I suppose it is some retired someone who is into cosplay and perhaps discipline. Worth a look at the photo.
I can’t wait to read the backstory on this. Looks pretty weird to me, but there might be some logical explanation I can’t fathom.
I thought it was the Marines who were Devil Dogs?
Especially since it looks like an otherwise ‘official’ picture. It’s not like someone caught him in the alley behind a bar wearing it.
Also, while there’s certainly an “I know it when I see it”, I’m curious how they’re defining “bondage mask”. Is it just that it’s made out of well fitting leather and not cheap rubber/latex like a Halloween mask?
All the online pictures of him half naked wearing the mask while his sub is on a leash is probably a clue, but I don’t know. That Task and Purpose article is horrible. The writer should be fired. Follow the USA Today link in the article for more information.
"The photos, which have appeared on social media, show male soldiers in uniform, or parts of uniforms, wearing dog masks, leather and chains. Some of the photos depict poses of submission and sexual acts. Another photo shows a soldier in combat fatigues wearing the dog mask on an airfield. " - USA Today.
More pictures and info. https://twitter.com/NoVA_Campaigns/status/1601302777044828162
Two reactions:
1a.) What’s with all the “this dawg did this” and “this pup finished X” instead of simply saying “I”?
Is there some loss-of-identity aspect to this fetish?
2b.) Dang, I’d been considering getting a few paw prints as a small tattoo, and now I’m … seriously rethinking the idea.
I forget which rule number it is that holds there’s porn of everything imaginable on the internet.
But I suspect a corollary of that rule is that whatever tattoo you can imagine there’s a fetish community using that as their coded recognition signal.
That’d be Rule 34.
I’m not military, but ISTR that having a subordinate refer to themselves in the third person is a normal part of basic training, e.g. “sir, this recruit has finished assembling his rifle.”
Here it is, at least for the USMC:
One of the principal ideals learned during this period is that recruits are not to think of themselves as individuals—they are not permitted to use first person or second person pronouns. Instead, recruits are required to use third-person referrals, such as referring to themselves as “this recruit” and accomplish all tasks with teamwork.
I have to wonder what this guy was thinking. Just how many full Colonels in the Aviation branch of the Army with that particular unit insignia on his left shoulder could there be? Probably not more than a small handful, and I’d imagine they could narrow it down from there by the ribbons he’s wearing.
I suspect had he kept it out of uniform, it might not have actually been noticed.
All true.
And the same sorts of self-status-reducing verbiage is used in dom/sub games. How do I know? I used to do IT for a company in that line of work. It was an … interesting … cultural experience.
It’s a Marine Corps, thing. Possibly Navy as well. Pretty sure the Air Force doesn’t do that. 100% sure the Army doesn’t. A fresh private might, on day 1 of Basic Training, might mistakenly do such a thing because he/she has seen too many movies or something, but it would be corrected on the spot–usually by mockery. Same thing when they call their drill sergeants, “Sir”.