USAF Badges purge
I bet some MOD bod is copying and pasting from this already. The Purge Pt 2 is coming - General Discussion - Baseops Forums
|
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f7f6aef50.jpeg
I can’t think of any official RAF badges that are sexist/ racist/ whatever (although there might be some rather dodgy student course ones), but this sort of aircraft artwork would probably be viewed unfavorably today. Is it still on the aircraft in a museum somewhere? |
I see somebody looked ahead and made sure their badge was both safe - and protected. To quote one of the responses on that forum:
The 28th BS, at least, had their patch approved by treaty with the Mohawk tribe/nation and it was updated in the late-90s IIRC. It also takes the tribe's approval to change it from what I understand. |
I should think most museums have a few, most of them done in good spirit, and with affection (if they are of ladies). The B17 at Duxford still has AFAIK, "Sally B" on one side, and "Memphis Belle" on the other. The Victor at Cosford has "Maid Marion". That's just two off the top of my head. We just have to hope this isn't coming over the pond.
|
Does Disney still do patches? They seem to be so much more classy and smart than most of these self designed "morale" velcros.
|
And why not?
|
The odd Museums do still have copied GW1 artwork on Jaguars and other Granby Jets. Victors as well. Last nose art seen on a flying RAF Aircraft was XX725 (Ex Granby Jag). Door is not with Jet now.
|
|
Originally Posted by canard68
(Post 10961744)
I bet some MOD bod is copying and pasting from this already. The Purge Pt 2 is coming - General Discussion - Baseops Forums
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-...ymbols/9673242 |
Originally Posted by Herod
(Post 10961762)
We just have to hope this isn't coming over the pond.
There is no place for such sexist drivel in the 21st C. Especially given that we have had female aircrew for some 30 years! |
Buster gonad was melted down after being polished and displayed in the museum in London.
|
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2
(Post 10961963)
Why?
There is no place for such sexist drivel in the 21st C. Especially given that we have had female aircrew for some 30 years! |
Originally Posted by finestkind
(Post 10962086)
. If someone is going to fly their metal steed into action with the possibility of not returning than perhaps they have the right to be a bit racy. Otherwise we end up with the importance of wearing clean underwear so we are not embarrassed if we have an accident that has ripped a body limb off.
|
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2
(Post 10962108)
What UTTER drivel. You think it is acceptable to objectify women? I would suggest that says all I need to know about you.
Couple of points my hurt friend. 1) I expressed my opinion. I did not attack you, which your thinly veiled post appears to do to me. By all means disagree with me. 2) Your target fixation is not commendable. There is a lot of aircraft art that has nothing to do with the opposite sex (lot’s comes to mind of “itler” receiving numerous bomb’s, rocket’s, boot’s etc to the rear end) but still can be considered racy. Or are you for banning all aircraft art forms? objectify express (something abstract) in a concrete form. "good poetry objectifies feeling" One of the meanings of objectify. Point being who determines what good poetry is? Same as I don’t know art but I know what I like. There is art that I find distasteful. Last point. In case you missed it, I agreed with you. My point (oops another point) was that there is a lot of aircraft art that is part of history and that is racy. Trying to apply the social standards of today to yesterday is ludicrous. This brings up the discussion point of what is history? Ten, twenty, or thirty years ago? |
So that's alright then is it? Because it was done in the past we should not criticise?
How you can compare nose art of bombs or whatever to the naked female form is beyond me. As for 'hurt'? No, just sick and tired of idiots like you and your ilk with your overt sexism. |
As for 'hurt'? No, just sick and tired of idiots like you and your ilk with your overt sexism. |
Originally Posted by ExAscoteer2
(Post 10961963)
Why?
There is no place for such sexist drivel in the 21st C. Especially given that we have had female aircrew for some 30 years! |
NutLoose - because the majority of the GW1 'Nose Art' is either semi-naked females, or references to (as YOU well know). Trying to say it is the equivalent of 'Buster Gonads' is patently a false argument.
Oh and no we haven't had females flying in the RAF for 70 years BTW. ATA does not count. |
It means slapping nose art on the side of an aircraft isn’t sexist as there are a lot of male nose art as well.
|
Bollocks is there and you know it.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:26. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.