Honoring servicemembers at sporting events

[Hank]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

So you agree with me that,  we all have our own thoughts on what a man is and what a man should be.  

As such, I cannot be flat out wrong as you indicate.  If I were flat out wrong then we clearly cannot have different thoughts and we clearly do.

Your thoughts demonstrate a complete unwillingness to accept people for who they are and what they may feel.  It shows a lack of desire to accept that their upbringing, family, environment, education, or personal experience might have shaped their thoughts and ideas and that because it they demonstrate personal traits you find so abhorrent.

If you are going to ask us to accept your viewpoints because of the 5 criteria you suggested, how can you not accept alternate viewpoints based on those same 5 criteria?

If you reject it, flat out, as you are indicating by saying "flat out wrong" then you invalidate your viewpoint.  If you accept it, then you accept that your viewpoints may indeed be open for alteration.

Unless you'd like to take a step back and retract your statement that you do believe that we all have our own thoughts and ideas of what a man is and what a man should be.  If that's the case then we get to "This is the world according to Hank. No discussion needed." 

 

 

 

When I said you were flat out wrong I didn't mean to imply that your views are wrong and my views are right. I respect that your views are different, I'm happy to discuss them, and I'm not hard headed to the point where I can't be persuaded. What I meant was you were wrong about the bolded not belonging in the post, because the bolded was my views, and the post was about my views, therefore it belongs. 

[LTS]

On 9/7/2018 at 2:56 PM, Hank said:

Like many other board members, I've never understood why we do this. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know when or how it started. As a retired soldier, I would feel incredibly uncomfortable being out there on the ice/field and politely decline the invitation when offered to me. But to care enough to have a negative feeling about it? I don't understand that either. Personally, if you're someone who feels "uncomfortable" when someone is being honored I think it speaks volumes about your lack of character as a man. At least you are self aware enough to know you're an inferior man and you feel accordingly. Perhaps it's better to keep those feelings to yourself and not expose yourself as the weak, pathetic inferior man that you are. 

So let me start over from the first post real quick.

I think I can summarize my position.  I am not uncomfortable with the honoring.  I do think it gets to be too much. I have no problem thanking a service person when the situation arises.  I don't go make it a point to stick my nose into a service persons business just to thank them either. As was stated, there is a clear marketing aspect to all of this and that's where I have a bit of a problem with it.  It's different than any other marketing event in that if you don't stand up and applaud you're going to get some kind of public opinion backlash coming at you. This doesn't happen when you tune out the 3rd Bud Light commercial.  But, in the end, I don't attend so many events where this gets to be annoying for me, so ultimately I don't care.

What, in your original statement, do you define as uncomfortable?

What is it, that makes that person an inferior man?

As near as I can tell you have defined it as "those who form a negative opinion" about honoring those who've served.  Are you referring to people who have a problem with EVER honoring them or are you referring to those who get tired of the events being tracked out over and over again?

 

 

[Hank]

19 hours ago, LTS said:

So let me start over from the first post real quick.

I think I can summarize my position.  I am not uncomfortable with the honoring.  I do think it gets to be too much. I have no problem thanking a service person when the situation arises.  I don't go make it a point to stick my nose into a service persons business just to thank them either. As was stated, there is a clear marketing aspect to all of this and that's where I have a bit of a problem with it.  It's different than any other marketing event in that if you don't stand up and applaud you're going to get some kind of public opinion backlash coming at you. This doesn't happen when you tune out the 3rd Bud Light commercial.  But, in the end, I don't attend so many events where this gets to be annoying for me, so ultimately I don't care.

What, in your original statement, do you define as uncomfortable?

What is it, that makes that person an inferior man?

As near as I can tell you have defined it as "those who form a negative opinion" about honoring those who've served.  Are you referring to people who have a problem with EVER honoring them or are you referring to those who get tired of the events being tracked out over and over again?

 

 

LTS, I didn't forget about you. A reply to this requires a larger block of time than I currently have, but I'll get to it. I appreciate you engaging me on this and enjoy the conversation. 

[Weave]

On 9/10/2018 at 12:00 PM, Hank said:

We have been posting here together for well over a decade and I believe him to be sincere. I also believe he is in the minority. A very small minority. I believe most men feel uncomfortable for the reasons I stated above.

I'm curious as to why you think I am in the minority, ie. what feedback do you have that indicates something else?

And I'm curious as to what sort of character flaw you are referring to. 

[SwampD]

2 hours ago, Weave said:

I'm curious as to why you think I am in the minority, ie. what feedback do you have that indicates something else?

And I'm curious as to what sort of character flaw you are referring to. 

I'm guessing it's the character flaw that you, like every single person I know, know that these pregame memorial ceremonies are nothing more than paid for recruitment tools. I don't believe you to be in the minority.

[SwampD]

Actually, given who our president is, we're probably in the minority.

[Hank]

On 9/10/2018 at 3:58 PM, LTS said:

So let me start over from the first post real quick.

I think I can summarize my position.  I am not uncomfortable with the honoring.  I do think it gets to be too much. I have no problem thanking a service person when the situation arises.  I don't go make it a point to stick my nose into a service persons business just to thank them either. As was stated, there is a clear marketing aspect to all of this and that's where I have a bit of a problem with it.  It's different than any other marketing event in that if you don't stand up and applaud you're going to get some kind of public opinion backlash coming at you. This doesn't happen when you tune out the 3rd Bud Light commercial.  But, in the end, I don't attend so many events where this gets to be annoying for me, so ultimately I don't care.

What, in your original statement, do you define as uncomfortable?

What is it, that makes that person an inferior man?

As near as I can tell you have defined it as "those who form a negative opinion" about honoring those who've served.  Are you referring to people who have a problem with EVER honoring them or are you referring to those who get tired of the events being tracked out over and over again?

 

 

You mention both uncomfortable and annoyed. That's an important distinction. If someone thinks the DOD markets/recruits (that's what I think it is, not some diobolical plot to put the public eye on individual servicemembers to distract them from the lost lives and money, because I don't believe the public outcry has reached the level where the DOD is concerned about it) and that annoys them, whatever. I don't get caring enough to be annoyed, but to each their own. It's become an acceptable norm in our culture. Like holding a door instead of letting it smack the person behind you. If someone is being honored, you stand and politely clap for ten seconds, it's what you do in our polite society. If anyone feels like they are judged harshly by those around them for not doing it, it's for that reason and not some bigger "you must hate the military" garbage. 

You asked me to define uncomfortable.  I can't, I've never been made to feel uncomfortable (In the context of our discussion).

You asked me what it is that makes that person an inferior man. I think a man that feels uncomfortable (different from feeling annoyed at the perceived endless  marketing/recruiting effort  by the DOD) seeing servicemembers honored sees himself as inferior, and if that's how he sees himself, that's how I'll see him. To be honest, I've never heard a person in real life express feeling uncomfortable (or annoyed) by this. Ive onle seen it mentioned on these boards  I guess in hindsight this shouldn't surprise me. I think there's a lot of group think pack mentality on these boards. Fake outraged social justice warriors. It's definitely not a representation of the blue collar Buffalo I grew up in. We have a young man who believes white men are pre-conditioned to see black men as violent gorilla's who need to be put down (his words, not mine) and would find social injustice everywhere wether it existed or not. Mind you, he has no life experience outside of his Western New York small town lilly white bubble. We have a poster who's a(n) (reformed?) Abusive drunk that wants the NHL to look like the women's game. The examples go on. When "those" type of men express feeling "uncomfortable", yeah, I'm going to see them the way I do and judge them accordingly. On that subject, I believe in a previous post you asked me what characteristics/traits went into making/being a real man. There's really too much that goes into it to write down. I've never sat down with my son's and had that discussion, nor do I know anyone who has. It's one of those things that are better expressed through teaching points as they present themselves in life. For instance:

 

Son, you can't break up with your girlfriend over text, a real man doesn't do that. 

Dad, why do you still work when you get 6k a month from the VA until you die? Well, at my age if I sat on my ass all day every day I wouldn't be able to feel good about myself as a man. Plus, while we live very comfortably, that extra money provides the quality of life that we enjoy, like season tickets, taking Mom to the Opera, dropping three hundred on dinner at Ruth's Chris or Morton's instead of one hundred at Longhorn or Outback, spending five weeks in Sydney instead of two weeks at Hilton Head. 

Dad, why do you have all these credit cards if you're not going to use them? Because available credit and debt to income ratio are two things that determine your credit score. It's important for a man to have good credit in life. That's why the APR on my mortgage is 3.25% and interest on my car loans were under one. By the time a man reaches his late 20s he should have at least 20k in available credit at under 12% in case of emergencies. If he doesn't than he's made a series of poor life decisions and hasn't matured enough to clean up his credit. 

Dad, why do you have a second job when you're in the army?  Because it's important for me to show you boys that it's important for a man to have a strong work ethic. Besides, I like being debt free minus the mortgage, it helps me feel good about myself as a man. 

If I didn't do an adequate job of answering your questions let me know and I'll try again. My views are just that, mine. No one is wrong if they don't share them, just different. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hank

[Hank]

On 9/9/2018 at 9:51 AM, Scottysabres said:

I tend to not discuss politics very often, if at all. But I saw the conversation about service members in one of the Aid threads so mosied over here to just say I'm an older veteran, and I tend to agree with those on thanking me for my service. I just thank them for their support and move along. I don't think I've ever taken a veteran or service discount, at least, not to my recollection anyways.

Every individual served(s) for their own reasons in my opinion anyways. When I joined in 88, there wasn't a lot going on job wise in the area and I was interested in the G.I. Bill for school. Just so happens I got swept up in the Gulf war. I served, I got out in 92, and moved forward in life from there. Then got ready reserved in 2002 after 9/11. I didn't then and still don't expect others to look at me differently, it wasn't like I went running to the base gates screaming YAHOO! while waving an American flag in the air.

I served, went about my business, came home and live my life. As so many others have.

In fairness, you don't qualify for a military discount as you are neither active duty nor retired and don't have a military ID. 

[Weave]

38 minutes ago, Hank said:

 We have a poster who's a(n) (reformed?) Abusive drunk that wants the NHL to look like the women's game. 

This is the 3rd or 4th time you've made this particular character assassination.  It's ugly and it has no basis in anything factual.  You've come to this conclusion based on things he's posted that have nothing to do with abusing women or alcohol.  It has no place on this forum.

[Hank]

11 minutes ago, Weave said:

This is the 3rd or 4th time you've made this particular character assassination.  It's ugly and it has no basis in anything factual.  You've come to this conclusion based on things he's posted that have nothing to do with abusing women or alcohol.  It has no place on this forum.

I mentioned noone in particular in a pretty long post. You isolated it and drew attention to it. Good job. 

If you delete your post I'll delete that portion in mine. 

[Weave]

2 minutes ago, Hank said:

I mentioned noone in particular in a pretty long post. You isolated it and drew attention to it. Good job. 

If you delete your post I'll delete that portion in mine. 

No.  I think it deserves scrutiny.  It wasn't a general post, and you've leveled it directly at him before.

[Hank]

Just now, Weave said:

No.  I think it deserves scrutiny.  It wasn't a general post, and you've leveled it directly at him before.

Yes, directly at him, after an unprovoked attack of his own. Once, not three or four times as you claim. 

 

I was asked to explain things, I did, I mentioned noone specific. Scrutinize away. 

[Weave]

26 minutes ago, Hank said:

Yes, directly at him, after an unprovoked attack of his own. Once, not three or four times as you claim. 

 

I was asked to explain things, I did, I mentioned noone specific. Scrutinize away. 

Seeing as that I have reported you twice for it in the past, and now this one is three, I'm going to use your new line.  You're full of chit.

 

[Hank]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

Seeing as that I have reported you twice for it in the past, and now this one is three, I'm going to use your new line.  You're full of chit.

 

I honestly don't remember the second one, would you mind PMing it to me?

[Weave]

6 minutes ago, Hank said:

I honestly don't remember the second one, would you mind PMing it to me?

It's long lost to the archives.  I was tempted to be a dick and post them in this thread, but they're long gone.

[Hank]

21 minutes ago, Weave said:

It's long lost to the archives.  I was tempted to be a dick and post them in this thread, but they're long gone.

What I remember reading from him, and someone else, was years ago. If I am misremembering, than my sincere apologies go out to him. This is the first time I've been told I'm misremembering. Not even by him. I wish at the time you would have sent me a PM and said something along the lines of "hey, I don't think you're remembering things correctly. Either way, that's not cool." I probably would have deleted what I wrote. But instead of doing that you chose to run to a mod and tattle. I was definitely wrong about you. 

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Hank said:

What I remember reading from him, and someone else, was years ago. If I am misremembering, than my sincere apologies go out to him. This is the first time I've been told I'm misremembering. Not even by him. I wish at the time you would have sent me a PM and said something along the lines of "hey, I don't think you're remembering things correctly. Either way, that's not cool." I probably would have deleted what I wrote. But instead of doing that you chose to run to a mod and tattle. I was definitely wrong about you. 

You were confronted about it in that thread and stood your ground.  And then you repeated it.  This site doesn't need that kind of garbage. 

As for the rest, I'll sleep tonight.

[Hank]

2 minutes ago, Weave said:

You were confronted about it in that thread and stood your ground.  And then you repeated it.  This site doesn't need that kind of garbage. 

As for the rest, I'll sleep tonight.

No, chz gave me a three week time out. Either way, no one told me that I misremembered. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hank

[Weave]

3 minutes ago, Hank said:

No, chz gave me a three week time out. 

I'm not talking about the last time.  I'm talking about the first time.  Based on your standing your ground the first time you made that play (was a year ago or more) it seemed pretty apparent to me that you weren't interested in backing off your assertion so when it continued I felt I had seen it enough and asked that something be done about it. 

[Hank]

7 minutes ago, Weave said:

I'm not talking about the last time.  I'm talking about the first time.  Based on your standing your ground the first time you made that play (was a year ago or more) it seemed pretty apparent to me that you weren't interested in backing off your assertion so when it continued I felt I had seen it enough and asked that something be done about it. 

The last (only?) Time was well over a year ago. It was a one page thread that was deleted after I received my time out. I have no idea what you are talking about. 

[Hank]

3 minutes ago, Hank said:

The last (only?) Time was well over a year ago. It was a one page thread that was deleted after I received my time out. I have no idea what you are talking about. 

My mistake, it was around Christmas, not over a year ago. 

[Weave]

2 minutes ago, Hank said:

My mistake, it was around Christmas, not over a year ago. 

This has been going on since the old politics thread, and if my memory is correct, the Patrick Kane thread.  I can't give you evidence.  Those threads are gone.  I KNOW I've reported it twice, regardless of whether it resulted in anything on your end.  Can we just end this crap and move on?

 

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Weave said:

This has been going on since the old politics thread, and if my memory is correct, the Patrick Kane thread.  I can't give you evidence.  Those threads are gone.  I KNOW I've reported it twice, regardless of whether it resulted in anything on your end.  Can we just end this crap and move on?

 

I sure would like to move on, yes. 

[LTS]

On 9/18/2018 at 5:36 PM, Hank said:

You mention both uncomfortable and annoyed. That's an important distinction. If someone thinks the DOD markets/recruits (that's what I think it is, not some diobolical plot to put the public eye on individual servicemembers to distract them from the lost lives and money, because I don't believe the public outcry has reached the level where the DOD is concerned about it) and that annoys them, whatever. I don't get caring enough to be annoyed, but to each their own. It's become an acceptable norm in our culture. Like holding a door instead of letting it smack the person behind you. If someone is being honored, you stand and politely clap for ten seconds, it's what you do in our polite society. If anyone feels like they are judged harshly by those around them for not doing it, it's for that reason and not some bigger "you must hate the military" garbage. 

You asked me to define uncomfortable.  I can't, I've never been made to feel uncomfortable (In the context of our discussion).

You asked me what it is that makes that person an inferior man. I think a man that feels uncomfortable (different from feeling annoyed at the perceived endless  marketing/recruiting effort  by the DOD) seeing servicemembers honored sees himself as inferior, and if that's how he sees himself, that's how I'll see him. To be honest, I've never heard a person in real life express feeling uncomfortable (or annoyed) by this. Ive onle seen it mentioned on these boards  I guess in hindsight this shouldn't surprise me. I think there's a lot of group think pack mentality on these boards. Fake outraged social justice warriors. It's definitely not a representation of the blue collar Buffalo I grew up in. We have a young man who believes white men are pre-conditioned to see black men as violent gorilla's who need to be put down (his words, not mine) and would find social injustice everywhere wether it existed or not. Mind you, he has no life experience outside of his Western New York small town lilly white bubble. We have a poster who's a(n) (reformed?) Abusive drunk that wants the NHL to look like the women's game. The examples go on. When "those" type of men express feeling "uncomfortable", yeah, I'm going to see them the way I do and judge them accordingly. On that subject, I believe in a previous post you asked me what characteristics/traits went into making/being a real man. There's really too much that goes into it to write down. I've never sat down with my son's and had that discussion, nor do I know anyone who has. It's one of those things that are better expressed through teaching points as they present themselves in life. For instance:

 

Son, you can't break up with your girlfriend over text, a real man doesn't do that. 

Dad, why do you still work when you get 6k a month from the VA until you die? Well, at my age if I sat on my ass all day every day I wouldn't be able to feel good about myself as a man. Plus, while we live very comfortably, that extra money provides the quality of life that we enjoy, like season tickets, taking Mom to the Opera, dropping three hundred on dinner at Ruth's Chris or Morton's instead of one hundred at Longhorn or Outback, spending five weeks in Sydney instead of two weeks at Hilton Head. 

Dad, why do you have all these credit cards if you're not going to use them? Because available credit and debt to income ratio are two things that determine your credit score. It's important for a man to have good credit in life. That's why the APR on my mortgage is 3.25% and interest on my car loans were under one. By the time a man reaches his late 20s he should have at least 20k in available credit at under 12% in case of emergencies. If he doesn't than he's made a series of poor life decisions and hasn't matured enough to clean up his credit. 

Dad, why do you have a second job when you're in the army?  Because it's important for me to show you boys that it's important for a man to have a strong work ethic. Besides, I like being debt free minus the mortgage, it helps me feel good about myself as a man. 

If I didn't do an adequate job of answering your questions let me know and I'll try again. My views are just that, mine. No one is wrong if they don't share them, just different. 

Hank - I truly appreciate the time you put into this response.  It demonstrates a real commitment to the discussion.

Let me start by saying, there are a lot of those little "10 seconds" in life where it does not harm anyone to use that time to respect what someone else has done or to show respect by performing a small act (ie. holding a door). Our society has certainly fostered the "me before anyone else" mentality to the point where many people feel that they are all that matter.

I dislike the military. It represents something that should not exist. However, I still respect those who choose that as their career. I can understand how someone who feels even more strongly about the military than I do could be bothered by honoring a person who willingly chose to support that entity.

As for the "inferior man" section of your post. I think the part that comes into question is why single amount men?  It's that choice to focus on "men" as opposed to "people" that I think bothers me most.  The things you cite as examples are examples for all, not just males.  The focus on men here seems to come across as a sexist viewpoint simply because of the persistent use of men and sons without any acknowledgement that it is important for women to also have: a strong work ethic, clean credit, etc.

Finally, when you paraphrased about another poster "wants the NHL to look like the women's game" were you using that posters words or were you drawing a comparison to someone wanting to reduce the hitting that exists in the NHL?  If the poster said it, then so be it. However, I think, in choosing the words you chose, you demonstrate that you see some line of distinction between the physicality of men and women and what should be acceptable.  It would have been different if you had stated it, "wants the NHL to eliminate checking".  Hockey removed checking until age 13 a few years back.  There is talk of removing it until age 15.  It's not a male/female thing, it's a damage to the body/brain thing.  Similarly, there are those who ask why women's hockey does not have checking legalized?  Certainly watching a USA vs Canada game one might not even know that checking was illegal. The bottom line is that in choosing your words (if they were yours) it comes across as being sexist, especially when coupled with the entire post on "a man and his sons".  If it's not your intent, excellent. I am just saying that it's not hard to interpret your focus on the male aspects as being chauvinistic.

 

[SABRES 0311]

On 9/8/2018 at 10:28 AM, Hank said:

You're correct, I've never been to a Nascar race. 

 

It's not meant to be offensive, I'm just sharing my opinion on a current and relevant topic. This is where a mod asked me to do it. I've attacked no one personally. Feel free to disagree with my opinion, but your disagreement doesn't mean I violated the rules of the forum. 

There is no pattern, you're being intentionally obtuse. 

You’re a little belt fed don’t you think? I don’t have an opinion on the subject really. Only that I think anything, like the Winter Classic, loses meaning when done too often.