Skip to content

CHAMPS, BRATS, and Entitlement Ahoy!

December 11, 2014

I’ve tried very hard lately to curtail my insults because inner peace, motherlovers. But I just today heard about the CHAMPS vs BRATS (whatever, but more about that bollocks later) brouhaha that has now made its way to SpouseBuzz, which is how a friend heard about it, which is how I found out. And now I have all the insults because what has happened is completely unconscionable and deserves an epic effing smackdown.

BLUF: Jacey Eckhart is right. Those words will probably never again pass my fingers, but there you go.

Jacey is right because, regardless of what the CHAMPS people did or did not do, regardless of their military affiliation or non-affiliation, regardless of whether they chortled madly while USO touring (they *gasp* called it a vacay! how dare they enjoy themselves while helping to entertain the military! f*cking heathen civilian beasts!) the BRATS are a horde of bullies and entitled little shits who have just done more damage to the military-civilian divide than they can ever imagine (mostly because their worlds obviously revolve only around them, so seeing beyond their tiny little ego-bound lives is a pretty massive undertaking). If this gets any traction outside of the military world…wow.

And it could. Why? Because one of you egotistical f*cksticks published private details about the CEO online. And worse? She’s a mil-fiancee. Worse than that? Her fiance is deployed.

*golf clap* Good job, assbiscuits. You’ve really outdone yourselves. Online harassment. Bullying. And now now you’ve added “threats” to your list by publishing addresses and personal details–that’s unspoken permission and encouragement to those who are just a little bit that side of crazy or criminal, which makes your participation a threatening act.

Oh, and remember that other little drum you guys like to beat? ZOMG ISIS IS COMING FOR US EACH INDIVIDUALLY BATTEN THE HATCHES AND PREPARE FOR BEHEADING BECAUSE OBAMA. Yeah, good job advertising that military family to the terrorists. But, wait. I guess that doesn’t matter to you guys, right? Because f*ck her and f*ck that and f*ck everything let’s set all this shit on fire just to make our point. Right?

Reading the comments here and here, I have the overwhelming sense that the people leading this charge are suffering from a martyr complex, are so enamored of their own tiny lives that they like the mil-civilian divide because it keeps them special and other and over here, away from the civilian masses.

You know what this sounds like? That other little bastion of entitled little pricks who want to feel special and hate the idea that there are multiple viewpoints within and without their culture and are f*cking pissed that anyone would dare tread on their special space and are willing to harass and abuse and adopt a false front and then tantrum online to get their way: GamerGate.

Look at those comments. They can be boiled down to: It’s all about ethics in gaming journalism non-profit work and for-profit books of which a f*cking handful have sold.

Same thing, BRATS*.

Every one of you involved in this, and most especially those involved directly in the harassment and threats, should be ashamed of yourselves. You are NOT honorable. You are NOT responsible. You are NOT adaptable. You are NOT tolerant. What you are is a bunch of self-obsessed hypocrites, bullies, twatrockets, and buffoons, and you’ve just blackened the eye of the military community**.

Nice job showing the world how you revel in being a brat and eschew being a champ.

And one more *golf clap* just because your sins are so f*cking epic.

F*ck off. Then f*ck off some more. And then f*ck off so hard you tear the space-time continuum and f*ck off in an infinite Star Trek-like loop. And then, once  you escape the time loop, f*ck off again.

* That is such an infantile thing y’all have done there. I’m a military brat. I will never be a f*cking military BRAT. You might as well be balls-deep in a warm wad of virgin cotton candy with this shit. Daring to choose to do what is right is boldness? How about f*cking surviving the mil-sprog life when you’re surrounded by egotistical cockbeasts? That’s bold right there. Responsibility…but of the Christian variety? Roger that, assburgers. Tolerant? Nice word – you’ll put up with anyone, but not necessarily respect their decision or right to live their lives. *high five* And OMG that S addition- spunk. The way you dickbiscuits have acted, I’m inclined to think the spunk you mean is the jizz kind. Good job. Epic job, actually.

** Plus, you made me agree with Jacey Eckhart, which might just splinter this reality, so f*ck you for that, too.

7 Comments leave one →
  1. December 13, 2014 4:54 am

    There is a lot to take in here. I suspect I might be an entitled little prick, although I am not a harasser or a bully. Those who threaten or abuse really should be ashamed of themselves. In the sake of fairness – if anyone cares about fairness anymore – the information about the CEO’s romantic life was published by Champ supporters hoping to argue that the CEO understood the military because of this affiliation. I agree though, tolerance appears to have taken a vacation all ’round.

    • snarkynavywife permalink*
      December 13, 2014 1:00 pm

      That’s good to know. Unfortunately, the trail of comments on the links posted speaks ill of those who are expressing their opinions, and the report that the fiancee’s personal address is being passed around by those who were on a mission to tear down the entire operation says all that needs to be said about the entire group. Anyone involved–and anyone who excuses or condones this behavior–is an entitled prick with a martyr complex and a pathetic collection of ethics.

  2. December 14, 2014 3:42 am

    I think the problem is with the word ‘group’. Personally, I believe the overwhelming majority of these posts (at least to the Eckhart piece – the first link) are absolutely fine. Why should everyone involved be considered a person with a pathetic collection of ethics? They don’t like the book or the charity appearing to raise funds to purchase the book written by the charity’s CEO. I never saw the address or anyone passing it around, although I certain believe it happened and those people are indeed unethical whackadoodles. The opposition group had no leader, no organisation per se; whackadoodle trolls were there to the degree that they exist in the general population. The majority chastised their behaviour rather than condoned it.

    • snarkynavywife permalink*
      December 14, 2014 12:14 pm

      The fact the comments failed to acknowledge this egregious act, and nobody acknowledged the loss of the good that was being offered speaks ill of the bulk of the commenters. That their rallying cry is “you’ve destroyed our culture” as reasoning for ALL the behavior surrounding the dissemination of private info and destroying a worthy cause also points to very questionable ethics.

      If the initial objections had been about fraud, abuse, etc. this would be different. But the cause that initiated all of this is a gigantic issue. See also Ophiolite’s post. Please don’t #notallbrats this. We don’t need derailment. We need a smackdown so the entitled, self-righteous masses take a step back and think about what they’ve done and under what actual motivations.

  3. December 14, 2014 12:34 pm

    The last thing the issue needs is a smack down. I think the comments don’t discuss the ‘address’ issue because very few saw it (many of the comments mention the fact that the ‘boyfriend’ info was released by friends of the family). From what I can gather, the address was mentioned on a private FB group and deleted quickly after that. (I am not a member of that group so this is based upon chatter.) How can everyone who expressed opposition to the name/book/finances be responsible for monitoring every group/post at all times? And should we drop our objection because someone in the group is an idiot? Should one change opinion because an idiot shares that opinion?

    My initial objections were to the name and its relationship to brat identity. That position can also be read at the blog. Absolutely everyone involved on all sides should consider their motivations.

  4. December 14, 2014 12:49 pm

    Sorry for making this two message; I just found Ophiolite’s nice post. The fundamental difference is that while Ophiolite makes a realpolitik argument that corporate strategies are necessary in a hard world, brats make an idealistic argument that corporate strategies should be opposed where found. This is a legitimate debate of the kind that probably should have been engaged in, but which didn’t emerge for a number of reasons.

  5. December 19, 2014 9:29 am

    So you are a navy wife whose language could make a sailor blush. You assume too much. As pointed out, most of your complaints about publishing addresses, engagements, and other details came from the Finks themselves. Put it out on Facebook and you put it out to the world. Were there a few remarks made by brats that were over the top? Yes – but none that I saw quite as bad as what you have published. Lots of us are much older – I’m retired from both teaching and the army reserve. I’ve also been involved with brat affairs since the mid 1990s. You did no good with this article.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: