Definitely taboo enough to get you chewed out, and almost enough to risk a physical altercation.
Someone asked me when I was in the Army and not thinking about why they asked I just said I wasn’t.
They almost started to chew me out until I mentioned it was given to me as part of an Army sponsored fundraiser.
It also makes me think of my uncle who is a very proud labor union member. He gets upset if anyone says anything disparaging about labor unions.
My point is, it sounds to me like people taking honor in being a member of an exclusive club, and they don't like it if other people do things to belittle their club membership, like by pretending to be a member.
I wonder if there is some psychological term for that behavior.
A civilian wearing an army T-shirt is not “stolen valor” in the sense that stolen valor is a crime, so this is, at best, equivocation.
While I believe (but I don’t feel like checking the UCMJ) there is a much more extensive crime (or set of crimes) relating to stolen valor within the military, the crime of stolen valor that it is possible for a civilian to commit consists of, and (outside of selling military decorations) only of, fraudulently claiming one of narrow set of awards with the intent to obtain money, property, or other tangible benefit, specifically: a Congressional Medal of Honor, a distinguished-service cross, a Navy cross, an Air Force cross, a silver star, a Purple Heart, a Combat Infantryman’s Badge, a Combat Action Badge, a Combat Medical Badge, a Combat Action Ribbon, a Combat Action Medal, or any replacement or duplicate medal for such medal as authorized by law. 18 USC Sec. 704.
Wearing a band shirt and an army shirt are not comparable at all. The default thought when someone sees someone wearing a military shirt is “oh they were in the military”. The thought when wearing a band shirt certainly wasn’t “oh they must be in the who”.
Again, no, not in a sense of “stolen valor” where “stolen valor is a crime” is true, it isn’t. You are still engaging in thebsame equivocation where you are trying make an argument grounded in “this behavior has a name which is also the name of a crime”, even though the behavior in question is not within the scope of the definition of the crime. Fraud is a crime (older than “stolen valor”, which is a novel 21st century crime in the US), pretending to have been in the military other than as part of a fraud scheme is not. (ISTR at least one state has proposed a more general ban on this, but even if it passed it would likely be struck down aa violating the First Amendment, just like the earlier and somewhat broader version of the Stolen Valor Act was.)
> Wearing a band shirt and an army shirt are not comparable at all.
To the extent that there is a defensible argument for this position, it doesn't involve invocations of non-germane criminal law.
I wasn't trying to make light of the service of military members. I agree that it is wrong to try to obtain fake respect.
I was just recounting two specific tales from my memory about people being defensive against others disrespecting their social circles. I find the behavior interesting ... maybe because I have never felt that way before about something.
When I mentioned psychology, my curiosity was in the context of behavior psychology (what is the word used to describe the behavior), not in the context of a mental illness.
Incidentally, I did like the band's music, I just didn't own any of their albums.
In the United States, the military has no authority over citizens. It's a foundational law. Exceptions can be made under temporary and unusual circumstances.
But everyone in the military is indoctrinated to believe that they are serving their country.
Some of them are shipped overseas. Some live in Virginia Beach. Some are physically endangered. Some sit behind a desk.
There are good and noble people who choose a life of service. Some of them are in the military. Some of them are food kitchen volunteers.
Not everyone in the military is noble, or serving their country. Any more than any other federal employee.
It's difficult to know the appropriate level of respect or honor to give to a random person displaying the paraphernalia of military service. "Thank you for your service" is free, and perhaps genuinely felt and received in some cases (but also vacuous at times).
I've worked with a lot of ex-military folks. And several members of my family are current or former members. I can't think of a single trait that is common to all of them.
Not physical fitness. Not leadership skills. Not honesty or honor or respectability. Not intelligence or grit or perseverance or fashion sense.
The median is probably higher than the average across the whole population. So there may be a correlation. Except fashion sense!
However this does not persuade me that there's a reason to differentially treat military vs random citizens in your example of a traffic stop. But I'm also not a cop!
I stopped reading here. Every military member swore an oath. They have no choice of duty, but they still swore the same oath to die for their country. Anybody attempting to minimize their sacrifices should remember things like Pearl Harbor, which killed all indiscriminately. And remember that desks fit in tents fit on ships and in tents, which are themselves in active war zones.
It feels good and honorable to say, just like defending a member of your family. That is a goal of the mythology, and it works! It's a hell of a drug.
I don't intend to criticize the military -- combat or non.
But the psychology of it is fascinating.
This seems like a psychological issue with some demanding they have given just as much, and are just as important, yet are too scared to pay the ultimate price.
Or how about the psychological issue that results in hatred towards the military? That one I witnessed personally and I find very interesting.
Additionally how many business owners are willing to die for their business?