Posted on 01/13/2007 12:27:16 AM PST by csvset
A US Air Force sergeant who appears nude in the latest edition of Playboy magazine has been stood down from duties as an investigation begins.
Michelle Manhart, 30, is pictured in a range of poses, some while wearing uniform and striking a military pose, others while stripped naked.
The air force said in a statement her actions "does not meet the high standards we expect of our airmen".
Ms Manhart said she did not expect to be disciplined and defended the photos.
Ms Manhart, who is married with two children, appears in the February issue of Playboy's US edition.
In a six-page spread she is photographed in camouflage uniform shouting and holding weapons under the headline "Tough Love".
Other pictures are more explicit.
Dismay
She defended her decision to pose for the magazine, pointing out that she works in training air force recruits and has served her country since 1994.
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
They picked me to train these individuals so if they elect to say I don't have [integrity] then that's their opinion
Michelle Manhart
|
|
|
|
"Of what I did, nothing is wrong, so I didn't anticipate anything, of course," she told the Associated Press.
"I didn't do anything wrong, so I didn't think it would be a major issue.
"They picked me to train these individuals so if they elect to say I don't have [integrity] then that's their opinion."
Oscar Balladares, a spokesman for Lackland Air Force Base, denounced her actions in a statement.
"This staff sergeant's alleged action does not meet the high standards we expect of our airmen, nor does it comply with the Air Force's core values of integrity, service before self, and excellence in all we do.
"It is not representative of the many thousands of outstanding airmen who serve in the US Air Force today."
A Playboy spokeswoman said two serving women have posed nude in the past, both from the navy.
One was discharged a few months early in June 2000, while the first model was honourably discharged in 1998.
So says you. This is merely your opinion.
This is why it's okay to show the Good Guy blowing the Bad Guy up with an RPG to the chest and not to show the same Good Guy getting it on with some chick.
The good guy being defined as 'Us' and the bad guy being defined as 'Them'. Sure, I understand what you mean.
Pornography is immoral for two reasons: first, because it reduces its subject to the status of a commodity by divorcing his or her sexuality from its proper place in the natural order of things (i.e. family life); second, because (when used for its most obvious purpose) it tempts its user to engage in morally illicit behavior by divorcing the act of sex from its purpose in the natural order of things (i.e. family life),
Hmmmm... You speak of the natural order of things as if they were universal throughout human culture. What you mean to say is in the 'natural order of things in Western culture'. In many cultures a woman is and has always has been a commodity. Many within our own culture still treat women as such. So, I'm not sure where you get your 'norm' for modelling natural behaviour against.
In my view, cosmetics are a way to keep women enslaved to this idea of woman=commodity. I refer to cosmetics as a 'Maybelline Burkha'. I think that covers how I feel about cosmetics. If you use them, you are doing this to yourself. I would rather see all women naked than even one single woman with make-up on her face. I think make-up is immoral and not within the natural order of things.
Can you think of a way to dispute that?
As married man, I would never want to see my wife, female relatives, or any future daughters reduced to being spank-off fare for some dirty guy.
Why does the guy have to be dirty? Would it be ok if the guy wasn't dirty? I don't think that masterbation per se makes one a dirty person.
No man wants his own daughter displayed for the pleasure of other men in a Playboy centerfold or on the strip club stage.
This is simply false. I remember watching Playmate of the Year Donna Edmondson's video when it came out and her father was very proud of her. He said so. I know it wouldn't bother me if my daughter or wife was in Playboy. My last wife was German. She had been an athlete all her life and then a doctor. She had a very no-nonsense idea of the human body. She was equally as comfortable naked as dressed- public or private. It didn't bother me. It didn't bother her. I am a man- thus you are refuted in that point. Absolutes in debate will usually corner you. It would be better if you said 'Not many men want...' This way I would quibble over the meaning of 'not many' as opposed to simply refuting your entire point by coming up with just one example contrary to your conjecture.
If I carry the way you feel to its natural conclusions I should want to cover all women from head to toe in a sack so that no other male could possibly get wanking material out of an exposed ankle or wrist.
This is the beauty of freedom. Go your own way. Don't try to make me go your way. I will go mine. When you try to make others go your way and ascribe such words as immoral to my actions because they are different than your own eventually a culture of people like yourself will want to destroy a culture of people more similar to me. This is what is happening in the world right now between Islam and the West.
The way you look at it, I can describe a woman who wears tight fitting clothing or a low cut top or a short skirt as being immoral because she has sexually stimulated me. But think about this:
The biggest turn on for me in a woman is her mind. I find intelligent women to be very sexually arousing. Does this mean they are immoral for having aroused me by displaying their intellect? This is a serious question. Claudia Schiffer is not a hot woman in my opinion but Dr Condoleezza Rice is very sexy and I cannot hear her talk or read about her without thinking of her as 'a sexual object' (if you will). Is she immoral for having made me feel thus?
It is my opinion that at the heart of the Muslim male is the same fear of the sexuality of the woman that lies at the heart of the Westerner who proclaims women immoral for arousing the sexual desires of men. The same. Read that how you will.
You have not changed my mind. And it doesn't matter if I have changed yours or not because.... (Drum roll).... My world view will defeat yours one day. People want more and more freedom, not less. Muslim culture (and all other female fearing cultures for that matter) will dissappear from the Earth. Look at television- you see more and more sex and nudity- not less. This will not change. It will only increase. The world will validate my view more and more with each passing second and yours will fade to non-existence.
In my view, an immoral thing cannot survive. When a century has passed us by, perhaps some future Freepers can look back on this conversation and see what memes have died out and which ones have survived.
I think you're right about one thing. Most people don't do violence naturally but everybody likes a good shag. A good shag will trump violence one day and anything that leads to a good shag will be deemed more moral than whatever leads to a good fight.
Perhaps this Air Force lady has eroded the foundations of your world view. She has done no harm to mine at all. I haven't seen her nude pictures and probably won't trouble myself to look at them. It's just not a big deal to me one way or the other (her nudity).
That's what got the human race into its current dire straits: the worship of freedom above all. "Ye shall be as gods" is just as much a lie as it ever was.
As for the battle of worldviews — well, let's just say the final result has long since been decided. May God give us all the strength to stick with the side whose battle cry is fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum rather than the side that cries non serviam.
Huh? I think that what got America where it is today is because a few folks back around 1776 and a few more in the 1940's worshipped freedom above all, so much so that they risked and in many cases sacrificed their lives to it.
May God give us all the strength to stick with the side whose battle cry is fiat mihi secundum verbum tuum rather than the side that cries non serviam.
What does God's word have to do with nudity or your distates thereof? Your problem and those of many folks around here is that they confuse normative and objective standards of behaviour. The prohibition against rape, murder, and theivery is objective it destroys the lives of those who are the victims and undermines the economic well being of all in an easily observed manner. The prohibition against nudity is normative - in the US. It is a societal convention, here. I have not noticed that coed sauna's, for instance, has undermined the discipline of German society.
I spent time in and out of bases of all kinds. I have to agree with you. When the Marines started getting women in the general population was the best. They were almost all in great shape. I am pretty sure that the AF still calls it "squeezing the pickle" when you let one go.
One of buddies spent a lot of time (like jail time) in the SAC underground in Omaha. Boring as hell - unless something broke (he was a comm tech). According to him the best part of the job was reading all the daily status sheets from around the world. Every little incident in the AF was posted, noted and cataloged there. Said there was some weird stuff that happened.
I know another guy who was in the Mountain on his last day and the place got locked down for three days. LOL
Yet another reason for me to wait for the new issue with baited breath! She's a babe... But my #1 reason is Number 6 from Battlestar Galactica is in the new issue.
I only get Playboy for the pictures!
Mark
I've got fifteen cents. Please send me 18 of `em! Thanks!
Mark
Why would you want a Paris or Britney when you could have an Ann Coulter? Seems to me, that wouldn't be a hard choice to make. Anyway, I think the first two are unavailable....too busy making fools of themselves.;)
What's with married women wanting to strip down for a bunch of men? Doesn't make sense to me.
I guess her husband approves, most wouldn't and would divorce a wife who fulfilled those desires.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.