# Meanwhile back at the perpetually offended tent/Infidel tattoo questions



## Colin Parkinson (5 Jun 2019)

Sigh someone got their knickers in a knot for someone proclaiming exactly what they are.

https://nsadvocate.org/2019/06/05/news-brief-halifax-navy-sailor-with-islamophobic-tattoo-now-being-investigated/

Mod edit -- Just added a bit to the title to make it clearer.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Jun 2019)

> Google that term and search results are full of white supremacist and Islamophobic memes.



Okay. 

Noun


> 1: one who is not a Christian or who opposes Christianity
> 
> 2a: an unbeliever with respect to a particular religion
> 
> ...



Adjective 



> 1: not holding the faith of a given religionEither they must come to terms with surrounding infidel tribes or they must conquer the hinterland.— Daniel J. Boorstinthe infidel nations
> 
> 2: opposing or traitorous to a given religion



Send that sailor to prison!


----------



## mariomike (5 Jun 2019)

> Google that term and search results are full of white supremacist and Islamophobic memes.



Okay.

Canadian infidels,
https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=eHf4XPTTFaHc5gKtt5mQDg&q=%22canadian+infidels%22&oq=%22canadian+infidels%22&gs_l=psy-ab.12..0j0i22i30l3.2053.10505..11051...0.0..0.1262.3859.0j18j0j1j7-1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..35i39j0i131i67j0i67j0i131j0i10.aoJ5oefvAzo


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Jun 2019)

Infidel vs Canadian Infidels.

Am I missing the word Canadian or even a maple leaf in that tattoo?

I'll tell you right now, there's alot of caf members with an "infidel" tattoo.
And Tshirts, and bumper stickers, and back window stickers. 


Should we ban proud to be Canadian tattoos?  :


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Infidel vs Canadian Infidels.
> 
> Am I missing the word Canadian or even a maple leaf in that tattoo?
> 
> ...



I assume that, as we speak, there are legal defence teams scanning the internet for photos of Senior Officers in the CAF wearing the (almost) ubiquitous 'Infidel' morale patch on their combat uniforms...


----------



## mariomike (6 Jun 2019)

> Google that term and search results are full of white supremacist and Islamophobic memes.





			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Infidel vs Canadian Infidels.



Okay.

Canadian infidels
https://www.google.com/search?q=infidel&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiBz__L8NPiAhUFnlkKHcp8A6AQ_AUIECgB&biw=1280&bih=641


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (6 Jun 2019)

You forgot all the people that THIS guy calls infidels! :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBvfiCdk-jc


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Jun 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I assume that, as we speak, there are legal defence teams scanning the internet for photos of Senior Officers in the CAF wearing the (almost) ubiquitous 'Infidel' morale patch on their combat uniforms...



And the next CANFORGEN coming up.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jun 2019)

Since this isn't touching on a _specific_ op, just moved this into a more general military news thread.

Please continue, folks ...

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Jun 2019)

... and, for the record, here's an image of the tattoo in question for reference, in case it disappears elsewhere.


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> And the next CANFORGEN coming up.



TATFORGEN  :nod:


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (6 Jun 2019)

That is the Tattoo they are complaining about?

 :rofl:

On another note, I've been rewatching the Sopranos which is widely considered a masterpiece and one of the greatest TV series of all time.  With the militant political correctness that exists today, would that show even be able to be made today? 

Interesting commentary as well from Dan Houser (the creator of the GTA video game series):

https://m.ca.ign.com/articles/2018/10/24/dan-houser-thankful-not-to-be-releasing-grand-theft-auto-6-right-now

The prospects of a new GTA being released appear increasingly unlikely as Houser doesn't think he can satirize the game with today's political climate.  GTA 5 was the number three selling video game of all time behind only Tetris and Minecraft.

We are living in a very strange time of censorship and are becoming less free as a society.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Jun 2019)

But "we're" the ones allowing it.....


----------



## Furniture (6 Jun 2019)

Just wait until some special group decides that our GCS-SWA medals represent a war of racism, and colonial oppression, then demands take them off lol


----------



## IceBlue (6 Jun 2019)

Furniture said:
			
		

> Just wait until some special group decides that our GCS-SWA medals represent a war of racism, and colonial oppression, then demands take them off lol




That may have to be my release date


----------



## mariomike (6 Jun 2019)

> We then identified the sailor and the chain of command is now investigating,” says Major Mark Gough, Senior Public Affairs Officer, Maritime Forces Atlantic Headquarters.



Why the need for an investigation?


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Jun 2019)

If I was a civilian in a Nova Scotia Tim Hortons just itching to cry about something and seen a sailor with a infidel tatoo my first thought would be why the hell doesn't Canada have an aircraft carrier and fancy carrier group. Or even just some cruisers and destroyers to really kick ass on the high seas.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Why the need for an investigation?



Because it's easier then leading??


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Jun 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Why the need for an investigation?



Because someone has to hang.


----------



## Furniture (6 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Because it's easier then leading??



It's easier than having the entire CAF accused of wrongthink, resulting in Deschamps V2.0. 

With a CAF comprised maily of white males I'm sure you can imagine how that would work out...


----------



## brihard (6 Jun 2019)

Flipping back to the 1995 version of the dress instructions...

"9. Body Tattoos and Body-Piercing.
Members shall not acquire visible tattoos that could
be deemed to be offensive (e.g., pornographic,
blasphemous, racist) or otherwise reflect discredit on
the CF."

That paragraph has continued pretty much identically since then. You'd have to be kinda dumb to think than an 'Infidel' tattoo in the shape of a rifle isn't going to cross that threshold. 

Amidst all the whining about SJWs, snowflakes, and the perpetually offended and so on and so forth, has individual accountability and common sense stopped being a thing in the CAF?


----------



## 211RadOp (6 Jun 2019)

The current one (dated 2017-12-15) says:

9.Body Tattoos and Body-Piercing. As of September 26th, 2012, members are not to acquire any tattoos that are visible on the head, face or ears. Additionally, members shall not acquire tattoos that are visible either in military uniform or in civilian clothing that could be deemed to be offensive (e.g., pornographic, blasphemous, racist or containing vulgar language or design) or otherwise reflect discredit on the CAF.


----------



## brihard (6 Jun 2019)

211RadOp said:
			
		

> The current one (dated 2017-12-15) says:
> 
> 9.Body Tattoos and Body-Piercing. As of September 26th, 2012, members are not to acquire any tattoos that are visible on the head, face or ears. Additionally, members shall not acquire tattoos that are visible either in military uniform or in civilian clothing that could be deemed to be offensive (e.g., pornographic, blasphemous, racist or containing vulgar language or design) or otherwise reflect discredit on the CAF.



Yup... So the only real difference is 'visible in uniform'... Which this was.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jun 2019)

For reference to the discussion,

Tattoo Thread - including current policy [MERGED]
https://navy.ca/forums/threads/869.575
25 pages.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Jun 2019)

"deemed to be"   Who doesn't love being put into a Orwellian scenario??

Something is offensive or it isn't,  if it takes debate to figure it out then it isn't, it's simple opinion.
99.9 % of us would spot, and agree, on offensive with zero debate whatsoever.


And since I think every tattoo put on human skin is offensive I got a lot of ratting out to do ..... ;D


----------



## mariomike (6 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> "deemed to be"



It says,



> could be deemed to be offensive



Could be to some, not to others.



			
				Brihard said:
			
		

> You'd have to be kinda dumb to think than an 'Infidel' tattoo in the shape of a rifle isn't going to cross that threshold.



Have to wait for the results of the chain of command investigation,

Update:



> CORRECTION, June 6, 2019, 1:30 PM. I was just contacted by Major Gough who told me the following. “I just realized I misspoke when I said we identified the sailor. We have not yet identified the sailor, but the chain of command is still investigating the matter.”
> https://nsadvocate.org/2019/06/05/news-brief-halifax-navy-sailor-with-islamophobic-tattoo-now-being-investigated/


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Jun 2019)

So, if a definition of 'infidel' is the absence of religion, how hateful and offensive would it be to have a crucifix tattoo, a Star of David a crescent and star tattoo? Do they get a buy because they are organised religions.

Infidel, by definition sounds no different than athiest, by the same definition. Simply, no belief in religion.

Nobody appears to deem it offensive when a muslim calls a christian an infidel or kuffar. Do we demand that they remove the words apostate, kuffar and infidel from the Koran and their speech?

When we are called infidels, out of hate, the best way to take the power from the word is to make it your own. We have turned it into a source of acceptance and humour. Since the word has become mainstream, on t-shirts, hats, moral patches, whatever, the sting has been taken away. The word has lost its power for us and those that use it hatefully.

Well, except for some Timmy customer.

I am not throwing out my T-shirts, nor do I intend to take a flame thrower to the English language to satisfy someone being uncomfortable with words.


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Jun 2019)

You're not looking at it through an Orwellian lens.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (6 Jun 2019)

Can we please stop skirting the fact that it’s not so much the word, in and of itself, that is causing the issue *all on its own* and/or what the definition of it is. It’s the fact that it’s written in combination with being the shape of an automatic rifle. 

I personally don’t care one way or the other, but I’m not the one who placed a complaint, so whatever...

...But I’m pretty sure that if someone did the same thing using the word Gentile (which simply means ‘not Jewish’, so isn’t offensive at all, but in combination with other imagery ppl could take offence) it would still cause some raised eyebrows. And any number of other words when combined with guns could achieve the same reaction from some.

No one knows what the outcome of the “investigation” will be, but something of that nature (the word “Infidel” printed in the shape of a firearm) is open to interpretation, and maybe that’s simply exactly what the individual wanted to have happen. 

Stop trying to state that there’s absolutely zero reason for anyone to question it. We all know what the ink guidelines/policies are for CAF members and if something is towing the line in some fashion and it gets noticed, well, then that’s on the host to explain.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Jun 2019)

Is infidel a word only followers of Islam are allowed to use?

If an Islam practitioner uses it then they're pious, if I use it I'm Islamophobic?

I'm pretty sure the origins of Infidel is Christianity, am I wrong? 


Why is infidel in the shape of a gun considered racist and Islamophobic?


----------



## TCM621 (6 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Is infidel a word only followers of Islam are allowed to use?
> 
> If an Islam practitioner uses it then they're pious, if I use it I'm Islamophobic?
> 
> ...



It is derived from the Latin infidelis which simply means not faithful. Over time, it had become a word lobbied at anyone who doesn't share what you consider the true faith. The Arabic is Kafir. Muslims have a bunch of different types of infidels like Dahriya(athiest) and Murtad (apostate). To call someone a takfir seems to be like calling someone a heretic.

Why it is racist and Islamophobic? Because it is 2019, I guess? It very well be an expression of hatred of Muslims but there is no reason it has to be.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Jun 2019)

I can't ever recall a Christian using it to describe others, generally they say: Non-believer, non-Christian, agnostic or Atheist depending on the other persons position.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Jun 2019)

There was a T-shirt I wanted in 2006 that was similar to a well known sports logo that said “Major League Infidel”. It was discontinued so as to not offend the Afghans.


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Jun 2019)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I can't ever recall a Christian using it to describe others, generally they say: Non-believer, non-Christian, agnostic or Atheist depending on the other persons position.


Godless heathens? Commie. Timbit.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Jun 2019)

Actually few Christians ever disparage non-believers in front of me. I don't doubt there are some, but in general they are far more polite than the Atheists are about Christians.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Jun 2019)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Actually few Christians ever disparage non-believers in front of me. I don't doubt there are some, but in general they are far more polite than the Atheists are about Christians.



I think it depends on the Christians you hang around with.  I've personally been told I was a godless heathen that was going to hell by a Christian, and a number of similar insults along that vein by other so called Christians.  They weren't even particularly the fire and brimstone type, but those are probably the worst examples.

My personal observation is that people that are generally pretty strident about criticizing your belief frequently stray far from the actual beliefs of their faith (such as the Beattitudes). That seems to be independent of the religion, so more of a human behaviour thing I guess. But you only really remember the small number of arseclowns that you had a bad interaction with, and not the thousands of times where nothing really happened.


----------



## Harris (7 Jun 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> I assume that, as we speak, there are legal defence teams scanning the internet for photos of Senior Officers in the CAF wearing the (almost) ubiquitous 'Infidel' morale patch on their combat uniforms...



Getting a list of everyone who bought these would likely help: http://www.cpgear.com/search/results?query=infidel&commit=search


----------



## mariomike (7 Jun 2019)

Harris said:
			
		

> Getting a list of everyone who bought these would likely help: http://www.cpgear.com/search/results?query=infidel&commit=search



I like the "optional velcro" part.


----------



## Nuggs (7 Jun 2019)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I can't ever recall a Christian using it to describe others, generally they say: Non-believer, non-Christian, agnostic or Atheist depending on the other persons position.


In memory of my late grandmother, I'd like to add heathen to the list, it was her favourite.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## FSTO (7 Jun 2019)

Why do reporters screw themselves when they make stupid comments like "tattoo in the shape of an AK47 Assault Rifle. These idiots wouldn't know an AK if someone butt stroke him.

About the tattoo on its own? Much ado about nothing to me.

In fact, how about we get rid of all religion from the CAF? It would be interesting to hear the responses to this from all corners of the political spectrum.


----------



## Kat Stevens (8 Jun 2019)

Other than it being a just plain goofy design for a tat, at the end of the day it's just a word. One that was used by Christian knights to describe the Saracen armies about 900 years ago.


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2019)

FSTO said:
			
		

> In fact, how about we get rid of all religion from the CAF? It would be interesting to hear the responses to this from all corners of the political spectrum.



See also,

Religion in the Canadian Forces & in Canadian Society  
https://navy.ca/forums/threads/25815.0
25 pages.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (8 Jun 2019)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Why do reporters screw themselves when they make stupid comments like "tattoo in the shape of an AK47 Assault Rifle. These idiots wouldn't know an AK if someone butt stroke him.
> 
> About the tattoo on its own? Much ado about nothing to me.
> 
> In fact, how about we get rid of all religion from the CAF? It would be interesting to hear the responses to this from all corners of the political spectrum.



If the same tattoo, in the same shape, said Fuck Christ, would you all be okay with it?  Can I have that tattooed on my forearm?  and walk around in public?  Just asking


----------



## ballz (8 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> If the same tattoo, in the same shape, said frig Christ, would you all be okay with it?  Can I have that tattooed on my forearm?  and walk around in public?  Just asking



I'd think you were an idiot and if that were in any way comparable you might have a point, but the tattoo doesn't say "frig Allah."

Let's not pretend that there is not a faction of Islam that wants to bring death upon the infidels of the world, and have tried , and are still trying. Giving a big "frig you" to those who wish to commit genocide against you, your family, and your culture harm is quite different from "frig Christ" or "frig Allah."

I don't know this particular sailor's history but it's even more true for those who have fought overseas against Islamist extremists. When your enemy wants to kill you because you are an infidel, it's only natural to develop a sardonic sense of humour over something like this.

I don't see how this is any different from homosexuals embracing the word "faggot" as middle finger to the homophobic among us. If a gay person had "faggot" tattoo'd on their forearm, I might find it distasteful but I 1) wouldn't be offended; and 2) am in no place to judge.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Jun 2019)

Considering there was an active contingent of said Muslims trying to kill CF personal in Afghanistan, then I would say wearing the word is a way of saying 'eff you" for trying to kill me or my comrades.


----------



## brihard (8 Jun 2019)

And there are also many Muslims that we were fighting alongside, in the ANA. There are Muslims serving in our own ranks. There are Muslims in the ranks of countries we are allied with.

Pretending the tattoo is anything other than a middle finger to Islam is silly, so let’s dispense with the notion. It is what it is. I remember when the infidel shirts and hats and patches got cool for a while at the height of the global war on terror. Nobody expects aggressive young men in their twenties to be the pinnacle of taste, and that’s fine. A tattoo though? Really?

The question then is does or could it reflect poorly on the CAF. The sailor in question will, I’m sure, have a definitive answer in due course and I suspect he won’t like it. Given the dress regs covering tattoos that I posted earlier, at that juncture the individual will probably have no excuse any better than “yup, I was in fact that dumb”. When we join the CAF we choose to know and to follow its rules.


----------



## ballz (8 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> Pretending the tattoo is anything other than a middle finger to Islam is silly, so let’s dispense with the notion.



I don't know the guy, maybe he does hate all of Islam, maybe he's a shit stain, I tend to make that judgement about people with trashy tattoos.... but I disagree with your sentiment. Criticism, middle fingers, etc. toward Islamist extremists does not necessarily extend to all Muslims. This is the root of this Islamaphobia BS being pushed by those who wish to divide us into little tribes, that somehow we can't criticize the extreme elements of Islam without that extending to all Muslims and being meant to hurt all Muslims, as if they are a homogeneous group. And society is quickly falling for it.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (8 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> If the same tattoo, in the same shape, said Fuck Christ, would you all be okay with it?  Can I have that tattooed on my forearm?  and walk around in public?  Just asking



No, see my post about 99,9% .....there is no debate on that, or"f" anyone's deity.

And if you are a civi you can have whatever you want.....being a moron isn't illegal. (though we all know it should be)


----------



## FSTO (8 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> If the same tattoo, in the same shape, said frig Christ, would you all be okay with it?  Can I have that tattooed on my forearm?  and walk around in public?  Just asking



Does the word infidel specifically call out Allah, or Mohammad? No.

But if it did say screw Christ, I'd be okay with it because its just a word after all.


----------



## Stoker (8 Jun 2019)

According to social media member was in Afghanistan in the Army and was involved in a IED attack that killed friends, apparently the tattoo was an attempt to deal with his PTSD sometime later CT'd to the navy. He regrets the tattoo. The guy who went out of his way to take his picture and post on twitter is well known social media "warrior" https://twitter.com/robhutten. He outed the member and tagged his ship's name. The backlash against him was significant and he's now taken the tweet down but not before tagging Antifa and other groups. He's not really sorry.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Jun 2019)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> If the same tattoo, in the same shape, said frig Christ, would you all be okay with it?  Can I have that tattooed on my forearm?  and walk around in public?  Just asking



I think I, like most, wouldnt really care.  

If we, on the forum, are an appropriate cross section of Canadian society then I would surmise very few of us are actually practicing any religion and are probably more closely tied with being agnostic or atheist. 

I never understood why some folks like to throw the Christian thing back.  Christianity is dying, western society has moved beyond its shackles and confines, IMHO.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Jun 2019)

Brihard said:
			
		

> And there are also many Muslims that we were fighting alongside, in the ANA. There are Muslims serving in our own ranks. There are Muslims in the ranks of countries we are allied with.
> 
> Pretending the tattoo is anything other than a middle finger to Islam is silly, so let’s dispense with the notion. It is what it is. I remember when the infidel shirts and hats and patches got cool for a while at the height of the global war on terror. Nobody expects aggressive young men in their twenties to be the pinnacle of taste, and that’s fine. A tattoo though? Really?
> 
> The question then is does or could it reflect poorly on the CAF. The sailor in question will, I’m sure, have a definitive answer in due course and I suspect he won’t like it. Given the dress regs covering tattoos that I posted earlier, at that juncture the individual will probably have no excuse any better than “yup, I was in fact that dumb”. When we join the CAF we choose to know and to follow its rules.



You cant just dismiss a factual counter argument. You are essentially moving the goal posts. 

The fact remains that Infidel is defined as a unfaithful.  It comes from Latin word infidelis.  If someone artificially conflates with Islam then they obviously didnt take the time to gain an understanding of our language. 

The hilarity to me is the person who reported this is either a) offended by the word infidel, b) offended by the firearm shape of the tattoo; or c) both.  But he doesn't seem to take issue with the fact the phone he used take this picture was made in some 3rd world shit-hole and the workers we paid pennies.  

Some peoples kids I tell ya.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (8 Jun 2019)

This is why I'm a big proponent of "sleeves down"  8) at all times.

1.  I hate rolling sleeves and think it looks stupid and sloppy.
2.  If you do have some ink, it's covered. It's one less thing someone can give you grief about. 

Btw, not even close to the worst tattoo I've seen in the Forces.  My fav one was K.A.T. tattooed in big black letters on both arms of a Corporal which stood for "Kill All Taliban"


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> And if you are a civi you can have whatever you want.....



I've never felt the need to get a tattoo. So, I'm not savvy on them. 

But, there is a policy where I used to work, "Tattoos depicting nudity, obscenity, racial, sexual, political or social bias must be covered." 

Long-sleeve shirts in July and August.

In station, this is also required when visitors (non Department members) are present.

Which is a big step forward from the not so distant past when ALL tattoos had to be covered.

And, that's with a union. AFTER you get hired. After you are off probation.



> Non-union workplace
> 
> The answer on hiring is simple and straightforward – an employer can legally choose not to hire based on any (visible) tattoos or piercings. There would be no violation of the Human Rights Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not relevant. This simple statement applies whether it is a unionized workplace or a union free workplace
> 
> ...


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jun 2019)

Imagine the confusion if the fellow had PRIDE tattooed on his arm.


----------



## cld617 (8 Jun 2019)

I think this does a better job of highlighting issues in our regulations more than anything, that we can be punished for blasphemy.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Imagine the confusion if the fellow had PRIDE tattooed on his arm.



As long as it doesn't say white pride, its fine.


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Jun 2019)

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/raising-middle-finger-is-relays-information-judge-rules-in-case-of-man-accused-of-breaching-no-contact-order                                                                                                                                     


The above might be helpful in understanding that in the view of the law, giving the middle finger or even a cold, hard stare can amount to an intimidating communication, as long as there is intent. Bear in mind that in respect of human rights law or Charter cases (both non-Criminal), the standard of proof is much lower and onus is on the accused/respondent to establish that no offence was intended against a complainant or any particular group.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jun 2019)

Some interesting observations to draw away from the Iman's interview, wouldn't you agree MM?




After deleting his tweet (comment about deleting the tweet seemed rather flippant) Mr Rob Hutten locked up his account.

I guess trying to doxx a CAF member with a 13 year old tattoo done up to deal with getting blown up, losing friends and some PTSD rubbed some people the wrong way.


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Some interesting observations to draw away from the Iman's interview, wouldn't you agree MM?



Reply #39 was news article regarding the Original Post.

It was posted without comment.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Jun 2019)

So what did you think of the article?


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So what did you think of the article?



Like I said, Jarnhamar,



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> Reply #39 was news article regarding the Original Post.
> 
> It was posted without comment.





			
				FSTO said:
			
		

> Why do reporters screw themselves when they make stupid comments like "tattoo in the shape of an AK47 Assault Rifle. These idiots wouldn't know an AK if someone butt stroke him.



If anyone has a bone to pick with the article in Reply #39 , the reporter's name and e-mail is at the top.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Jun 2019)

Once upon a time we had a round of discussions that ended with "let's not post articles without comment".  What happened to that?


----------



## mariomike (8 Jun 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Once upon a time we had a round of discussions that ended with "let's not post articles without comment".  What happened to that?



Ok. If you feel that strongly about it.

Article removed.

Lots of articles get posted without comment - or complaint,
https://army.ca/forums/threads/130548/post-1573931/topicseen.html#new

Do you have a reference?


----------



## brihard (9 Jun 2019)

Chief Engineer said:
			
		

> According to social media member was in Afghanistan in the Army and was involved in a IED attack that killed friends, apparently the tattoo was an attempt to deal with his PTSD sometime later CT'd to the navy. He regrets the tattoo.



I’ll buy that, and am a hell of a lot more sympathetic given those particulars. I hope he’s doing better these days, that’s some pretty awful crap to carry.


----------



## Gimli (9 Jun 2019)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the trendy infidel fashion thing come about by embracing insults?   Not factoring in how the word was used historically, these days some Muslims use it as a condemning word.  However some non Muslims now use it as a badge of honour.  

Similar to American Republicans embracing “Deplorable".  Black people taking ownership of the N word.  And if I’m not mistaken, “Christian" was originally used in a derogatory manner.  

For some reason this seems to be viewed differently.  I am contemplating why.


----------



## brihard (9 Jun 2019)

Gimli said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the trendy infidel fashion thing come about by embracing insults?   Not factoring in how the word was used historically, these days some Muslims use it as a condemning word.  However some non Muslims now use it as a badge of honour.
> 
> Similar to American Republicans embracing “Deplorable".  Black people taking ownership of the N word.  And if I’m not mistaken, “Christian" was originally used in a derogatory manner.
> 
> For some reason this seems to be viewed differently.  I am contemplating why.



Quite likely. That notwithstanding, how would the CAF see it if a member of African descent had an N-bomb visibly tattooed on their arm, exposed while in uniform? I’m sure we can think of other slurs too that would fit analogous circumstances.

We’re speaking here within the limited context of the display, while in uniform, of tattoos that could potentially bring the CAF into disrepute. It’s not unreasonable for CAF to keep a grip on this just as any other employer can. It’s just one of many instances where the free expression of CAF member’s is subject to some limitations.


----------



## Sub_Guy (9 Jun 2019)

Gimli said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the trendy infidel fashion thing come about by embracing insults?   Not factoring in how the word was used historically, these days some Muslims use it as a condemning word.  However some non Muslims now use it as a badge of honour.
> 
> Similar to American Republicans embracing “Deplorable".  Black people taking ownership of the N word.  And if I’m not mistaken, “Christian" was originally used in a derogatory manner.
> 
> For some reason this seems to be viewed differently.  I am contemplating why.



You aren’t wrong. Many folks were wearing Infidels badges, hats, shirts, and apparently tattoos. We were often referred to as “Infidels”, by the very folks who wanted to kill us. I remember seeing baby onesies with “little Infidel” printed on them.

I’m sorry but I think this whole thing is stupid, one guy sees an opportunity to smear the military and he jumped all over it. We have to stop giving these assholes their 15 mins of fame.


----------



## mariomike (9 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I figured you posted it because something there in caught your eye.



I posted it because it was relevant to the discussion.



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I was genuinely curious about your thoughts in the article.



I don't know what I could possibly add. I don't have a tattoo. The meaning of the word "infidel" has already been explained by yourself and others. The last CAF rifle I fired was an FN.

The chain of command is investigating. I am sure someone will post the results - if they are made public.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Jun 2019)

Sorry MM you caught me cross posting/editing. 



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> I posted it because it was relevant to the discussion.


100 %
I actually thought it was a great article to post which highlighted some underlying problems. Not so much about the ak47 comment but the subtle accusations of possible violence from the CAF member and accusations and assumptions of ignorance. 



> I don't know what I could possibly add. I don't have a tattoo. The meaning of the word "infidel" has already been explained by yourself and others. The last CAF rifle I fired was an FN.



Let's get you a tattoo and go shooting an AR-15.


----------



## mariomike (9 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Let's get you a tattoo and go shooting an AR-15.



I'll add that to my bucket list.  

Loved that branding iron scene in Jarhead.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Jun 2019)

Why was post #39 edited? Now we've got half a page of discussion with no reference?


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Jun 2019)

>Lots of articles get posted without comment - or complaint,

The only one I saw at the direct link was from FJAG, but a quotation was extracted.

Policy here is to avoid copying-and-pasting large articles; a link with nothing to indicate any particular point of interest is the other extreme.  I - and probably many others - have not enough time in the day to read everything, and I doubt the articles which are linked are necessarily the most balanced or authoritative takes on a matter rather than whatever the poster has found that most reinforces one point of view.  If an article makes some relevant points, snip them out and past them with the link; or, add a couple of sentences describing what might be of interest or recapitulating what you believe the article adds to the discussion.


----------



## mariomike (9 Jun 2019)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> ; a link with nothing to indicate any particular point of interest is the other extreme.



I felt the included title was descriptive enough,


> Halifax mosque leader on infidel tattoo: ‘might be on his hand, it might not be in his heart’



Guess it wasn't. I had nothing to add.  So, I removed my post. 



			
				Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> If an article makes some relevant points, snip them out and past them with the link;



ok. I usually do. I should have put more than just the title,



> “Open arms, no problem,” Khan said. “We would host him in our mosque. We would sit and have dinner with him and see what’s happening and put things in perspective. Let bygones be bygones.”


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Jun 2019)

A bit more, from both the CAF & the original Twitter-er, shared under the usual caveats ...


> The Royal Canadian Navy says it has confirmed the identity of a sailor who was singled out on social media for his tattoo featuring the word "infidel" in the shape of a rifle.
> 
> Maj. Mark Gough of Maritime Forces Atlantic said late Friday afternoon that as a result, "the chain of command is investigating the matter further." He provided no other details.
> 
> ...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Jun 2019)

> "I have no hard feelings about this guy if he's not an Islamaphobe," Hutten said. "I don't want him fired, but he shouldn't be wearing that tattoo in public."



Says Mr Judge, Jury and Executioner.

How have we reached the spot where a single individual can ruin a career and become an internet celebrity, by doxxing someone because of a tattoo that hurt his feelings and he went off half cocked without knowing the background, use or origin.? :facepalm:

Not including all the wasted time and manpower in the CoC, DJAG, press, etc investigating this.

Another word wiped from language and use, because it's deemed offensive by a single individual.


----------



## FJAG (10 Jun 2019)

Fishbone Jones said:
			
		

> Says Mr Judge, Jury and Executioner.
> 
> How have we reached the spot where a single individual can ruin a career and become an internet celebrity, by doxxing someone because of a tattoo that hurt his feelings and he went off half cocked without knowing the background, use or origin.? :facepalm:
> 
> ...



With respect--and at the risk of becoming embroiled in a thread I wanted no part of--I think that you are missing the target here.

It's not so much whether one person was offended or not but what is the person with the tattoo trying to say. I firmly believe in freedom of expression but with that freedom comes the countervailing fact that when you are expressing yourself then you are sending a message that you want others to receive. So my question is: what message is this sailor trying to convey by virtue of dedicating a fairly large patch of publicly viewable skin to a permanent marking that says "Infidel" in the shape of an automatic rifle?

No matter which way you cut it, he's either being subtlety or blatantly intolerant of something or just plain immature. The fact that some people might be offended by this is hardly surprising; neither is the fact that there are some people who would fight to the death to support his right to express himself this way. And it probably surprises no one that I stand in the middle: I'm neither outraged by nor supportive of the tattoo, however, I think that anyone who has one like this should not be surprised in the least by the fact that the chain of command will want to investigate his motives and level of common sense and make their own determination of whether or not he's what the military is about in this day and age.

 :2c:


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Jun 2019)

[quote author=FJAG]So my question is: what message is this sailor trying to convey by virtue of dedicating a fairly large patch of publicly viewable skin to a permanent marking that says "Infidel" in the shape of an automatic rifle?
[/quote]
Well, he IS an infidel who carried an AR15.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Jun 2019)

It's actually what is the person intending to communicate, and whether that communication violates some established rules based order that is lawful. Any civilian can have that tattoo. Since a person's skin is not owned by the CAF, the tattoo is not an adornment on a uniform. It is not part of the uniform. It appears to be part of a "creed",  the interpretation of which is subjective and not necessarily designed or intended  to be offensive, racist, intimidating or blasphemous.  It may be all of those things to some people, but that's just too bad for them if the creed is bona fide. In the same manner the CF must accommodate religion with uniforms  and gender (and gender choice) with requested accommodations, they must accommodate creed. It isn't optional.

Edited for spelling and clarity.


----------



## mariomike (10 Jun 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> Any civilian can have that tattoo.



Where I worked, before I retired, ALL tattoos had to be covered.

Long-sleeve shirts in July and August.

Now, departmental policy is, "Tattoos depicting nudity, obscenity, racial, sexual, political or social bias must be covered." 

That's with a union. AFTER you get hired. After you are off probation.

In our business, it doesn't matter how well we do our job; if a member of the public feels our self-expression comes off as offensive, we are of no use to them.

The barometer was pretty simple.  How would people, especially senior citizens, feel with us coming into their homes.

For Dispatchers, it was less of a concern. 



> Canada: Can An Employer Prohibit Tattoos And Piercings?
> 
> The answer on hiring is simple and straightforward – an employer can legally choose not to hire based on any (visible) tattoos or piercings. There would be no violation of the Human Rights Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not relevant. This simple statement applies whether it is a unionized workplace or a union free workplace
> http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/460616/employee+rights+labour+relations/Can+An+Employer+Prohibit+Tattoos+And+Piercings
> The situation is more complicated after an employee has been hired. Here the employer's rights differ greatly depending on whether it is a unionized workplace or a non-union workplace.



As noted, the rules differ once an individual is hired depending upon whether it is a unionized workplace or not.

Best bet is to wait until AFTER you get your union card.

Edit for spelling.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Jun 2019)

I see police officers, paramedics, firefighters with exposed tattoos all the time, including police officers in Toronto on bike patrol. Maybe there is a policy stating these must be covered, but whether that is enforceable at all in say, a disciplinary setting, is quite different than just having a written policy.

You might also take note that in the absence of a union (which has a grievance system and a right to fair representation), a non-union employer will receive much more scrutiny in order to  assess their disciplinary actions.


----------



## mariomike (10 Jun 2019)

Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> , a non-union employer will receive much more scrutiny in order to  assess their disciplinary actions.



Scrutiny from whom?



> The answer on hiring is simple and straightforward – an employer can legally choose not to hire based on any (visible) tattoos or piercings. There would be no violation of the Human Rights Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not relevant. This simple statement applies whether it is a unionized workplace or a union free workplace
> 
> Non-union workplace
> 
> Here there are no legal restrictions on prohibitions by employers against tattoos and piercings. Simply put the employer's rights are as broad as noted above with respect to hiring.



That is from the above Canadian source.

Also this. From another Canadian source. Something to consider if changing employers,



> So long as the tattoos or piercings are not part of an ethnic, religious or tribal custom, the Human Rights Act and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms do not apply to employers’ hiring choices with regards to body modifications.
> https://www.kcyatlaw.ca/tattoos-piercings-workplace-canada/



This can also be a hiring factor, 

"Distinguish between employee roles (i.e. those that do and do not interact with customers or clients)"

eg: A call-centre or warehouse etc.



			
				Cloud Cover said:
			
		

> I see police officers, paramedics, firefighters with exposed tattoos all the time, including police officers in Toronto on bike patrol. Maybe there is a policy stating these must be covered, but whether that is enforceable at all in say, a disciplinary setting, is quite different than just having a written policy.



I would guess most waited until _after_  they got hired. That's the conventional advice to candidates.

After they get on the job, I think covering and discipline depends on individual circumstances. Being unionised, there is also a grievance and arbitration process.

Trivia,

( Most probably would not remember, but it wasn't so long ago that all Metro officers - with or without tattoos - wore long-sleeved shirts all summer. And that was before their cars had air-conditioning! )


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Jun 2019)

Well, find a nordic ancestor and go nuts with your Viking tribal customs.


----------



## Loachman (11 Jun 2019)

People from my ancestral area of origin (Norfolk/East Anglia) either beat up the locals or were beaten up by the "migrants" prior to eventually intermingling and crossbreeding over a millennium ago, so I probably could "go nuts".

I have some ideas in mind - perhaps a C7 composed of the word "Pride" (thanks, Jarnhamar - excellent suggestion; it reclaims "pride" as well) crossing a dripping bearded axe - but lack any interest in acquiring a tattoo.


----------



## X Royal (11 Jun 2019)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> "deemed to be"   Who doesn't love being put into a Orwellian scenario??


Meaning changes greatly when you drop the first part of the quote.
It said "that could be deemed to be offensive".
The "that could be" changes the whole meaning. Far more inclusive.
But for some reason you knew that.


----------



## Stoker (11 Jun 2019)

I think the moral of this story is that a tattoo that you gotten with the best of intentions at the time could very well come back to haunt you years later. Our ship just came back from Fleet Week in New York where a sizeable amount of our sailors got tattoos some free because it was part of a Fleet Week promotion. I wonder in 10 years time could some of these tattoos could be deemed offensive and come back to haunt them.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 Jun 2019)

X Royal said:
			
		

> Meaning changes greatly when you drop the first part of the quote.
> It said "that could be deemed to be offensive".
> The "that could be" changes the whole meaning. Far more inclusive.
> But for some reason you knew that.



Actually it doesn't change a thing....makes it even more ambiguous.   I could be a rock star,...I'm not, but "could be".   What???
Floating goal posts....so good when you'd rather "call for an investigation" rather then deal with it at your leadership level..


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jun 2019)

I personally think this incident is another example of someone looking for something "Islamophobic" to be offended about and start a witch hunt over.


----------



## AbdullahD (11 Jun 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I personally think this incident is another example of someone looking for something "Islamophobic" to be offended about and start a witch hunt over.



Nah, this is a great post of idiocy on all sides.

People need to go live their lives not exist in them and these silly issues will not be a big deal.

This sailor didn't hurt anyone, we are all spending a lot of energy wondering his motives. Why not just ask him and leave it at that? And who cares if he is an islamophobe. We can draw our own personal conclusions what that will mean about him.

Instead we all pontificate (current favorite word lol) about this that and the next thing.

Abdullah

P.s not necessarily meaning members here, but in a general sense.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 Jun 2019)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> People need to go live their lives not exist in them and these silly issues will not be a big deal.



Truly unfortunate, but that ship has sailed, aided by a more then willing media, since outrage sells.  200 people protest, top story, 200 million shrug their shoulders and go to work??    Crickets....


----------



## FJAG (11 Jun 2019)

Time out for this:







https://www.facebook.com/berkeleybreathed?fref=photo

 ;D


----------



## Stoker (9 Jul 2019)

https://globalnews.ca/news/5474416/navy-sailor-infidel-tattoo-cover-up/

Navy confirms sailor to cover up ‘infidel’ tattoo after investigating social media concerns



A military spokesman says a sailor who was singled out on social media for a tattoo that featured the word “infidel” in the shape of a rifle on his arm has acknowledged the concerns raised by the tattoo, but military officials say they’ve concluded there was “no ill intent on the sailor’s part.”

Maj. Mark Gough of Maritime Forces Atlantic says the Canadian Armed Forces were alerted on June 4 about the photo of the sailor with the tattoo circulating on social media.

The force investigated after concerns were raised online about the nature of the tattoo and whether it was Islamophobic. Gough says that after speaking with the sailor, his chain of command concluded there was no ill intent by the sailor.

However, Gough added, the sailor has acknowledged and understands the concerns raised by the tattoo.

“He will abide with the Canadian Armed Forces’ policy on tattoos and he plans to tattoo over this tattoo as soon as possible,” Gough said.

 “As such, the chain of command considers the matter closed, and no further action is required.”

The military brought in regulations around tattoos seven years ago.

The regulations state: “Members shall not acquire tattoos that are visible either in military uniform or in civilian clothing that could be deemed to be offensive (e.g., pornographic, blasphemous, racist or containing vulgar language or design).”

The military has recently committed to dealing with the involvement of Canadian Armed Forces members in hate groups after an internal report found that members had been linked to six hate groups since 2013.


----------



## mariomike (9 Jul 2019)

> he plans to tattoo over this tattoo as soon as possible,” Gough said.



Is that less painful than removal?


----------



## Strike (9 Jul 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Is that less painful than removal?



It's certainly less expensive.

Maybe he can get on that "Tattoo Nightmares" show?


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Jul 2019)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Is that less painful than removal?



For sure; know a few people that got removals and none of them enjoyed it (and some ended up with some minor scarring from the burns)

Coverups hurt as much as the original tattoo, but the arms don't hurt at all.  Some spots on your torso and some other areas can be pretty uncomfortable, but at least it's a one and done for a coverup (vice multiple trips for a removal).

This almost seems to be a common sense approach instead of a knee jerk response to the media; is it Bizarro Tuesday?


----------



## cld617 (9 Jul 2019)

What a joke.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Jul 2019)

Just get a tattoo artist to turn the AR15 into an AK47.  Then it's fine


----------



## kratz (9 Jul 2019)

As long as we are suggesting cover ups for this tattoo:



via Imgflip Meme Generator


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Jul 2019)

Has Rob Hutten (who tweeted about the tattoo) ever explained why he tagged #ANTIFA in his tweet?

What was his intention? Was it to try and doxx the sailor and sic a bunch of SJW on him?


----------



## Stoker (10 Jul 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Has Rob Hutten (who tweeted about the tattoo) ever explained why he tagged #ANTIFA in his tweet?
> 
> What was his intention? Was it to try and doxx the sailor and sic a bunch of SJW on him?



He locked his twitter account until everything blew over as the backlash was great. Its back up again and he scrubbed everything about what he did before and no mention about the sailor that was cleared of any wrong doing. Personally I think that's exactly what he was doing, and it backfired on him.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Jul 2019)

Looks like Rob is butt hurt and still making posts about infidels.

https://twitter.com/robhutten


----------



## Stoker (10 Jul 2019)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Looks like Rob is butt hurt and still making posts about infidels.
> 
> https://twitter.com/robhutten



Didn't see that, what an arsehole.


----------



## Kat Stevens (10 Jul 2019)

Why do these people constantly feel the need to be offended on behalf of everyone else?


----------



## mariomike (10 Jul 2019)

Chief Engineer said:
			
		

> no mention about the sailor that was cleared of any wrong doing.



There was no ill intent.

However,



			
				Chief Engineer said:
			
		

> “He will abide with the Canadian Armed Forces’ policy on tattoos and he plans to tattoo over this tattoo as soon as possible,” Gough said.


----------



## Kilted (11 Jul 2019)

I don't know if he really could be disciplined for it. If the sailor had it for a long period of time it is likely that many people in his chain of command at various levels were aware of it and may not have commented negatively on the tattoo.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Jul 2019)

Target Up said:
			
		

> Why do these people constantly feel the need to be offended on behalf of everyone else?



Because they are busy bodies, like rabid vegans and cult followers.


----------



## Lumber (12 Jan 2021)

I know I'm necro'ing an old thread with no real "news", but I needed to vent.

The other day we were doing junior officer trg, and we were discussing hateful conduct, and one of my peers, while discussing various examples of hateful conduct, included “that infidel tattoo” as a textbook example of hateful conduct. I didn’t speak out, but man do I disagree with that statement.


----------



## mariomike (12 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> The other day we were doing junior officer trg, and we were discussing hateful conduct, and one of my peers, while discussing various examples of hateful conduct, included “that infidel tattoo” as a textbook example of hateful conduct. I didn’t speak out, but man do I disagree with that statement.


I don't have any tattoos. And, I'm no longer subject to CAF policies. So, I have no comment on “that infidel tattoo”.

But, if there was a possibility that I might, perhaps, wish to apply to another employer, in the future, I would take their possible opinion into consideration.

Depending on the employer, they may want to see you in short sleeves or T-shirt during the Interview. Especially if the new job involves working with the community.  Some members of the community might not see it the same way as others do.


----------



## Lumber (12 Jan 2021)

mariomike said:


> I don't have any tattoos. And, I'm no longer subject to CAF policies. So, I have no comment on “that infidel tattoo”.
> 
> But, if there was a possibility that I might, perhaps, wish to apply to another employer, in the future, I would take their possible opinion into consideration.
> 
> Depending on the employer, they may want to see you in short sleeves or T-shirt during the Interview. Especially if the new job involves working with the community.  Some members of the community might not see it the same way as others do.


Is it a "racy" tattoo that might be problematic during job interview? Sure. I'm saying I don't think it's "hateful" conduct.


----------



## mariomike (12 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> I'm saying I don't think it's "hateful" conduct.


I don't think it is either. Not to me, at least.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Jan 2021)

Technically your just being respectful of the Islamic traditions and labelling yourself so they know your status according to their religion and customs.


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> Is it a "racy" tattoo that might be problematic during job interview? Sure. I'm saying I don't think it's "hateful" conduct.


Considering the new Hateful Conduct policy for the CAF includes making a comment on someone's height, I don't think it's that far of a stretch someone would get in trouble for an "Infidel" tattoo...


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Jan 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Technically your just being respectful of the Islamic traditions and labelling yourself so they know your status according to their religion and customs.


That's what I would argue if I had an infidel tattoo.*

Islam is an accepted, respected and practiced religion in the CAF.

Infidel is a term used throughout the Koran.

It's illegal to discriminate against someone on the grounds of religion in Canada.



*that's if I had money for a civilian lawyer and no further career aspirations.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> I know I'm necro'ing an old thread with no real "news", but I needed to vent.
> 
> The other day we were doing junior officer trg, and we were discussing hateful conduct, and one of my peers, while discussing various examples of hateful conduct, included “that infidel tattoo” as a textbook example of hateful conduct. I didn’t speak out, but man do I disagree with that statement.


I also disagree. Tattoo fashions change over time (e.g., anyone here with a playboy bunny on their forearm?) and have little to do with inspiring hate or other negative behaviours.

I have commanded soldiers sporting some of the most shocking tattoos I've ever seen and, counter-intuitively, it seemed to me that the more shocking the tattoo, the meeker the host!

If someone turns out to be a practising Nazi through their 'conduct' they may be subject to hate laws. If so, it doesn't matter what their tattoos say if, in fact, they happen to be wearing any.


----------



## BurnDoctor (12 Jan 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Technically your just being respectful of the Islamic traditions and labelling yourself so they know your status according to their religion and customs.


That's how I've always viewed it...it is "someone else's" label that "someone else" has assigned to me/people like me. I don't have said tattoo, but to a certain extent, I have embraced "their" label. It isn't offensive to me, but rather, it is accurate, so... game on, I guess.


----------



## TCM621 (12 Jan 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Considering the new Hateful Conduct policy for the CAF includes making a comment on someone's height, I don't think it's that far of a stretch someone would get in trouble for an "Infidel" tattoo...


I knew I was being harassed. I think we need a class action lawsuit against Tall Privledge.


----------



## Weinie (12 Jan 2021)

Maybe he should have had kafir tattooed on his arm. Then he could have gone with the carbine.

Kafir - Wikipedia

And at least he had the tattoo done voluntarily.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Jan 2021)

Given today's attitudes to be offended about anything, what cannot be considered offensive by one person or another. What if he had been sporting a full sized crucifixion of christ on his back. You know, so they couldn't  give him the lash.😉


----------



## FJAG (12 Jan 2021)

I find it interesting that we're discussing as to whether or not we find a particular tattoo "hateful".  Isn't the real question: what was the message about himself that the individual who has the tattoo was trying to send out to the world at large or say to himself. Frankly, I have a hard time in finding a good message respecting that particular tattoo (especially when shaped like an AK47 with the handgrip and receiver shaped like a cross). On the other hand, I can see where a large part of society (and not just Muslims) find it distasteful at a minimum. On the scale of impact where "artsy, quirky or interesting" is at one end and "hateful" is on the other I think this one stands on the wrong side of the "I'll give him the benefit of the doubt" mark.

I need our old $0.02 emoji so in the interim I'll use this one 🧸


----------



## Blackadder1916 (13 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> I know I'm necro'ing an old thread with no real "news", but I needed to vent.
> 
> The other day we were doing junior officer trg, and we were discussing hateful conduct, and one of my peers, while discussing various examples of hateful conduct, included “that infidel tattoo” as a textbook example of hateful conduct. *I didn’t speak out*, but man do I disagree with that statement.



I was debating whether (or how) to respond to this resurrection without sounding like an arsehole, but I think what is more important than the perceived hatefulness of the wording of "that infidel tattoo" is the "not speaking out".  I have no intention of questioning your qualities as an officer (and that's not a backhanded way of suggesting I am, truly I have no such intention), but did anyone in that trg session provide a contrary opinion or question anything resembling the DS solution?

It's anything but the textbook example as one of your peers believed, but it is a good example of the shades of gray in these type of incidents. To be up-front about my own opinion, the soldier/sailor (he got the tattoo when he was Army) was stupid, but then I'm an old fart with no great fondness for body ink (_in my younger days I would even have pause to pursue physical relationships with tattooed women - though sometimes it was a short pause_).  But to get back on topic, it would have been an excellent point to discuss during officer training since I thought it had been resolved as previously reported in this thread.


> A military spokesman says a sailor who was singled out on social media for a tattoo that featured the word “infidel” in the shape of a rifle on his arm has acknowledged the concerns raised by the tattoo, but military officials say they’ve concluded there was *“no ill intent on the sailor’s part.*”
> 
> . . .



I know that hindsight is a wonderful thing and not everyone has constant access to the collected wisdom that is army.ca but if the topic comes up again, think about speaking up (_I'm an old contrarian - it was not always good for my career - so am well aware about the perils of speaking up_).  Or, at least send them to these forums for a good argument/enlightenment.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (13 Jan 2021)

This commentary on tattoos is humorous.  The tattoo in question was most certainly not hateful conduct.  What it was is a violation of CAF policy on tattoos which is why the CAF asked the member to have it covered.

What I'm most worried about is your fellow Officer's inability to interpret and apply policy.  I shudder to think of them dealing with actual complex personnel issues.  

As for tattoos in general, they can and do look great on people.  My wife has 23 tattoos, including a full sleeve and an entire leg piece done.  She was a punk rocker girl before and her best friend is professional tattoo artist. Gals with tattoos are fun 😁.  I especially like bringing my wife to mess functions to watch certain individuals have a conniption.

As for work, it isn't an issue and she works for a Big 5 Bank (about the most conservative place you could work).  She covers her arms up and dresses professionally when dealing with customers to maintain the image of the Bank but that's it.  

I always find these discussion funny, especially at work.  It allows me to discover who the squares who live under a rock are.


----------



## mariomike (13 Jan 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> (_in my younger days I would even have pause to pursue physical relationships with tattooed women - though sometimes it was a short pause_).


Could be a generational thing? It never came up in my younger days. 

In my married life, not sure if it is for cultural ( my wife is Jewish ) or personal reasons, or both, but never heard her express an interest in getting a tattoo.  I certainly never suggested it. 

I love Japan, and recall seeing big signs saying 'No visible tattoos' at the reception desk and by the pool and onsen.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (13 Jan 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I always find these discussion funny, especially at work.  It allows me to discover who the squares who live under a rock are.


I highly doubt I've ever been accused of being under a rock, yet about the only thing that could turn me off quicker then tattoos would be smoking.  Its a preference, not a sentence....


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Jan 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I highly doubt I've ever been accused of being under a rock


You're under a rock.


----------



## Weinie (13 Jan 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I highly doubt I've ever been accused of being under a rock, yet *about the only thing that could turn me off quicke*r then tattoos *would be smoking.*  Its a preference, not a sentence....


I read your post ,and then went for a smoke to contemplate how to reply. I have been a smoker for almost 45 years. I have stopped (not quit) three times in my life, the latest for almost 8 years, Circumstances have lead me to start smoking again. I am not proud of it.

My wife is 18 years younger than I am. We have four kids: 14,12, nine and three. All of them (and rightfully so) hate the fact that I smoke.

I am addicted to nicotine. I have tried every method under the sun to walk away from it. It is most certainly not a preference.


----------



## mariomike (13 Jan 2021)

Weinie said:


> I am addicted to nicotine. I have tried every method under the sun to walk away from it. It is most certainly not a preference.


I started when I was still in short pants. Quit in April 1986, and still miss it. My wife doesn't smoke either. But, I'm used to people smoking. It doesn't bother me.


----------



## Weinie (13 Jan 2021)

mariomike said:


> I started when I was still in short pants. *Quit in April 1986, *and still miss it. My wife doesn't smoke either. But, I'm used to people smoking. It doesn't bother me.


Good for you, and take my advice, never, ever contemplate starting again.


----------



## Journeyman (13 Jan 2021)

Weinie said:


> Good for you, and take my advice, never, ever contemplate starting again.


I never had to start smoking. My brother and I were raised by 2 smoking parents with a VW Beetle and windows rolled up in the winter. We got more than out fair share in childhood.  Neither of us smoked.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (13 Jan 2021)

Weinie said:


> I read your post ,and then went for a smoke to contemplate how to reply. I have been a smoker for almost 45 years. I have stopped (not quit) three times in my life, the latest for almost 8 years, Circumstances have lead me to start smoking again. I am not proud of it.
> 
> My wife is 18 years younger than I am. We have four kids: 14,12, nine and three. All of them (and rightfully so) hate the fact that I smoke.
> 
> I am addicted to nicotine. I have tried every method under the sun to walk away from it. It is most certainly not a preference.


Ouch, you totally misunderstood my post.....you could be a 100% non smoker and non-tattooed and you'd STILL never turn me on.  Never met your wife but I quarentee you she has  you beat before the race even starts.


----------



## Weinie (13 Jan 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Ouch, you totally misunderstood my post.....you could be a 100% non smoker and non-tattooed and *you'd STILL never turn me on.*  Never met your wife but I quarentee you she has  you beat before the race even starts.


Ouch. You've never met me.


----------



## HiTechComms (13 Jan 2021)

I am surprised how lax tattoo policy is. I couldn't never get away with a visible tattoo. All my ink is covered and is not in visible areas. It doesn't matter if its offensive or not just the fact that you have a tattoo.


----------



## Lumber (13 Jan 2021)

HiTechComms said:


> I am surprised how lax tattoo policy is. I couldn't never get away with a visible tattoo. All my ink is covered and is not in visible areas. It doesn't matter if its offensive or not just the fact that you have a tattoo.


Where is it you work/live that doesn't allow you to have any visible tattoos?


----------



## mariomike (14 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> Where is it you work/live that doesn't allow you to have any visible tattoos?


Possibly a non-union workplace?


----------



## blacktriangle (14 Jan 2021)

Lumber said:


> Where is it you work/live that doesn't allow you to have any visible tattoos?


I think he grew up behind the iron curtain...I know the prisoners and gangsters had tattoos, not sure about everyone else...

I like tattoos, must be a generational thing. Always had more fun dating a woman with tattoos...

As for nicotine... I think a lot of us perform better with it, I find it helps both my nerves and cognitive abilities. Lots of ways to get the fix these days without hacking darts.

We’re on the edge of a brave new world, might as well enjoy it!


----------



## mariomike (14 Jan 2021)

reveng said:


> I think he grew up behind the iron curtain...I know the prisoners and gangsters had tattoos, not sure about everyone else...
> 
> I like tattoos, must be a generational thing. Always had more fun dating a woman with tattoos...
> 
> ...


I agree with the "generational thing". Most of the men I knew were heavy smokers. I was too. We had the freedom back then to smoke where and when we wanted. Even inside hospitals ashtrays were provided.

I remember the day I quit. It was from seeing all those smokers forced to stand outside. 

What I found cool was that some, not all, who had been in the war had faded tattoos. I used to ask about them.

( Remembering that great tattoo scene in "Jaws". )  



> "I never had to start smoking. My brother and I were raised by 2 smoking parents with a VW Beetle and windows rolled up in the winter. We got more than out fair share in childhood.  Neither of us smoked."



I remember those days. Wasn't a VW. But, ashtrays and cigarette lights all over the car. No seat belts. Windows UP! , and not always in winter. Mom didn't want her hair messed up. 

Mom and Dad both smoking. Little sister up front in moms lap. Me in the backseat.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Jan 2021)

reveng said:


> I think he grew up behind the iron curtain...I know the prisoners and gangsters had tattoos, not sure about everyone else...
> 
> I like tattoos, must be a generational thing. Always had more fun dating a woman with tattoos...
> 
> ...




This man knows the way 😄


----------



## HiTechComms (14 Jan 2021)

reveng said:


> I think he grew up behind the iron curtain...I know the prisoners and gangsters had tattoos, not sure about everyone else...
> 
> I like tattoos, must be a generational thing. Always had more fun dating a woman with tattoos...
> 
> ...


I did grow up behind the iron curtain. I am not that old.

I also work in IT at the levels of C, V, E  people. These people do judge a book by its cover. Its no different then people saying Trump needs to be more presidential and stop tweeting. Seeing ink in visible areas is seen as low brow and unprofessional. I know a surgeon that is covered in tattoos but he at all times has them covered and you wouldn't even know he has any. You do not see politicians, and elites with huge amount of tattoos.

When you are around long enough and observe who gets promoted and who doesn't. I think that is no different in CAF from what I learned reading posts about strange promotion process, hey that guy really does a job well but he doesn't organize a fun run or a bbq ever but this guy barely knows his job but had that awesome bbq and fun run, or this individual is incompetent and a complete toxic dump and how do we get rid of him.

Visible Tattoos are just a strike against you in the private sector. I am not a in CAF so I cannot comment.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jan 2021)

HiTechComms said:


> I did grow up behind the iron curtain. I am not that old.
> 
> I also work in IT at the levels of C, V, E  people. T*hese people do judge a book by its cover. Its no different then people saying Trump needs to be more presidential and stop tweeting. Seeing ink in visible areas is seen as low brow and unprofessional*.
> 
> Visible Tattoos are just a strike against you in the private sector. I am not a in CAF so I cannot comment.


Yes. 100 times yes.

By all means wear your visible tattoos, and nose/face/eyebrow/tongue piercings, with pride in civvy street. 

Unless you run your own business, just be prepared to settle for 'McJobs' ... in the back room away from the customers.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (14 Jan 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Yes. 100 times yes.
> 
> By all means wear your visible tattoos, and nose/face/eyebrow/tongue piercings, with pride in civvy street.
> 
> Unless you run your own business, just be prepared to settle for 'McJobs' ... in the back room away from the customers.


Society is changing on that. Take a look at how people viewed long hair on men historically and how they do now. Here is a bit of evidence from 1971 that these social taboos are declining slowly.

Five Man Electric Band - Signs with Lyrics - YouTube


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jan 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Society is changing on that. Take a look at how people viewed long hair on men historically and how they do now. Here is a bit of evidence from 1971 that these social taboos are declining slowly.
> 
> Five Man Electric Band - Signs with Lyrics - YouTube


Based on my observations of the civilian workforce, and I work with hundreds of different people every year due to my occupation, it's not changing much. 

The size of the pay-cheque appears to decline in inverse proportion to the quantity of visible tattoos and piercings...


----------



## Eaglelord17 (14 Jan 2021)

Might be a bit different with the trades, but we also have a lots of what would be considered societies 'odds and ends'.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jan 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Might be a bit different with the trades, but we also have a lots of what would be considered societies 'odds and ends'.


But more likely to stay employed, in many cases, than some office work type occupations!


----------



## Brash (14 Jan 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The size of the pay-cheque appears to decline in inverse proportion to the quantity of visible tattoos and piercings...


Declines inversely to the the quantity of visible tattoos and piercings.

You're saying as the quantity of tattoos goes up, the amount of declination goes down?
So the pay check goes up?


----------



## Brash (14 Jan 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Unless you run your own business, just be prepared to settle for 'McJobs' ... in the back room away from the customers.


That's a little disrespectful towards people who enjoy working "McJobs", don't you think?

Some people work "McJobs" because they are recovering from instability in their lives, are limited in their capacities somehow, or just generally like it.


----------



## HiTechComms (14 Jan 2021)

BrashEndeavours said:


> That's a little disrespectful towards people who enjoy working "McJobs", don't you think?
> 
> Some people work "McJobs" because they are recovering from instability in their lives, are limited in their capacities somehow, or just generally like it.


That could be true or they just might be the lower achievers.


----------



## HiTechComms (14 Jan 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Society is changing on that. Take a look at how people viewed long hair on men historically and how they do now. Here is a bit of evidence from 1971 that these social taboos are declining slowly.
> 
> Five Man Electric Band - Signs with Lyrics - YouTube


Not as much as you think. I work in IT which is considered as one of the most dynamic work sectors and I will tell you that its not changing that much. Ironically its the influx of foreigners/immigrants that is keeping it from changing. Its usually the "liberal" born Canadian that tends to have the "trans, tattoo, piercing, dyed hair" that have these attitudes. Since most Canadians really are mentally challenged (Education in Fluffology) and rarely are good enough to be in my neck of the labour segment the immigrant Sri Lankan's, East Indian, Eastern Europeans, Filipinos, (Asian's), Nigerians, etc, have a far different opinion of not just tattoos but general behavior and outwardly self presentation. This is why our team has less then 20% born Canadians on it, the rest including my self are foreign born.  

My question to those that are saying attitudes are changing? Have you actually ever asked any one if attitudes are actually changing or is it just your own projection?

FYI 
I have tattoos.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Jan 2021)

HiTechComms said:


> That could be true or they just might be the lower achievers.


Lots of reasons people work 'McJobs', no need to be a dick about it. They are working, so good for them.

Lots of lower achievers all over the place, and plenty 'fail upwards' once they have the right connections. There are a lot more real performance metrics used at McDonalds than most industries, and they aren't afraid to fire low achievers. Have met lots of people in high brow jobs that wouldn't last a shift at the grill/cashier/waiting tables.


----------



## mariomike (14 Jan 2021)

Of course tattoos have nothing to do with job performance. 

I always believed likeability was 90% of customer service. Depends if your customers like tattoos.


----------



## mariomike (14 Jan 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Have met lots of people in high brow jobs that wouldn't last a shift at the grill/cashier/waiting tables.


They took us out of service once for a PR stunt behind the counter at a McDonalds near Honest Ed's. My trainer was a very nice, intelligent hard working man. Very polite with me and the customers. I guess it was only a couple of hours, but felt like eight. I left there with a lot of respect for the work they do.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jan 2021)

BrashEndeavours said:


> That's a little disrespectful towards people who enjoy working "McJobs", don't you think?
> 
> Some people work "McJobs" because they are recovering from instability in their lives, are limited in their capacities somehow, or just generally like it.


You know what? You're right!

I take all that back ....


----------



## NotSoWiseKingSolomon (14 Jan 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I highly doubt I've ever been accused of being under a rock, yet about the only thing that could turn me off quicker then tattoos would be smoking.  Its a preference, not a sentence....


I'm 26, I didn't know anyone with a tattoo or smoked until I got into the military. Me and my previous social group would never consider dating a girl with tattoo or that smoked. I did grow up in a very wealth neighborhood, and pretty religious compared to most of society. All the people I know are doctors and lawyers, engineers, there is no visible tats among them. The rougher side of house, I notice more. I think it's more divided on economic lines.


----------



## Kat Stevens (14 Jan 2021)

Glad I work in a field where I’m judged on my ability to not get me or my team blowed up and not some coloured ink in my flesh.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Jan 2021)

To be technically correct, if I got a similar tattoo to the one in question, it would have to read; "Apostate" and not "Infidel", just doesn't have the same ring to it......


----------



## PuckChaser (17 Jan 2021)

Split off the economics discussion to here: https://www.army.ca/forums/threads/post-secondary-degrees-and-economics.133625/page-2


----------



## sher_singh (17 Jan 2021)

What type of behavior does such a tattoo encourage, and is that conducive to our goals?

Nothing is neutral nor inconsequential.


----------



## Journeyman (18 Jan 2021)

sher_singh said:


> What type of behavior does such a tattoo encourage, and is that conducive to our goals?
> 
> Nothing is neutral nor inconsequential.


For some (hence "perpetually offended" in the thread's title).  For others, well, sometimes a cigar _is_  just a cigar.*


* And for anyone interested, Sigmund Freud never actually said that.


----------



## Weinie (18 Jan 2021)

Journeyman said:


> For some (hence "perpetually offended" in the thread's title).  For others, well, sometimes a cigar _is_  just a cigar.*
> 
> 
> * And for anyone interested, Sigmund Freud never actually said that.


IIRC correctly, cigar tubes were a far bigger threat.


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Jan 2021)

Journeyman said:


> For some (hence "perpetually offended" in the thread's title).  For others, well, sometimes a cigar _is_  just a cigar.*
> 
> 
> * And for anyone interested, Sigmund Freud never actually said that.


Neither did Bill Clinton


----------



## OldSolduer (18 Jan 2021)

sher_singh said:


> What type of behavior does such a tattoo encourage, and is that conducive to our goals?
> 
> Nothing is neutral nor inconsequential.


So by inferring that tats encourage bad behavior I reckon I should be out on the Asian Steppes, riding a Mongol pony and slaughtering entire villages.
Or at the Hot Gates stabbing Persians. 

Give me a effing break.


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Jan 2021)

User has been banned. There were multiple IP address changes in a short period of time that did not correspond to a legitmate Tor Browser user. Suspect they were just an online troll.


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Jan 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> So by inferring that tats encourage bad behavior I reckon I should be out on the Asian Steppes, riding a Mongol pony and slaughtering entire villages.
> Or at the Hot Gates stabbing Persians.
> 
> Give me a effing break.


Then I'd want you in my rifle company


----------

