Be an obnoxious ass, using racist and homophobic language in responding to a prospective recruit whom you initiate contact with on official military email. Sgt. Ramode, take a good hard look in the mirror the next time you wear your uniform. If you are fortunate you might keep your stripes but don’t expect to get any more. I’d like to thank Sgt. Ramode though, she has shown quite clearly what DADT truly is all about: bigotry, nothing more and nothing less.
Hat tip: Pam’s House Blend
UPDATE: SLDN has more on this.
That Sgt. Marcia Ramode.
She might get a slide on the homophobia, but the current military considers overt-racism a career-killer. Hope she enjoys Greenland.
He’s not exactly the best person to put to the front of the argument, or to lead the charge, though, what with his clear anti-military bent on so many other matters.
Sgt. Ramode certainly doesn’t sound like the sort of person I’d like to be around, but neither does the other guy. She clearly needs a lesson in how to tolerate others who differ from her, but he could use a lesson in not intentionally aggravating other people by calling them “predators” or telling them that they’d, “BETTER HEAD OFF TO THE PLAYGROUND and find some new recruits [emphasis his].” Or saying to a Native American, “take that to your next rain dance.”
Honestly there was enough bigotry and animus for three or four people there, from both of them. The difference is, of course, that she is a public servant, and part of her job is being a good representative or “ambassador” for her employer.
He doesn’t have that constraint, but it’s no excuse for some of his statements. We aren’t going to win this debate by being a**holes any more than they will by being bigots.
PSUdain: Agree! After the first email exchange, they should have let it go, with the burden a bit more on the recruiter there, for being at work and using work email, unless they were both genuinely enjoying a good discussion and wanted to pursue it (which also would have been proper only off work email). But they both acted like there was a fire sale on “OMG RTFL you suck” comments, and I can’t imagine I would want to spend time with either one.
I was thinking the same thing, PSU. Both of these children need some remedial training in respect of their fellow American.
But dey dont teech dose tings aneemore i guess.
That Sgt. Marcia Ramode.
Hence why I called her “she”. I assume she is Latina from the name, but I could be wrong.
Honestly there was enough bigotry and animus for three or four people there, from both of them. The difference is, of course, that she is a public servant, and part of her job is being a good representative or “ambassador” for her employer.
That’s it precisely. He was being an ass on his own time while she was doing it on duty and using military email to boot.
We aren’t going to win this debate by being a**holes any more than they will by being bigots.
Quite right. The efforts of say Staff Sgt. Alva are better served to overturning DADT than this fellow. However, this email exchange will hit the public and most will only remember the bigotry of the recruiter, hopefully questioning the reasoning behind it.
As a current member of the National Guard with a total of 13 years active & reserve service, I can tell you that this recruiter’s military career is over. She obviously lacks judgment and a good deal of common sense. Who else would, in an official and highly visible position, write such things? If I were a betting man, I’d wager she’s either said or written something inappropriate in the past. Despite DADT, no branch of the military wants to be represented by this kind of recruiter. Besides, even she should have known that the UCMJ forbids homosexual acts, not those who are gay.
Sgt (for now) Ramode certainly exposed a lack of common sense. First thing she did wrong was take the bait. And she slid right down the hill after that. Maybe that’s why she’s in a non-critical position. I wouldn’t want her in a position requiring much of a brain.
She was wrong (and not just spelling and grammar) but DADT is not her fault.
Anyone with a modicum of common sense would have responded to the “I am gay” email with an “I’m sorry, current policy is… please contact your Congress-critter if you’d like to see it changed”.
She’s claiming to be Native American, at least in part.
It sounds to me like the gay fellow took the opportunity to be obnoxious about DADT even though there’s not a solitary thing that a recruiter can possibly do about it. And yes, obviously, she shouldn’t have responded past the first exchange.
I hate to point out though that minority people tend not to be as careful about expressing racism and other bigotry as white people. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard remarks from racial minorities that I find shocking. I’ve heard supposedly well-educated people claim that it’s not possible to be racist unless you’re white.
I sometimes think, when some public figure gets in trouble (I recall a local elected lady in the Bay Area who got recalled after pulling her face back to make her eyes slanted during a speech) that it never entered the reality of their world that they could possibly be accused of racism, no matter what they did. There’s a double standard for people who can claim to be victims of discrimination, even if, I think, they aren’t always aware of it themselves.
A rude awakening for the Sgt. Though she’ll get in more trouble due to PITA factors for her command than what she said.
There is a chance it wasn’t the sgt. writing at all.
Robert & Synova, excellent points. It takes two to tango and both should have kept it civil. I fault the gay guy for goading her into a position but I am also faulting the sargeant for falling into that trap and demeaning the uniform she wears. (Or in her case, will cease from wearing.)
Two wrongs sure as hell don’t make it right.
Regards,
Peter H.
#11 Really? Is there some suggestion that her side of it was forged?
#12 The military is expected to be civil in the face of the worst sort of abuse. It’s not very fair, but that’s the way it is.
Syn, you are exactly right and I agree with you on that point. My point is that this sergeant should not have let some little libtard goad her into making inflammatory remarks in print.
Hey, maybe he learned from some of our lower-case-trolls how to rile people up. We may be on to something here.
Regards,
Peter H.
I’ll begin by saying I think Corey Andrew was as idiotic and bigoted as Sgt. Ramode. I’m embarrassed he’s from my hometown after reading his comments and insults.
That said, I don’t blame him in a way for beginning the exchange. I know what it’s like to have military recruiters, Nation of Islam, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, gangs, and assorted other homophobic organizations approach me to join their ranks. The initial recruitment email was probably hard to resist replying to.
Once Sgt. Ramode was informed Mr. Andrew was gay (the T in DADT) she should have simply stated the policy verbatim from any manual which exists and moved on. Her personal opinions should be left aside. Many people are racist and homophobic as the two in this email have demonstrated. That’s unfortunate but personal feelings must be put aside and professionalism must prevail. Mr. Andrew should have remained professional. Sgt. Ramode has nothing to do with the policy and nothing is served debating with her. Sgt. Ramode went way over the line and bears more fault. Clearly she is irrational and not very intelligent based on the exchange. Hopefully, DADT will be repealed so professionalism prevails, discrimination dies and we’re spare idiotic emails and news such as this.
That Corey Andrew Guy is an ass. He forged the whole thing. All he is trying to doi s get publicity and make some money out of it. He cannot join the military anyway, all his chances are shot. So he better startlooking for aj ob in burger king. As for that army recruiter I say go girl you did nothing wrong. corey andrew is another one of those people out there who do not support the troops.HAHAHAHAHHA