Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the last 2 weeks...recruiting ads for both the Russian
and the United States Army have appeared together in a number of online sites. To say the new, trendy U.S. Army recruiting ad was...um....underwhelming..would be accurate.
Well here's the thing about the Armed Force marketing. The commercial isn't meant to strike fear in the hearts of our enemies. That's not its purpose. Every country on Earth is more scared of our military than Russia's, even if Russia has scarier commercials.
Commercials are meant to entice teenage AMERICANS to join.
The current generation of teenagers are liberal, they're touchy-feely, they're anti-war, they don't want to be the world's police, they want to hold hands and fight for gay rights, they want to sing kumbaya, they want to love and be accepting. They don't want to kill people in Syria or Iraq. They don't want the Israel/Palestine conflict to continue. They want to make a positive difference in the world; they don't want to make war.
There is a huge aversion in youth to joining the military. They think we're baby killers. They think we rape and kill innocent civilians. When a guy joins, sometimes his girlfriend dumps him because he's now a barbarian, a heathen, heartless.
Regardless of our feelings on the commercial, its purpose is to resonant with those youths... to make them potentially feel like it would be acceptable to serve in the military, to give recruiters a fighting chance, to break the fist-fighting, tattooed, Tabaco-spitting stereotypes.
I don't have an issue with the content of the commercial.. I just wish it was not animated. I don't know why they used a cartoon. Really weird decision.
However- it has to be THEE most talked about Army commercial ever. It put the Army at top of people's minds. That's a successful advertising campaign right there. All publicity is good publicity.
Last edited by dmarie123; 05-22-2021 at 11:45 PM..
Reason: punctuation
I'll agree with you on 1 point..that trendy, hip, woke , you go girl, touchy-feely Army recruiting ad WONT do anything except make our adversaries look at us as a joke.
... Commercials are meant to entice teenage AMERICANS to join.
And not just 'Americans'. I served with Spanish, British, Brazilians, Peruvians, and one man from Georgia, all of these men were in the US Navy.
We routinely enlist immigrants as a short-cut to citizenship, and that door is open for teens of all friendly nations.
Quote:
... However- it has to be THEE most talked about Army commercial ever. It put the Army at top of people's minds. That's a successful advertising campaign right there. All publicity is good publicity.
Well here's the thing about the Armed Force marketing. The commercial isn't meant to strike fear in the hearts of our enemies. That's not its purpose. Every country on Earth is more scared of our military than Russia's, even if Russia has scarier commercials.
Commercials are meant to entice teenage AMERICANS to join.
The current generation of teenagers are liberal, they're touchy-feely, they're anti-war, they don't want to be the world's police, they want to hold hands and fight for gay rights, they want to sing kumbaya, they want to love and be accepting. They don't want to kill people in Syria or Iraq. They don't want the Israel/Palestine conflict to continue. They want to make a positive difference in the world; they don't want to make war.
There is a huge aversion in youth to joining the military. They think we're baby killers. They think we rape and kill innocent civilians. When a guy joins, sometimes his girlfriend dumps him because he's now a barbarian, a heathen, heartless.
Regardless of our feelings on the commercial, its purpose is to resonant with those youths... to make them potentially feel like it would be acceptable to serve in the military, to give recruiters a fighting chance, to break the fist-fighting, tattooed, Tabaco-spitting stereotypes.
I don't have an issue with the content of the commercial.. I just wish it was not animated. I don't know why they used a cartoon. Really weird decision.
However- it has to be THEE most talked about Army commercial ever. It put the Army at top of people's minds. That's a successful advertising campaign right there. All publicity is good publicity.
Young people have always tended to be more liberal and more idealistic. In fact you use the term baby killers, that’s not current that’s from the Vietnam era.
There’s a lot of adults that don’t feel we should be the worlds police anymore, in fact the last administration made that a policy. And no one wants war. What do we gain from invading countries that didn’t attack us, like Vietnam or Iraq? What did people die for? Young people question the status quo, and have been doing so forever.
None of that has anything to do with fighting for gay rights. You can defend the country and defend your fellow citizens here at home. Why do you think it has to be one or the other?
Young people have always tended to be more liberal and more idealistic. In fact you use the term baby killers, that’s not current that’s from the Vietnam era.
.....
None of that has anything to do with fighting for gay rights. You can defend the country and defend your fellow citizens here at home. Why do you think it has to be one or the other?
I'm a recruiter, currently serving. I was NOT alive during Vietnam. I've been called a baby killer, to my face, more than once. I've been chased away by parents who didn't want their kids to become "baby killers." I was once in public with a friend of mine who had a visual injury, and someone asked if he got it in the military, and then said "that's what you get for being a baby killer.
I don't think it has to be one or the other, but don't forget that "Don't ask, Don't tell" was in this generation... people were being KICKED out of the military for being gay a mere 10 years ago. Our very last president, just less than one year ago, banned transgenders from serving, and they were being kicked out of the military or having to hide their identity. Youth know this. Youth see the military as an incompatible organization with those that don't believe gays and trans should be discriminated against. Only since Biden took office will we welcome trans members, and it's still so knew that no one even understands the rules yet (When you drug test, which sex of an observe to you get at various points in your transition? When does it flip, etc). Since these policies are well known, and well eschewed, I think the Army was trying to touch the people that were disgusted and alienated by our long time discrimination.
So sure, a year ago you could defend trans rights, but you couldn't defend trans soldiers, because they had no rights, and their career would end if they expressed or acted on their gender identity.
10 years ago, you could defend gay rights, but if anyone in the military was found-out to be gay they would not only be discharged, but they would NOT get an honorable discharge, because serving as a gay person wasn't honorable. JUST 10 years ago. So right, sure, you could fight for equality, but you couldn't have equality. This wasn't very long ago.
The military is trying to distance itself from those policies.
Now I have a question for you and the other commentators: Why does supporting gay soldiers as equals mean our enemies will laugh at us? Why does it irritate people? Why does it cause it offense? Why does anyone care about the sexual orientation of soldiers? Are gay people less lethal when driving tanks, dropping bombs, flying fighters? Why can't you be gay and lethal?
Should have figured my post would turn into a " anybody not liking the recruiting ad must hate gays, lesbians, etc...Why did the ad have to center around her lesbian mothers(s)?...It didn't...just another attempt to appease many of those in this politically correct new social order. My family escaped from behind the iron curtain..what the "h" did that have to do with how well I might serve my country? I have absolutely no doubt that 1 or more of the many Medal of Honor receipients were gay..their deeds -no less heroic. So...fine...changing the rules/laws to make sure any who are fit can serve. But..speaking for my son and myself(son - disabled/OEF..me 20yrs service) ...this overt pandering to all the social justice types is pathetic, among other negatives.
I grew up in an era when these things were considered immoral. But times have changed.
There are tonnes of stories about servicemembers being kicked out because they were homosexual. Every service member was taught each of the punitive articles of the UCMJ, so every one of them full well knows that there is no punitive article addressing being homosexual. The military cannot charge you with a crime for being homosexual. What you can be charged with is 'sodomy'.
During my 20 year career, I served with a number of homosexuals. Do what you want with consenting adults behind locked doors and your good. But get caught performing sodomy on-base or at-sea and you get charged with a crime. Even when I worked as an MP, we had homosexuals working among us. They did not decide to be busted so they kept their sexual activity off-base and in their bedrooms.
But the public perception remains that being homosexual is a crime. And our culture has changed to be accepting of homosexuals. It is no longer seen as immoral.
Today homosexuals have 'pride parades' and they feel free to display their sexuality.
Clinton's "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy did not change the UCMJ. Sodomy is still illegal, and you can be busted for sodomy if you are caught doing it.
But the public perception remains, civilians still think that we bust all homosexuals.
This false perception needs to be addressed
The recruitment ad presented by the OP, is an attempt to address that public perception.
Should have figured my post would turn into a " anybody not liking the recruiting ad must hate gays, lesbians, etc...Why did the ad have to center around her lesbian mothers(s)?...It didn't...just another attempt to appease many of those in this politically correct new social order. My family escaped from behind the iron curtain..what the "h" did that have to do with how well I might serve my country? I have absolutely no doubt that 1 or more of the many Medal of Honor receipients were gay..their deeds -no less heroic. So...fine...changing the rules/laws to make sure any who are fit can serve. But..speaking for my son and myself(son - disabled/OEF..me 20yrs service) ...this overt pandering to all the social justice types is pathetic, among other negatives.
Amen!
I was born in 1985 and I have to say that not many people in real life have any issues with homosexuality. Plus, in this Army ad, the soldier is not even a lesbian. Having two lesbian mothers does not make the daughter lesbian, nobody is stupid enough to believe only lesbians raise lesbians.
Honestly, this ad makes the military look like a government jobs program and must therefore be "diverse" and inclusive. The military is already diverse and inclusive, so what's the point?
I have one brother and two uncles served in the Marine Corps and my fiance is also a Marine Corps veteran. I have always always always been told that no one cares about your days in college as a whiny social justice warrior. All that matters is your ability to be a lethal asset. Just get tough and do the job that is required of you, or don't join, simple.
Many people agree with you, that is why the ads has so many negative comments.
Many civilians are afraid of saying anything, because all we got was "you never served" or "you are a fake military supporter", "you are against gay people" something like that. Honestly, some people should spare us the fake outrage.
Last edited by lilyflower3191981; 05-25-2021 at 07:28 AM..
However- it has to be THEE most talked about Army commercial ever. It put the Army at top of people's minds. That's a successful advertising campaign right there. All publicity is good publicity.
Respectfully disagree
30 years ago, brands needed to have their name around so any talking about your brand was good. Today with the internet, brands need good feedback and good communication. A bad publicity is too damaging.
If a company ( for lack of a better word) is savvy enough to turn a mistake into their advantage - that's great. But bad publicity is bad publicity, to be avoided when possible.
There is genuinely bad publicity, which accurately exposes you for what you really are, and when people hear it, they don't like it. Certainly, there is a amount of damage limitation that can be done, but it is never "good."
This ad is so bad to a point, they have to turn off the comment section. "shut down free speech" is even worse.
All these said, I get why the Army had this type of ad, but when you push for the .01% you tend to turn off the rest. It is really common sense stuff and human nature.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...this post of mine..I'll stand by what I said..
