Military and homosexuals

[Layeena]

This is the correct answer.

Seriously, if a guy is so afraid of this other guy checking him out that he feel the need to kill him, he have some serious insecurity issues. As long as the gay guy don't try to touch him, where's the harm?

I mean, when I'm out clubbing, I don't take it offensive if a guy hits on me. Whether its a guy or a girl, its still a compliment. The guy find you hot, where's the insult in that? That doesn't automatically equal me being gay, nor does it mean I have to bend over.

OKay. I'm seriously 100% female, but Uzor has a very good point. If a guys checking out nother guy, and hits on him, or even if a girl hits on another girl, it's a compliment, ffs. And what if, referring to the don't ask, don't tell thing here, they're not trying to get caught in public, but some sneaky little bastard has a reason to suspect and wants to get them out? IS that really fair? What happened to "equality" in the world? I've not seen it once, the word is carelessly tossed about though. Is anyone ever treated as an equal? I don't think so, because there's always "higher on the food chain". Your bosses have bosses, lol. IMO, it's not really a thing that is whole. Sure, in the 1900's women/african americans got their rights, sure, we're progressing along in the "equality for all peoples", however, it's slower then we thought it would be.

Equality does not exist.

 

[Morcheeba]

Take a look at the definition of "First World."

Apply logic.

Even the alternative definition does not apply. The other meaning of "First World" has to do with standard of living related to cost of living, and the last I checked, the US was still at the top of that list.

If you want to say that we're politically or ideologically backwards, say so, but don't use a term when you don't know what it means.

I'm unsure if this is exactly what Skaw was saying. But it seems to me he was getting at the fact that in north america we do and DON'T have the highest standards of living. The quality of life is only there for those who can afford it in the states, somewhat different but not all that much in Canada. So first world, sure whatever, but we shouldn't kid ourselves.

 

[Raesvelg]

Standard of Living is a sketchy calculation at best though. It factors in such things as "income inequality", and a few other subjective factors. Kinda like "quality of life" indexes.

The US does have the highest disposable household incomes (adjusted for cost of living), both mean and median, in the world though.

So yeah. We can kid ourselves at least a little.

Getting off topic though.

 

[Halifirien]

I think Celvantes is right in that what Skaw meant is that we're a First World country who still has a lot of Third World attitudes. We're an amazingly advanced society which clings to primitive superstition as tightly as any tribesman worshiping the sun.

I think 95% of the animus directed at gays and lesbians centers around two beliefs. The first is that there's a god running the universe who has very specific rules about which body parts are allowed to interact with each other. The second is that gays and lesbians are threats to the patriarchal society because they're not conforming. There's a line from Dan Savage that says "Canada got the French. Australia got the convicts. We got the Puritans and we never got over it."

Homophobic straight men are only afraid of the shower because they're afraid of being treated the way they feel they're entitled to treat women: as objects for their sexual gratification.

 

[Uzor]

Homophobic straight men are only afraid of the shower because they're afraid of being treated the way they feel they're entitled to treat women: as objects for their sexual gratification.

I've never thought about it like that.

 

[Celvantes]

Actual Data:

Hey guys, the Air Force Times just published current data on perceptions of homosexuals in the military as well as the role of Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. I hope this gives everyone an accurate viewpoint of the situation as told from our perspective:

Honestly, I was surprised. I thought the military was a lot more tolerant of the idea than this study shows. The most important chart, I think, is the last. It appears that most military members believe homosexuals are in their unit, and they *still* feel the way they do about DADT.

Given this information, I think it would be a very *bad* idea for the president to force this change on the military. The backlash and the break in morale would be almost catastrophic. At the very least, I think that even if the written rule was changed, most gays would still not feel free to come out in the military, and DADT would continue to exist as an unwritten rule. There might be a few lawsuits, and there would probably be no open animosity, but the military would likely be a very cold environment for its openly gay members, especially in the Marine Corps.

In fact, there might be more unofficial pressure for an openly gay member to leave the service if DADT is repealed than there every was official pressure under DADT (seeing that 11% of those surveyed cited cases of DADT not being applied).

If the overall goal is social acceptance, I think the gay community would be better served continuing to fight for marriage rights in the civilian sector. At this time, I think it is a bad idea to try to leverage the president into making this change on the military. The average American's sympathy to your cause might change when the military starts having major problems because of your campaign.

 

[Miros]

YEAH, WE DON'T WANT THEM ++++++S IN THE ARMY! I AIN'T SHOWERIN WITH NO ++++++!

Oh wait, fuck it's 40 years later and it's gay this time. /tries to get with the time

 

[Hexx]

YEAH, WE DON'T WANT THEM ++++++S IN THE ARMY! I AIN'T SHOWERIN WITH NO ++++++!

Oh wait, fuck it's 40 years later and it's gay this time. /tries to get with the time

Wise man once said "History is the study of repetition"

I just forget which wise man said it, but it goes to show it always tends to repeat itself.

 

[Blazeoffury]

I hate to be that guy, that annoying repititous guy. There was a contract, it was signed. End of story.
Serving in the military is a luxory, not a right it can and will be taken away if deemed necessary. End of story.
Once joined the military, all civillian rights are forked over. End of story.
Don't like the rules, don't join. End of story.

 

[Halifirien]

I hate to be that guy, that annoying repititous guy. There was a contract, it was signed. End of story.

No, it's not "end of story." Things change. Nothing is set in stone. The military isn't operating under the same rules it had when Washington was in charge, or Lincoln, or Clinton or even Dubya. Plugging your fingers in your ears and saying "NONONONONONONONONONO NOT LISTENING! NOT CHANGING!" doesn't cut it in the real world with real people from different backgrounds who have to work together.

The Penatagon just announced they're lifting the ban on women serving on submarines. Change all around.

 

[masterorion]

And the gays are plugging their ears saying NONONONO, not listening to ur silly contract that I signed

 

[Morcheeba]

And the gays are plugging their ears saying NONONONO, not listening to ur silly contract that I signed

Are they really?

Judging by the poles and stats posted it seems that there aren't many cases at all where the gays are coming out on the job. So in this case the ones refusing a change are the ones afraid of change. Often times change is for the better and there will ALWAYS be bumps in the road no matter what the decisions made.

Someone wise said not long ago, it's time to get with the times. Because... 'times they are a changing'

 

[Tristam Green]

The Pentagon just announced they're lifting the ban on women serving on submarines. Change all around.

And truly, I have to say I'm bothered by this decision and wish they'd lift the ban on gays in the military rather than allow this crap.

 

[Celvantes]

Times may be changing, and I have no problem with that. But I really thought that the military was in a different place, mentally. It's clear to me from this data that the military is not yet ready to accept gays serving openly, and just giving an order from on high isn't going to change that. Forcing this issue now will do more harm than good.

 

[Morcheeba]

Times may be changing, and I have no problem with that. But I really thought that the military was in a different place, mentally. It's clear to me from this data that the military is not yet ready to accept gays serving openly, and just giving an order from on high isn't going to change that. Forcing this issue now will do more harm than good.

That may be true, and it probably is. However people are just going to have to get over the fact that everyone is different and who you, I and our neighbour decides to sleep with is of no consequence to each other, period. There will ALWAYS be homophobes in the military just as there will always be racists, not a damn thing will ever change that. No amount of working society into acceptance is going to change that, so I say wean out the homophobes and racists, they're the ones with the problem.

 

[Tristam Green]

Times may be changing, and I have no problem with that. But I really thought that the military was in a different place, mentally. It's clear to me from this data that the military is not yet ready to accept gays serving openly, and just giving an order from on high isn't going to change that. Forcing this issue now will do more harm than good.

Heh, I think it would be far simpler than you imagine. Isn't the saying "shit rolls downhill"? And since soldiers, airmen, and sailors are pretty damn well trained to listen to their superior officers, so if they say "guess what, there are gays in the military, you no longer give a shit if there are, deal with it", do you really think that mass hysteria or huge numbers of soldiers are going to go AWOL? I doubt it seriously.

 

[Halifirien]

I think most of the guys saying "I'd quit if they let gays serve openly" are blowing hot air. The threatened mass exodus didn't happen when racial integration was ordered by Truman. I don't believe it'll happen here, either. Most of them will just go with the flow, like most working schlubs when a higher-up makes changes.

 

[masterorion]

I think most of the guys saying "I'd quit if they let gays serve openly" are blowing hot air. The threatened mass exodus didn't happen when racial integration was ordered by Truman. I don't believe it'll happen here, either. Most of them will just go with the flow, like most working schlubs when a higher-up makes changes.

you have to remember that you cant just quit. everyone is bound by that damned contract that i keep mentioning over and over. they have you for the amount of years you signed up for. sometimes more. depending on if you get involuntarily extended. they go with the flow because they HAVE TO. but, again, its not saying they are not going to retaliate on the minority.
this is why i put up such i fight TRYING to tell you how it really is. you have these misconceptions of how you think the military really works.

 

[Miros]

You seem to keep forgetting that this is still the government and to them, the contract doesn't mean shit unless it benefits them. If they decide to pull dont ask dont tell they can just make it known that it's out of the contract and people who wish to leave will leave but likely lose all their benefits.

 

[masterorion]

You seem to keep forgetting that this is still the government and to them, the contract doesn't mean shit unless it benefits them. If they decide to pull dont ask dont tell they can just make it known that it's out of the contract and people who wish to leave will leave but likely lose all their benefits.

i agree about the government doing what they want. HOWEVER, if they take out DADT, its because of gays wanting it changed for the mostpart. so, that ends that. congrats to them.
when it comes to the government and their contract, believe me, they will get what is on that agreement...especially when it benefits them

but you still just cannot up and leave the military when you want. its not a normal job when, if you dont like it anymore, you just quit. its called desertion and is punishable by military courts and military jailing. even those deserters that left during WW2 and such, they get caught 30 years later, they are still punishable under the UCMJ.
if it were as easy as just losing benefits, the military would lost over half of their troops because they decided they didnt like it anymore. i guess it seems that EVERYONE in iraq loves getting extended stays there. why quit?! ID FRIGGIN LOVE IT THERE! /sarcasm off