Exactly! Both my daughters are strong and smart enough to stand on their own without some mother hen in government trying to “protect their sensitivities.” Hell, I’m just hoping they don’t become female versions of me when they start dating.
If you ask me, “protecting sensitivities” like this for the SJWs is more an example of the patriarchy that feminists despise than anything. “Oh, women can’t handle seeing things like this, we must protect them from everything.” For crying out loud, even The Europeans aren’t this retarded about things like this.
It’s more about context. Posters or whatever on the wall of some waterfront dive bar might be perfectly appropriate for the intended clientele but not necessarily suitable for a state owned training ship.
“There were days when the garage calendar was at the frontier of daring,” he said. “But when there is Hustler out there, it’s no big deal.”
Beck said the calendars are vestiges of a time when garages were male sanctuaries. Most of the customers were men and they felt comfortable with the calendars and greasy mechanics.
Mr. Hoffmann, owner of Forest Hill Garage in Richmond, said the calendars are no big deal.
“When you walk through the shop and see something gracious like that, it gives you a nice thought and you go about your business,” he said.
But the 65 percent of service station customers who are women and the 6,000 female mechanics nationwide may disagree, as may some male customers.
“I know growing up it made me uncomfortable,” said Donna Wagner, director of operations for the Car Care Council, a Port Clinton, Ohio-based group that educates vehicle owners about car maintenance. “All things being equal, I would pick the person without those kinds of calendars and posters.”
She’s not saying she’s offended, just uncomfortable and that given a preference, better without.
If the intended clientele isn’t the cadets who sail on the ship and paint the murals, who in Hell is?
It’s not like the students at Miss Prissy’s Finishing School for lady snowflakes are going to wander onboard and hang out in the passageways. If they do get onboard and find themselves behind one of those decorated doors it’s safe to assume they chose to follow a cadet to experience seamanship first hand - so to speak.
I may be the opposite. I kind of want my daughter to be more of a wise ass than myself or even my wife (if that’s possible). You know, so we know we have succeeded as parents.
I wouldn’t have thought of training ship cadets as the equivalent of paying passengers, like on a cruise ship for example. But even in the case of the cruise ship passengers if they painted on the bulkheads I don’t think the owners would hesitate to paint over it at the end of the voyage.
KC. Remember back to your twenty year old self. I know for me those were formative years and the memories continue to last when I need a pick me up. Can’t a little bit of debauchery still remain in this industry? Can’t these kids have one outlet to display their individuality as a class for the future classes to follow?
It appears that you have completely missed the point.
1/C cadets will be busy the entire week sitting for license exams. Do you think they should forgo their Navigation General and Rules of The Road modules to protest the removal of the murals?
The rest of the cadets have already bought plane tickets and made travel plans. The email informing the student body of this decision went out only a few days ago, less than two weeks before spring break. Most students purchased their flights home months ago. Should they return their plane tickets and forgo visiting their families to protest the removal of the murals?
The administration was clearly aware this would be a contentious decision. I think its fairly obvious that they scheduled the removal of the murals during spring break for a reason. There will be hardly any students left on campus to do anything about it, which is just what they want.
I don’t give a flying fuck what you or the 1/c cadets do. If these were actually as near and dear to your heart as you are claiming you and your fellow students could change your travel plans and fight this deep injustice. Instead you are content to post on the gcaptain forum.
I mean this is an excerpt from the letter you posted.
I don’t even remember what my classes plaque looks like on the TSSOM. I could give two shits if they float tested the thing. What I remember is drinking with my buddies and attempting to walk back up the gangway. You are acting as if this is your only identity, and the administration are taking this from you.
All of the women I’ve met in the industry have been strong independently minded individuals, I highly doubt they need you to come to their defense and speak for them… I’m not sure you’re aware, but the majority of these murals that have been suggested to be objectifying women were painted by women who found the images to be empowering. Not that that makes the images any less offensive to those who found offense in them, but this begs the question: “Who gets to decide what images are offensive and what images arent?”
I saw a post by a woman on campus that was frustrated by the situation and I thought she said it well:
I must say that painting over these murals exemplifies what it means to objectify the female form. Singling out women’s bodies specifically, and destroying the artwork does nothing less than instill insecurities in the women which attend this university.
This is particularly true when it comes to the women in the majors which contributed to these eternal bonds that have been symbolized by the pieces of art on the TSGB.
Every female I have spoken with disagrees with this choice. In a male-dominated industry, us women should be allowed to have an opinion when it comes to how “we” are supposedly and absurdly being “objectified” by things we might actually be offended by. This is definitely not the case. These aren’t offensive, what is though is having a man tell me I should be ashamed of what I am naturally. This isn’t being treated with equality. This is telling women that they cannot comprehend the world around them. That their opinions on this matter are inconsistent with the way they should perceive the world. I had a faculty member question me “as a woman on campus” how I could possibly support these murals. He did not appreciate my response, nor did I appreciate being told by a man that as a woman I need to think differently. I suppose he could be right, and this matter is too much for me comprehend without multiple men telling me as a female I should be offended. What do you think? Because obviously I can’t handle having thoughts on this matter.
The cadets don’t own the Golden Bear? What a shocking revelation…
Of course we don’t get to opine what is acceptable and what is not. Every single mural on the bulkheads of the TSGB had to go through multiple levels of administrative approval before getting painted. Rough drafts of every one of these murals were approved by multiple levels of faculty before being put up. Why are they now suddenly finding offense in the art they previously approved of?
Well I have a daughter and as a matter of fact she has a couple tattoos that resemble a few of those ladies. Also none of those murals were put up by the students without prior faculty approval
Right, well the 1/C cadets surely aren’t going to be failing mates exams to do anything about this…
Yes, those non-refundable plane tickets should just be ignored. The cadets could most definitely spend the week alone on campus without food services and without a kitchen to cook in, some without a form of transport, just to possibly have a chance at preserving the ship’s collection of murals. How reasonable…
I am posting on the forum to bring our concerns to light, as a bit of a Hail Mary. I only planned on giving more context than the original poster gave. I most definitely did not plan on getting to so many side discussions with salty individuals.
Not everyone is exactly like you. If drinking was the only thing you remember from your time at Maine, so be it. Of course these murals aren’t our only identity, but they are a part of it. And it’s a shame to see thirty years of history go to waste for a few subjectively tasteless pieces of art.
Realistically, you’re right. I can admit that.
Regardless, it’s disappointing to see what’s happening and a lot of us feel we should be saying something about it while we are still on campus.
Or they can bring sketch books and draw all the boobies they want. You’d be hard pressed to see company tolerating that on one of their vessels. @Khakis365 Get a tattoo, it lasts forever and no one will say anything about it. You can get a square rigger with a giant anchor or something really salty. Then you can claim that as your idenity and own it all by yourself.!
The command of the T/S Golden Bear wasn’t doing the cadets any favors by providing them with a bubble where they can pretend girlie pics in public are still a thing. .
Society has changed over the last few decades, like it or not. The administration of CMA are not the bad guys here for acknowledging that reality. The administration evidently realizes that the training ship should be preparing cadets for shipping today, not as it existed decades ago.
They also need to consider that they are part of the California state university system, and accountable to them and reliant on them for funding. They need to consider the reality of how visiting CSU types from Berkeley or Sacramento might react on a campus tour. It’s also foreseeable that CMA’s president might not to present this in a way that blames his bosses ("I don’t have a problem with it, but those academic “elites” in Berkeley don’t like it…) A lot of the comments seem to be assuming CMA operates in its own bubble and doesn’t have outisde factors to consider.
