Maybe I'm a total mental retard or just am not keeping up. But I'm confused as to why Jessica Lynch's homecoming is front page news.

I saw the BBC documentary surrounding the US army's staging of her "rescue" from a hospital treating her for wounds she received previously. And the fact that there were no iraqi soldiers to rescue her from.

so someone please explain to me. Why is this big news?

[ July 22, 2003, 02:17 PM: Message edited by: ung ]

Because, it's just a nice story. Why was Matthew Shephard's death any more important or newsworthy than any other violent crime committed in America? Because it was a powerful story used to prove a political point. Same here. Just as the gay political lobby needed a victim to show the need for hate crimes legislation, the Pentagon needed a hero out of this war, and she makes for a nice hero. I daresay most of the people on this board couldn't have made it through what she went through, even without an enemy hostage takers, etc. So I think she deserves a pat on the back.

[ July 22, 2003, 02:42 PM: Message edited by: William1865 ]

I'm pretty sure I haven't read anyone here saying that they could have handled what Ms. Lynch went through so that's an irrelevent point. A female soldier held captive yet successfully rescued is a happy moment in an otherwise disastrous war. That's newsworthy even if it is obvious Bush administration propaganda.

To reduce Matthew Shepard's horrific murder to fodder for the so-called gay political agenda is despicable and pathetically cynical. And probably somewhat true...

[ July 22, 2003, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: BryanD ]

I agree she deserves a pat on the back, and given the Post's coverage of her hometown's wait for news so many months ago, it makes sense for our local media to be leading with the story.

However, I daresay a lot of the people on this board could have, and probably have, gone through what she went through. Her injuries were sustained in a horrific car accident, and she has little if any memory of the events. I am sure that one or more of us Outsporters have gone through equally painful and dangerous situations.

Interesting question -- we were just asking that same question here in the office today. I guess everyone forgot about the other woman who was rescued -- strange...

William1865, are you serious? To equate a horrific death with a dubious heroic rescue is simply irresponsible. The SPIN of the Jessica Lynch story is simply spin, as you suggest, the administration needed a hero; and in this case got an easy one. The Matthew Shephard story has ramifications far beyond its telling.

One of the most disgusting things I've read on this forum. You might want to reflect on the way Mathew Shepherd was left to die on that fence for just a moment. You also might feel more comfortable visiting Fred Phelps website.

Jessica Lynch is not big news, OR the only female soldier to be captured and injured and saved in enemy territory. Wasn't even that big of news with the original (highly embellished) story about her rescue. Can't wait for Jessica Lynch to show up in one of W's campaign ads. Maybe they can super-impose him in his military garb actually "freeing" her from the clutches of a super-imposed Sadaam?

Furthermore, I cannot belive CBS pre-empted part of the Bold & the Beautiful for her homecomimg. wink

[ July 22, 2003, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: HornFan ]

Remember Scott O'Grady??? He was "hero of the week" following his harrowing ordeal in Bosnia and then faded from memory. Jessica Lynch will have her deserved time in the spotlight and then the media spotlight will fall on someone newer & hotter. There'll always be a new flavor of the month.

~Adam

I certainly do. At the time Scott O'Grady was shot down, his father was living in Alexandria and working as an MD at the Alexandria Hospital, now part of Inova. I drive by the O'Grady place from time to time. The last I heard, O'Grady was skiing and contributing the occasional article to USA Today.

I'm glad to see Ms. Lynch back, but the thing that keeps her from being a "nice hero" is... she did nothing indisputably heroic, despite the fantasies that were initially spun by the Pentagon/media tandem.

Perhaps some of the (nonwhite) female military fatalities are more deserving of the title, but of course they aren't available to be interviewed on network TV. And since it appears they gave their lives for a fabricated cause, maybe "victims" would be a better term.

I'm very moved by her story, car wreck or not, just as I was by Scott O'Grady. But something tells he that one of the reasons that she's getting so much play is that the military is practically shrieking, "See! She's not a dyke!"

Guaran-damn-tee you that if she had been one of the big tough sailors under my command in my Navy days, there wouldn't be the same "story." :mad:

But I wish her well all the same.

Gator "Former Navy LT" Jamie

Anybody else struck by how young she seems? I know you only have to be 18, but she looks and sounds like she's 15.

She's getting all the attention for all the reasons mentioned. She's white, blond and feminine. As for whether she is a hero or not, people have different definitions. Some think the soldiers are all heroes just for being there and serving; others think there must be some heroic act.

Kind of like 9/11 and the WTC vitims. Some people were saying all the victims were heroes, while others chose to reserve the term for the rescue workers.

It is interesting that Jessica Lynch has received much more media attention than Shoshana Johnson, the young black woman who was a PoW and whose frightened image was seen on Iraqi video.

Johnson was shot in combat, was captured by the enemy, used as propaganda, and then returned home to her family and 3 year old daughter with much less fanfare than Lynch who was "rescued" from a hospital vacated by Iraqis, suffering only injuries from her vehicle crash.

Not to downplay Ms. Lynch's bravery or role in combat, but it does seem like she (young, attractive, white, smalltown girl) was made the poster girl for the Cause.

I think that she is being deemed a "hero" because she has the perceived all-american look. Her face is marketable. Her ordeal, while terrifying and I'm glad she made it out alive, was just as horrific as the seven other hostages that were shot and kept prisoner. However none of them seem to have that wholesome Americana look about them. They are black women, asian men, and white men that, while white, don't necessarily have that look, whatever that may be, that deems one a "hero."

I truly empathize with Jessica's story, however I feel that the media is using her as the face of the war. She is being used as the poster girl of what was at stake with this war. She is supposed to represent the girl next door, your young wife, your young mother, your daughter, your innonence under the thumb of a dictator.

While the other hostages endured equally trying experiences, their outward looks do not lend to this media manipulation, they are too real. Plus there is a group of them. It is much harder to market a collective than it is to push a one onto the American consciousness.

I agree with Gator Jaime that if Jessica was a lesbian, there would not be this media blitz; there wouldn't be the possibility of a tv movie of the week. And if you think about it, the movie wouldn't be all that exciting, she'd be laid up most of the movie.

I am glad that she came home safely, but I feel like I am being cheated in some way when only one veteran is being singled out. I feel that all of the hostages should be given their due. Each should be made to feel this special, this honored. It makes me feel that unless I am able to jump on the bandwagon and see the heroism in this one woman, I am somehow less patriotic. I know nobody can truly make me feel anything I don't want to feel, however I do feel that this situation is meant to feed the patriotic flame. And because of this misuse of Jessica and the other hostages I am turned off by her story.

Te main difference between Lynch and the POWs mentioned above is that with the other POW's, we weren't able to have that hollywood style "jump in guns a-blazing pluck a damsel in distress from eveil enemies hands" rescue orchestrated.

And that is the saddest part of the story. This kid (PFC Lynch) did not ask for the attention. She enlisted in the Army in a grunt-type job to serve her country and better her life. That's a far cry from someone like, say, Kobe Bryant, who chooses the limelight and then protests when it displays his misdeeds.

I just hope that the "negative" aspects of her story don't damage her. She's got enough to deal with just putting her life -- and her body -- back together.

gj

NinerFan, who said she's not a lesbian? I thought the consensus was that she is feminine. Can she not be both?

The point is not that a white, feminine woman is more marketable as a poster child for the war, though that is certainly indicative of our current political climate. The point is that our government (just like the many that have come before it) is trying to maintain the myth that war is exciting and heroic.

Thus, there will be a new generation -- perhaps, of pretty, feminine girls -- who is ready to jump into a war without any understanding of the resources (material and human) required to pull it off.

What tears at my heart is the thought of all the families who lost someone in this terrible war. That Lynch survived is a good thing, but the media blitz must be a stake through the heart for families already suffering. I can't image having to endure it. All while soldiers are still in danger and still dying.

You are absolutely correct! She can indeed be both. I think I misread GatorJamie's earlier post and assumed non-lesbian. My bad, I apologize.

_______________________________________

Originally posted by GatorJamie:

And that is the saddest part of the story. This kid (PFC Lynch) did not ask for the attention. She enlisted in the Army in a grunt-type job to serve her country and better her life. That's a far cry from someone like, say, Kobe Bryant, who chooses the limelight and then protests when it displays his misdeeds.

I just hope that the "negative" aspects of her story don't damage her. She's got enough to deal with just putting her life -- and her body -- back together.
_________________________________________________

I agree with you that it really is sad that she is being propelled into such a highly visible position. Her entire life is now under the microscope. It really isn't fair. I haven't read anything that describes how she feels about being in this position. I will need to look into it to see if anyone has reported on how she feels about being put in this situation.

As for Kobe, I think he just needs to bend over and accept his punishment. He did step into the limelight willingly. As such he must accept everything that goes along with it. If his image is tarnished, it's of his own doing.

If Jessica's image is tarnished it is because the media is digging for a reason to drag down their hero. And that would be truly sad.

Araanib, I think Jessica being white and feminine is exactly the point. I see your point about the government continuing to perpetuate the myth that war is exciting and heroic. To do this though, wouldn't you agree that you need a figure or a situation to rally around. To showcase the heroic elements of war, you need to have someone that is welcoming. They must be able to tug at the heartstrings. They have to be able to convince you to join. I think Jessica being young, white and pretty allows them to tap into the mystic of joining the war effort to protect her, not to be her.

If the effort was to attract more women into the realm of fighting I think Shoshana Johnson...thanks Canmark for the name, I couldn't remember it...would be a better candidate. Here is a woman who is tortured, has her ankles shot out, and then returned to her family and her daughter, not saved hollywood-style.

In this campaign to reinforce the time held belief that war is heroic, Jessica's rescue is a reason not to have women join. If she is the damsel in distress in this war, then more men need to join so that young Jessica doesn't have to.

Should women be allowed to fight? YES! I don't know how Jessica's story will encourage a new generation -- perhaps, of pretty, feminine girls to join. I think it could be interpreted as a reason for girls not to join.

Instead, join the war effort Billy and be Jessica's hero.

[ July 23, 2003, 10:06 AM: Message edited by: Niner_Fan ]

Although, I wish Jessica all of the best in her recovery and in enjoying the rest of her life, I think that the hoopla should have been spread to the others who actually rescued her and to all of the soldiers who have lost their lives during this conflict. A story that few people know about, in which a soldier who got separated from the others in Jessica's unit, and held off several Iraqi's by himself, before he was overcome and stabbed several times to death. He and other soldiers like him, should receive at least some of the notoriety that is being overwhelmingly bestowed upon Jessica Lynch. These soldiers' families are still mourning their losses, but all that they have are medals given to them posthumously, and nothing else. Their stories deserve the limelight, as much, if not moreso, than Jessica's.

BTW, Jessica has asked the Army for an early discharge(which I am sure they will oblige), and she is engaged to be married to a fellow enlisted soldier that she met. She has already been offered several high six digit offers for a book about her life and military career.

[ July 23, 2003, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: SmoothRon ]

Niner-
You make excellent points about the injustices of elevating certain people over others to the national spotlight. As I said, the fact that Jessica was the media darling over any number of other people is most likely linked to her marketability, both on the side of the biographers/media and the DOD. That being said, I was attacking the tradition of promoting individual acts of heroism over the truths of battle.

I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. Marketing and propaganda -- especially during wartime -- is expected. But there is a bigger issue. Military service is often times about combative interactions between nations, and in that instance, a certain level of bravery and sacrifice and patriotism is required. But when those elements combine to loft the military as an institution into a sacred staus -- i.e., band of brothers -- the public develops a certain permissiveness. For example, withholding service rights to openly gay citizens becomes acceptable because we don't want to mess with the "brotherhood"; who cares if it makes the force stronger and more efficient?

Justice Scalia, now the jurist gays love to hate, wrote a scathing decent in a 1996 case challenging the exclusion of women from PUBLIC military schools (U.S. v. Virginia). He argued that the tradition of these military colleges making boys to men would be interrupted or diminished by allowing women to matriculate. Huh? The military is now a finishing school for real men?

So, the military, war, etc. all become a concept rather than a reality, and with that, they are protected as ideals. Lynch's publicity just goes to add one more myth to a fantasy saga which will further cloud the politics of war, something you would hope is the least muddied topic there could be.

Jessica Lynch did make a point of mentioning her friend Lori Piestawa, the young Native American female soldier who was killed by the Iraqis. She also thanked the Iraqis, Jay Rockefeller, and everyone else who assisted her. She showed a lot of class. Now, Jessica, you can collect as much endorsement money as your heart pleases.

I don't fault Lynch at all. it's the corrosive, partisan W administration, especially DoD (as opposed to the soldiers on the ground) and its media lackeys which plumped up this story to create a fake, feel-good, distracting narrative, straight out of the treacly script pools of Hollyweird and Mad Ave.

At least she--AND Shoshana Johnson, and some of the other soldiers--are home from a war none of them needed to have been sent to. Now, let's get Saddam and then get those other soldiers out of there!

Araanib--

I agree with you on the permissiveness that society allows to occur during wartime for the greater good, however I feel that once that period has passed, people want to feel that there actions were justified and there was a reason for them to give up their values. One situation is the bitterness creeping into the consciousness of America over the misleading attitude from Washington as to why we are going into war. "They have WOMD, we must attack." So we do. Now we say, "Well the British told us they had WOMD." So we turn on our staunchest ally to assuage the fear that we may have simply gone into Iraq to finish daddy's war, not because we believe we were saving a group of people.

But people allowed themselves to be duped. They allowed themselves to be purchased by the propoganda and enter the war. Now they want to feel like they are getting something out of it. It's not happening. If people believe that we were entering Iraq for anything other than oil interests or to finish his daddy's business they are mistaken. If they want to say we were saving people from a dictator, they just need to look at Liberia.

Our embassy and American individuals, not to mention Liberians, are being attacked and we have yet to say we are going to step in and put and end to this dictatorship. Sure we send marines to secure the area, but not to alleviate the situation. And Liberia was our ally during the Cold War. But as a people we allow this occur, I haven't figured out why yet, but we allow this to occur, probably because the propoganda machine hasn't kicked in.

You are right in saying the the military still has a mystic about it. There is this fantastical quality about it that views the military as this place for real men. However I think it is losing this image.

I am unclear as to what you mean when you say that Jessica's story will add to this fantastical image. Will her story be adding to the idea that the military is only for the "brotherhood," or that the military is a glamorous job for those seeking heroism, bravery, and courage?

However as for openly having gays in the military. I view that like the sports world. Society has this perceived notion that it is a place where men can be men, or at least be the perception of what it means to be a man. Surely society knows that there are gay men in sports, just as they know there are gay men in the military, they just don't want to have leave their comfortable bubble and acknowledge that it's there. They feel safer knowing that their fantasy is still reality. People know that there is injustice in the world, they know it is injust to ban gays from the military or sports, people just don't have the guts to stand up and say something. Instead they leave the courage to the fantasy men and women who protect us from ourselves.

Very well put, Niner. In fact, I have little to disagree with. But you seem unphased by the implications of your argument. The myth of America -- or of her institutions -- is exactly what serves as the pulpit from which divisive, reactionary pundits make their arguments. And it is exactly this perception of safety through the myth that allows so much discrimination to exist.

It happens everywhere. "Family" is now a euphamism for anti-gay. "Patriot" is a non-dissenter. The list continues.

And while I agree that America made apply the same visage of masulinity and verility to sports as it does to the military, that only goes to prove how wrong the general populace is about military service. It's all just one great, glorious game of football! Hardly. Little of it is glorious, all of it is thankless, and assessing or creating policiy that affects the military should address only very pragmatic concerns. Policy which aims to maintain an institution's "virility" is at best comical and at worse counterproductive.

Also, keep in mind when you make that argument -- equating the military to athletics -- that while it may be unfashionable to be out in pro-sports, it is not illegal.

If I were to stand on a soapbox and voice my arguments, I wouldn't be screaming from the top of lungs. Instead, there would be a churning intensity of outrage. I am very troubled by the complacent attitude with which society accepts whatever is mouthfed to them.

I am dumbfounded that America still holds onto this illusion like a five year old holds onto his blankie. We are constantly bombarded with the image that a family is a man, woman and 2.5 children, when the truth is that divorce is at a high, there are more blended families, single parents, and gay parents.

When it comes to patriotism, you are absolutely correct, society frowns upon the protest, the dissenters among the masses.

And I believe firmly that the reason these two myths are perpetually reinforced is because America is afraid to grow. The individual is so afraid to stand on one's own beliefs for fear of rejection, that you are correct, the myth is used to brandish others into feeling less than American.

Is the myth that America would be better off if America allowed gay marriage and gay rights, allowed gays in the military, embraced gay athletes or actors, a better myth to embrace than the repressed vision of small town America. YES!

I would like to see this vision touted, and I do that within my immediate sphere of influence by changing the perception of the world around me. It is for me to stand up to the people I come into contact with and challenge them to accept and understand and acknowledge that this myth of man, woman, child is family as a false mantra. How do I do this? By reminding them that they have divorced their exes, they have stepchildren, they are a single parent, and there is nothing wrong about their family.

I have to change their perception that unless your car is covered by 15 magnetic American flags you are not a true American. I have to remind them that standing up and against the status quo is the foundation of what what it MEANS to be an American. I have to tell them that when they stand up to their boss for his mistreatment, or stand beside their gay friend, they are breaking a cycle of delusion.

People must be told and reminded that they have the courage to stand on their own. They have to be reminded that when they give away their immediate power to an elected official, they are NOT giving away their FREEDOM. Nor are they giving away their true power. They have every right to stand up and change what is being done in their name.

Is it an easy process? No. But I can make a difference by standing up in my world. I stand up proudly as a man in all my world. I stand up for gay issues, for women's issues, for family issues, for freedom issues. I stand up and voice my opinion. Does it always work? No.

Am I disheartened when even my friends will say that a gay relationship has to have a male/female role in it. What? Are you delusional I say. I can be equal with the man I find in my life.

Well, it will be hard of you to find that.

It won't be hard for me find that, but it will be hard for you to move out of your comfort zone and see reality for what it is. I can find a man to be equal with, I know with a surety that parallels my belief that you can move out of this delusion that family is a man and a woman!

Am I disheartend when my family says, well I don't think you should have children because kids should be raised by a man and a woman. Excuse me! a man and a woman raised me, and I'm gay. And if I don't have kids, my brother nor sister don't want any, whose going to give you grandchildren. And if I'm as good a person as you say, How could you possibly think that I could not be a great father!

But I have to face these challenges head on until they change their mind, until they change their position and see reality for what is REAL. If I leave or walk away I am giving a tacit endorsement to them to continue living in their myths and illusions. I have to confront and challenge my friends, my family, my coworkers, my world until it finally gives. I have to do this, not by screaming at them until they wake up, but by grabbing them by the hair and pulling them into reality.

On our earlier discussion I'm sure we agreed. On this latest tirade, I don't know, we shall see.

Again, beautifully stated.

America, though, as an inclusive society (one that accepts gay marriage or one that does not try to define gay relationships through heterosexual norms), need not be a myth. I think that by trying to create a more acceptable "pre-packaged gay," you are simply redifining misconceptions.

This is not to say that you are doing that, but so many gay activists attack media messages about gays as being undesireable. Campy, they say, is derogatory; leather and butch are fringe, not mainstream; happily closeted is dangerous and destructive. What exactly is the paradigmatic homosexual? Someone, I can presume, who very closely resembles Jessica Lynch.

Individually, Americans (or perhaps everyone) have problems accepting the choices people make. We all want our demographic to have a positive stereotype. Gay men are, ideally, suave, wealthy, and more than capable of thriving in a committed relationship. Yet, those who choose to live outside that framework are deemed unworthy of a voice. I know, I know ... this argument has been made before.

My point is that when we as a community or as individuals try to correct society's misconceptions, we instinctively try to reinvent our stereotype to something more appealing in order to gain admission into the myth-world. This effort simply extends the fantasy to gays, and only mainstream gays at that! So, it turns out that we do not seek respect for our personal choices, we simply demand entrance into the cool-crowd.

And I say choices intentionally. We want to rid from the collective mind the idea that homosexuality is a choice. Why? Everything is a choice. Because we are biologically attracted to people of the same sex does NOT make our lives any less self-driven. We are striving not to convince people that our choices are worthy of respect but that we are qualified to sit at the "American" table because we aren't the bathhouse-going, ungodly freaks we were once considered to be.

Nicely said, Araanid. Nicely said.

It got me thinking about whether or not Jessica lay in bed pondering her choices. When I get out of here, I think I would like to be a hero. Why, I think I choose to be the face of war. I don't believe those choices entered her mind until the opportunity presented itself to her, and she had the choice to simply say to the media, Yes or NO. But she chose to play the role if only for a while. What could possibly be her reasons for making such a choice? Some money, fifteen minutes, and if lucky, a footnote in the 2020 edition of high school history books.

Do you think she respects her choices? As the claws haven't emerged to begin bringing her down I'm sure she does. But do we, society, respect her choices? And do we really have a choice?

If one were to say, I don't really find her a hero...I'm sure they are faced with the questions like don't you like her? What's wrong with her? Are you not American...maybe that's a bit dramatic. But how about, can't you respect her choice to enter the military and serve her country?

Why? What could my opinion possibly mean to some woman I have ever met. Will my respect, or lack of, really effect her? Probably not. Unless of course my feelings are the butterfly in her existence.

And what if she doesn't respect my choices. Should I seek out her approval? Heavens no! Is not seeking approval, or respect, for one's choices, not asking for an invitation to the dinner table?

You must love me! Okay Eva. If I tell you I respect your choices, does that mean I like them, or I accept them, or I deem them worthy of merit?

I don't believe anyone giving you respect can make you feel respect for your self or your choices. And if you respect your own choices, does it really matter if no one respects them? Only if you want permission to enter.

Do I want my sphere to accept me or respect my choices...I agree everything is a choice...it would be nice, but my understanding and acceptance of my self does not hinge on their approval. Maybe it is the heroic martyr in me that feels I must burst their bubble and bring the light to them...wow I can almost hear the orchestra playing in the background. I don't believe that they have to respect my choices, and maybe I do, but I do believe that they, and all society, myself included, MUST recognize that they are holding onto a myth, a vision, an illusion.

It is this illusion that we, society and the individual, measure our selves against. Yes we seek acceptance to the "grown up" table. Yes we demand that our stereotypes be broadened...but even within the gay community we have issues with seeing ourselves the way the media portrays the stereotypes...and because of that, we brandish our own community with the same whip that society uses. They make us all look like this or that we say (but isn't this or that exactly what we try to partner ourselves with, or try to become, or are)...

They don't make me look like this or that. I look like me. I work to see and accept myself as I am in the face of these myths. I pursue that self respect that doesn't ask for approval. That doesn't ask for acceptance. That knows my choices are just that, my choices and they demand my own acceptance and worth, and no one else's.

[ July 25, 2003, 03:03 PM: Message edited by: Niner_Fan ]

Im not sure I understand why this is the huge deal it has been made out to be.

Im just very happy she didnt come home in a body bag like is happening now.

"Mission accomplished"

As a native West Virginian, I'm glad she's home.

It still sucks what the Bushies have done to her--making her the poster child for this horrible war.