This…
…triggers you to issue this:
One word: Unbelievable.
My beloved Grace was a World War II history fanatic. She died on the day this spectacularly offensive memo was released. If she had been in perfect health and read the swill above, it very well might have killed her.
RimaAnn Nelson, the VA’s assistant secretary of health for operations and a evident Great stupid-addled moron, sent the memo calling for the prompt removal of the iconic photo capturing a historic moment of public jubilation after Japan surrendered in 1945. She wrote, as you can see if you can get through the document without suffering a nuclear head explosion, that it was “inconsistent with the VA’s no-tolerance policy toward sexual harassment and assault.”
Thus did she demonstrate the culture within, not just the VA, but the entire Biden administration and Woke World generally. Thus did she exemplify the wildly skewed priorities of the people currently administering our government. Thus did she reflect the contempt for American history such arrogance exemplifies.
VA Secretary Denis McDonough intervened yesterday, saying: “Let me be clear: This image is not banned from VA facilities — and we will keep it in VA facilities.” In response to press inquiries, the Veterans’ Administration merely reiterated that position. Meanwhile, “attempts to reach Nelson were not successful,” one hopes because she has been locked in a steel safe and dropped via parachute onto an ice floe in Antarctica, like remnants of “The Blob.” I question whether the retraction resulted from Secretary McDonough genuinely disagreeing with his subordinate’s action, or because the resolute U.S. culture-wreckers in the Biden Administration decided, “Oh-oh, the peasants aren’t ready for this yet. Let’s back off and try again later…“
It will be instructive to see if RimaAnn keeps her job—it’s might hard to get fired in this regime if you tick any DEI boxes. I would wonder how many other similar-minded government employees that I am paying for infest our agencies but, as King Lear said, “That way madness lies.”
Ethics Alarms 
“VA Secretary Denis McDonough intervened yesterday, saying: “Let me be clear: This image is not banned from VA facilities — and we will keep it in VA facilities.”
In a closet with its front to the wall?
Reminds me of Matthew 23:24 when Jesus criticized the Pharisees for being so nitpicky about minor things while ignoring what’s really important: ”Ye blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel.”
One of the symptoms of the woke virus appears to be a neurotic obsession with all things sexual. Interestingly, radical Islamists like Hamas and ISIS have a similar obsession although it manifests differently. What’s up with that?
When the right wing gets concerned about sex, the left likes to say it’s because they’re sexually repressed. I’d say right now it’s closer to the truth in the left’s case. We are still recovering from the hook-up culture that started in the 60s and continued through the 80s. With young men thus feeling entitled to sex and young women feeling obligated to give it to them, feminists started to notice problems with this outlook (it helped that it was another way to bash men) and began pushing back against it. Progress was slow until Trump made sexual DEFINITLY uncool to the left, and #MeToo was born. The left hasn’t stopped wanting sex, but now they feel guilty about it, and they take that guilt out on “the enemy”.
I have been waiting on this commentary, and once again I was not disappointed.
The whitewashing of history in the name of “Woke” continues apace. This one attempt was stopped (for now), thank goodness, but there will be others that won’t be.
Twenty years from now, none of us will recognize this country. A former Soviet citizen might, though…
This Saint has a past:
Phoenix VA Hospital Gets New Boss With Troubled Past
MONEY QUOTE: About 1,800 Patients Were Potentially Exposed To HIV At A St. Louis VA Hospital Under Nelson’s Leadership, According To One Report.
PWS
And yet, they almost have to make such a statement. Under our current laws, this was a blatant sexual assault in broad daylight. The fact that a news organization blanketed the world with and celebrated the image only makes it more traumatic for the victim. Some reporters interviewed the woman and reported that she said that she didn’t know the man, and didn’t consent to being kissed. Under today’s ideology, this was a traumatic incident that should have scarred the victim for years, if not life, with psychological issues. To say it was an extraordinary moment in time and a spontaneous emotional outburst like this was probably not a big deal is to minimize sexual assault in today’s orthodoxy.
To leave it up questions today’s treatment and ideology around sexual assault.
“To leave it up questions today’s treatment and ideology around sexual assault.”
Not really. Alternatively, one could say the pic is a visual marker/reminder of progress around sexual assault. Taking it down isn’t really different than toppling statues and book burning. Why are wokesters so afraid of history?
“Why are wokesters so afraid of history?“
The Brave New World seeks to blaze its own trail; with little to no recollection/reflection/perspective of the past it’ll seem like things have always been done their way.
PWS
It’s far easier to move the goalgoalposts a second time if you successfully erase all records of their prior positions.
It’s like labelling a specific exemption necessary for the passage of the Gun Control Act as a “loophole” so that the public view it as an unintended oversight instead of a necessary protection of property rights.
This is held to be an inspiring photo culturally. It is not a photo used to ‘educate’ or ‘warn’ people about sexual assault in the past. How can an act of felony sexual assault be inspiring and celebrated?
Michael R,
“This is held to be an inspiring photo culturally.”
Inspiring? More like a visual depiction of relief and celebration of the war’s end.
“How can an act of felony sexual assault be inspiring and celebrated?”
You really think that people who viewed the pic when published, or even many years later failed to understand what the pic symbolized? You really believe that people were thinking “felony sexual assault” when they saw the pic? Aren’t you projecting backwards and then applying today’s laws and cultural standards to 1945?
Heck, I saw strangers of all genders grab and hug each other while jumping up and down when Carlton Fisk hit his homer off the pole! That’s assault and battery without “consent.” If you were at the game and wearing a Sox cap or shirt, you were consenting to expressions of joy. Same for anyone who was out in Times Square when the end of the war was announced.
To defend their “woke” initiative, I suppose they had to “assume” this kiss was unwelcome. Anyway, it seems the backlash was immediate and significant, prompting them to rescind this nonsense.
At this point we would do well to remember that the ‘Renaissance’ that saved us from the ‘Dark Ages’ was really little more than new school of art that did a great propaganda job. The characterizing of the Dark Ages as a period of stagnation, superstition, and intellectual vacuum, was substantially untrue, and in that case was followed by an extended period of ‘blackwashing’ history!
I’ve been thinking about this (not-so) recent phenomenon. Those of the younger generation are absolutely enamored with consent. They seem to think that teaching people about consent will solve the sexual problems that often occur between men and women, that it will make their lives more comfortable and less fearful.
But life is messy. Relationships are messy. Sometimes that messy is bad, like when a nice guy does something that makes a girl very uncomfortable, and sometimes that messy is good, like the photograph above.
Attempts to sterilize the world of anything that might lead to discomfort will end up sucking the joy out of life. I joke with my wife about what sexual encounters with her Gen-Z siblings and their spouses must be like. ”Honey, is it okay if I touch you here? Yes? How about if I take off this article of clothing? Is this still okay?”
Yes, this approach to consent will probably result in some uncomfortable situations being avoided. But why do they never examine the costs associated with their suggestions (that usually eventually become codified into law in later generations)? Is it because they truly believe that government can solve problems, rather than simply insert trade-offs? Is the idea that every government action has an unpleasant consequence an anathema to their way of thinking?
I suppose the answer to my questions can be found in John Lennon’s song that Jack so loves to riff on.
Isn’t this just another form of attempting to force-kill America? It is a trendy, callous and methodically calculated passive aggressive form of ‘destruction by edict’ “because we can” via usurped and abused powers aimed at destroying reminders of past greatest successes of that which is seen as Americana, our country at her best—and publicly showcasing such an attack.
In a word: Yes. In another word: Bingo!