelevant. The op states opinion so I have a right to express mine.

They don't own the planes either.

Well? The parties who might be offended have no say in the matter then as they don't own the planes either.

Indeed. The RAF do. And they don't want pin-ups being painted on their planes. What's wrong with that?

[Xeng He]

Usually when people express themselves by painting someone else's property without permission they get slapped with an ASBO.

To be certain, it's acceptable for the RAF to decide what they have. However, some were arguing it was their duty to do so, which isn't quite the same.

[The Black Forrest]

I guess we need to remove all commercials featuring less than fully clothed individuals then, because if not, someone might become offended.

Hmmm? Not sure you want to go down that route. Recruitment ads in the US didn't show planes with nose art. I would guess the RAF didn't either.

[The Black Forrest]

Why ban pin up girls? Pin up girls are awesome.

In time it's going to happen as we move more and more into radar evasion designs and marterials.

[The Black Forrest]

Maybe you should first demonstrate that such a principle is what's behind this decision.




You must not understand how the military works.

1- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wire ... force-art/

Essentially, they say that women say it is offensive in the dailymail, but the article or the ministry of defense not really reference any support for that, and here they cover it because local extremists in Afghanistan might have their eyes melt out or something.

2- Generally a good military does tend to ask and consider the effects of the soldiers on the ground or in the air in this case. I am not saying they cannot just swing the whip, but in stripping part of the RAF history, then yeah, I doubt many pilots will be too happy of having their aircraft dulled down.

History and tradition? How many famous regiments of England were disbanded over time?

Pilots probably where grumpy but push comes to shove, they would rather fly.

[The Black Forrest]

Always need to appease the muslims?

When you are fighting in their country sure. I

[The Black Forrest]

Government cares more about those ad revenue pounds than the freedom of expression for pilots.

Usually when people express themselves by painting someone else's property without permission they get slapped with an ASBO.

---

The argument of ownership is irrelevant. The op states opinion so I have a right to express mine.



Well? The parties who might be offended have no say in the matter then as they don't own the planes either.

Indeed. The RAF do. And they don't want pin-ups being painted on their planes. What's wrong with that?

Oh we are in agreement. I simply am not bothered by them and some ways sorry to see them go. But times change and technology changes. In the future, radar evasion will be a driving factor for them going if they hadn't yanked them.

Even with the Muslim complaints, if you are in a Muslim country, it doesn't make sense to have planes showing naked boobs on the nose.....

[The Serbian Empire]

Government cares more about those ad revenue pounds than the freedom of expression for pilots.

Usually when people express themselves by painting someone else's property without permission they get slapped with an ASBO.

So how is Banksy still running free?

[Organized States]

I totally agree. I'd bring them back, it allows Crew Chiefs to express themselves more. Maybe something like no nude pin ups, it can't be larger than a certain size, etc, would appease the Special Interests groups enough.

[Keyboard Warriors]

Or you know, we could just accept that portraying women as sex dolls is pretty offensive towards women (yeah you might just have to take my word on this one) and conclude that such a portrayal is completely inappropriate to be featured on government property.

The decision to ban the images followed a visit by glamour models to southern Afghanistan before Christmas. During the trip they signed paintings of themselves on RAF aircraft.

As a general rule, the women whose images have graced warplanes have not been in the habit of objecting to it.

Were you under the impression that I insinuated that the only people who might have a problem with this were the women depicted in the paintings? Because I sure wasn't, and they sure as hell aren't.

Let's knock off the sex-negative bullshit. Sexy pictures of men and women have been around for a long time. Sexy pictures are not a problem. The humanization of a thing by naming it and putting pictures on it is not a problem.

Just like nobody argued humanization of an aircraft was the problem. It's the issue with women being treated as sex toys which has got most people riled up about this.

The idea that women should be offended by the existence of sexy pictures of women is really ridiculous. Do you see people announcing that men should be offended by the existence of pictures of sexy men? No, we do not, even if highly sexualized portrayals of men are in fact very common in media marketed to women.

Are these pictures of sexualized men being painted on government property? Surely you can understand the problems that might arise from negative stereotypes about women being propagated by government owned property in a profession which is heavily dominated by men and finds it challenging to convince women to enlist. Or are you going to completely ignore the context which this is in and scream about how men get sexualized too?

Being offended by pictures of sexy women is misogynist. You are literally hating the act of seeing the appearance of a woman.

This is such a ridiculous assertion that it's not funny. It's like your saying that any woman (or male for that matter) who takes offence at being likened to as a sexual plaything for the other gender actually hates them self. I've never seen somebody go to such a length to justify poor social conduct before, most people stop at sorry.

[Vicious Debaters]

I think one of the things that makes us human is the we have traditions and remember our past. When these are traditions are harmless, banning them is the destruction of culture.

But really, I wouldn't consider this a big deal anyway. -_-

[Arkinesia]

"PC brigade ban pin-ups on RAF jets - in case they offend women and Muslims"

oh daily mail you never fail to... well, not please, but you know what i mean

I prefer the term “amuse.”

[The UK in Exile]

Quite an interesting stance to come by considering that not a single one of the thousands of women in the RAF were bothered enough by this issue to file a complaint.

I guess that rules out women in the RAF as the super-sensitive minority being catered to, eh?

Its lovely that people have this view of the armed forces as the sort of place where complaints are encouraged.

[Korouse]

Then let the women paint pin-up boys.

The problem is solved.

[The Grey Wolf]

"in case they offend" shouldn't be a valid argument for anything.

Because offending people is good and we should strive to do it in every aspect of life.

Says the person who posts lovely gems such as "Ban toddlers" in a thread about a toddler being severely injured by a flashbang.

[Keyboard Warriors]

Because offending people is good and we should strive to do it in every aspect of life.

Says the person who posts lovely gems such as "Ban toddlers" in a thread about a toddler being severely injured by a flashbang.

There's a difference between satire and seriousness.

[Kiribati-Tarawa]

I agree, it's pretty stupid, especially if nobody has complained. Like someone else said, women who join the RAF aren't your typical "everything is sexist" or "the world is against women" people. If a significant number of complaints are filed, perhaps it's reasonable. However, since there haven't been any complaints, this just seems like some typical bureaucratic egalitarianism spreading into the military, where it, quite frankly, does not belong.

[Eastern Equestria]

I guess that rules out women in the RAF as the super-sensitive minority being catered to, eh?

Its lovely that people have this view of the armed forces as the sort of place where complaints are encouraged.

It's lovely that people have it in their minds that's the reason why no complaints were filed. Thousands of women in the RAF, not a single one was bothered enough by this trivial issue to even pipe up about it, much less file a complaint.