It didn't seem to bother anyone when it first came out 3 or 4 years ago. To crucify on the cross of political correctness an officer who by all accounts is a great leader is bull shit. His leadership is being confirmed by the vast majority of Sailors who have or are serving under him giving their support and loyalty.
Most members of the Naval Aviation community understand this is aviator humor. The CVN is reflective of the Naval Aviation culture and what he did was a morale builder. It also shows the younger troops and JOs that he is a person too, not some demi-god sitting in his silver tower. I've never seen a CO, CAG or Admiral sit out focsle follies. This was just an extension of that to the rest of the ship.
If I was still active, I'd be offended and alienated if I was forced to share a stateroom with a gay officer under the new policies. Yet I would be expected to accept it, suck it up and be "professional" about it without complaint. Why is this any different? The vast majority see it has humorous, not offensive. Just like the vast majority (supposedly) find the allowing gays to openly serve as acceptable and not offensive. Why is it okay because the majority like it in one situation but not the other?
This isn't about professionalism and leadership, this is about political correctness. And it does detract from the "warrior" culture and the benefits that mentality bring to a combat unit.