Moral Dilemma - To Out or Not to Out

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by foreman, Jul 25, 2005.

?
  1. Biggles - He should know better

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Scaley X - He should know better

    4.1%
  3. The pair of them - Better out than in

    57.1%
  4. Neither - It is none of our business

    38.8%

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. To the good citizens of ARRSE.

    I am faced with a moral dilemma.

    At no point will I refer or allude to the service or cap badge of the two individuals concerned, their parent unit, the frequency of their shenanigans or anything that would directly or indirectly identify the individuals.
    Also I do not wish to identify the innocent victims in all this, or wish to pass judgement.

    A former colleague, to be named Scaley X, was serving in a unit with an individual, to be named Biggles. Biggles seemed a nice boy, a wow at parties and a general man about town. No sign of a girlfriend, a busy boy, always jetting off here and there. Scaley X on the other hand, gave the impression of being a good all round family man.

    Fate played a fickle hand, and the pair were often found on exercise here and there. Scaley X had a history of being on exercise a lot in a previous unit, and Biggles, being a fly boy was never around.

    Biggles was occasionally invited to the family home, whereby his distain for Mrs Scaley X was thinly veiled. Scaley X's attitude seemed to change as well. Mrs Scaley X was made to feel uncomfortable in her own home, and the children could sense that something wasn't all it seemed with Uncle Biggles.

    Scaley X became moody, would often end up deployed at short notice, and always unsure of his ETA in the family home.

    Relationships became strained, and the final straw seemed to come with the news that Biggles was to move on.

    Scaley X snapped.

    He announced to Mrs Scaley X that he was in fact a man of complex needs, was confused and needed to go out and find the love of a man every now and again. She, however was to stag on in the marital home, never question where he had been, or who with and continue to fulfil her duties as a loving wife. At no stage was she to blow his cover as a family man.

    Under no circumstances was Mrs Scaley allowed to nip out for a bit of extra marital whenever she felt the need.

    Things have deteriorated to a point where Mrs Scaley X is being seen off by Scaley X. He blames her for the way he feels, he cannot understand why she will not go along with his plan.

    In the interest of Unit cohesion, to prevent the ongoing activity of a predatory character and to generally alleviate a situation I feel obliged to get involved in, I feel duty bound to Out the individuals.


    The Good citizens of ARRSE, please advise...
     
  2. do it ! or at least pm me with names and units !- got to be scalies
     
  3. What, based on the fact that one of them is called 'Scaley X'???
     
  4. If you really need to ask on ARRSE you're a right tosser.
     
  5. This is too good, I gotta bite.

    Bit of advice from chickland:

    Unless Mrs. Scaley X is you...then never, under, any circumstances, try to intervene in situations like this! It will not go well for any party involved, group cohesion will ultimately be damaged, and the only person that will get blamed is YOU for not keeping your trap shut. Nobody will thank you for bringing the situation to a head. Trust me on this one.

    But...you know...if you are in a position to counsel Mrs. Scaley X and she doesn't want to leave him (although I can't imagine why — even with kids, the minute I found out my husband was a tailgunner on the side I'd be out the door with a court order for half his paycheck in my pocket), I would also advise her to go out and bang whoever she wants. In a safe way, of course.

    And if Mr. Scaley X so much as utters a peep in protest, or even hints at cutting off her day-spa and manicure funding, then she should threaten to out him to as many relevant parties as possible and sue for divorce. And be willing to follow through. Why should she be at the disadvantage here? She should turn the sitch around to work for her. He obviously doesn't love her now so let him pay for the expensive privilege of having a beard, like other nervous closet-queens. :twisted:

    (edited because privilege is tough to spell!)
     
  6. Out them. The service test of "Values and Standards" applies :)

    Edited - better still, if Mrs Scaley is good looking, out them and then move in :)
     
  7. Third rule of Fight Club:

    Never intervene in closet and/ or repressed Gay love triangles.

    Besides, if anybody deserves the right to let the world know how Mr. Scaley X is behaving then it's Mrs. Scaley X, and her alone.

    V!
     
  8. 'Better out than in'
     
  9. Who gives a feck about family values when poofters are involved? Out the pair of the benders and let the world laugh at what a sh1te state of affairs the British Army has become.
     
  10. I do not beleive that this sh*te has appeared on a military website. PVR and get on Big Brother
     
  11. No bite required, this is a genuine enquiry, and deserved reasoned argument, thanks for your wise words Tankies Yank.

    Armourer, feel free to elaborate.
     
  12. With chutney ferrets allowed in the forces now i dont think that Outing them would be the best course of action.

    Mrs X has obviously cried on your shoulder, so you feel her up for a sympathy shag if nothing else.

    As for the up hill gardners then she should get a divorce move away or better yet get her slagging it around with the proper singlies and if he complains then she should just say to Sacley be quiet, and get used to it, or she would out him
     
  13. Correct, however (as had been mentioned) the standards and values paper applies here.

    This chap has all the hallmarks of failing the service test and so could face administrative action.

    I suggest you inform the chain of command in either a formal (the CO / OC) or informal (Padre / UWO) way.
     
  14. [rant]

    Bag-daddy is absolutely correct here. It makes not one jot of difference that the individuals concerned are homosexuals - one of them is married, the values and standards of the service have been compromised, and administrative action is a no-brainer.

    [/rant]
     
  15. Very true, DD. Sexual preferences should not make any differences at all. He cheats on his spouse. He treats his spouse like scum. He destroys his family and possibly disadvantages his children. He acts in an utterly irresponsibly selfish way.

    It does not matter if with a male or a female. He is simply completely in the wrong. :evil: