That's you on the left holding the sign, right? Nice jeans
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Homosexuals in Military
- Thread starter picklesuit
- Start date
- Status
This story being published has little to do with elitism or the press' knowledge of the military. I think many would think it worthwhile to report when 4 retired officers (some of whom were part of the implementation of DADT) are part of a bipartisan panel that concludes that homosexuals serving openly would not be disruptive.
<snark>
I'm still wondering how the military is dealing with women and blacks serving aboard ships and side-by-side with "regular" men.
</snark>
For anyone that thinks there isn't already a substantial gay community in the military already, you're kidding yourself. That being said, it's all a matter of professionalism regardless of how you like to get your freak on. I don't want to see my buddies sucking face with their wives, any more than I do two dudes.
That being said, if you've never had a gay friend or three... they make great drinking buddies. You go drinking with them, they pick up women like it's going out of style... and you know you're not gonna get CB'd. A gay wingman (pun INTENDED) is usually not a bad thing.
That being said, if you've never had a gay friend or three... they make great drinking buddies. You go drinking with them, they pick up women like it's going out of style... and you know you're not gonna get CB'd. A gay wingman (pun INTENDED) is usually not a bad thing.
I have to say in the short 4 1/2 yrs I've been in I have seen a few gays in the Navy. Most have actually been women, a few really didn't try to hide it (umm, what's that rainbow teddy bear tattoo on yer lower back?) and the two guys I knew were gay were smart enough to keep it to themselves.
I think the problem we have in the military isn't even with gays in general it is with gay men. I think it makes most men (myself included) uncomfortable being around another guy who may find you attractive because it makes us question their motives about doing things.
While I personally disagree with homosexuality, it is probably not the number one problem threatening unit cohesion right now in the military.
Just my opinion, but letting gays come out in the military won't change much.
I think the problem we have in the military isn't even with gays in general it is with gay men. I think it makes most men (myself included) uncomfortable being around another guy who may find you attractive because it makes us question their motives about doing things.
While I personally disagree with homosexuality, it is probably not the number one problem threatening unit cohesion right now in the military.
Just my opinion, but letting gays come out in the military won't change much.
Lobster
Well-Known Member
Personally I think the military needs to keep its current policy. I've noticed that gay folks tend to brag about or advertise the fact that they are in fact gay. This is not an insult to those who are and there are many that don't but for some reason few of them tend to think that they deserve some sort of special treatment because they are infact gay. I don't have a problem with it, do whatever makes you happy but I don't run around screaming "straight pride".
...I'm not trying to stur up a hornets nest here and my intention was not to offend anyone so do not take it that way...
...I'm not trying to stur up a hornets nest here and my intention was not to offend anyone so do not take it that way...
So do you find it tough to work around straight women, being as they may find you attractive and you have to question their motives?
Ya... I don't seem to have that problem.
If it was the most gut-wrenchingly hideous pitfiend to ever walk the earth.. yes.
I think the discomfort comes from the threat (real or imaginary) of repeated unwelcome romantic solicitations. Personally I have no problem with gays. If a gay guy mistakenly came onto me once, I wouldn't have a problem. But if a gay guy tried coming onto me multiple times, I'd get pretty pissed.. same deal with pitfiends. Hotties on the other hand...
Could not disagree more. The real issue is being in a compartment, close quarters or even hot bunking with openly homosexual individuals AND NOT BEING ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. The wingnuts would tell us otherwise, they are dishonest about the issue.
Should openly, activist homosexual be allowed in the military those that are captive should also have some freedom, that is be allowed to leave the military with no punitive action (honorable discharge, full benefits) regardless of their active duty committment.
When this issue is address, most all other solutions fall into place, IMHO.
Don't ask - Don't tell was a solution for a while, but activists want more.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
I've said this before. One of my roommates on a cruise was a pillowbiter. And that guy would just leer at you when you changed, and made it VERY uncomfortable to be in that stateroom.
He had that personality that if he could have been open, he would have been the flaming homo shouting "look at me! I am GAYYY!" from the topmast. It's easy for people to go "but my gay buddy is not like that". I had a gay housemate in college. He was not like that. Did not mind living with him. But the guy I had to cruise with, a whole different story.
Call me a caveman, but keep it at DADT unless they get their own berthing and heads. Women would not like it if a random guy moved into a stateroom and used their shower. He might be a perfect gentleman, or he may be trying to get them in the sack by hook or crook the whole cruise. That is not a way to live. Especially sailing into harms way.
I view living with a gay looking to "convert" no different than forcing women to live with a guy that thinks all women want him, they just don't know it yet.
He had that personality that if he could have been open, he would have been the flaming homo shouting "look at me! I am GAYYY!" from the topmast. It's easy for people to go "but my gay buddy is not like that". I had a gay housemate in college. He was not like that. Did not mind living with him. But the guy I had to cruise with, a whole different story.
Call me a caveman, but keep it at DADT unless they get their own berthing and heads. Women would not like it if a random guy moved into a stateroom and used their shower. He might be a perfect gentleman, or he may be trying to get them in the sack by hook or crook the whole cruise. That is not a way to live. Especially sailing into harms way.
I view living with a gay looking to "convert" no different than forcing women to live with a guy that thinks all women want him, they just don't know it yet.
so the "real" threat is fear and ignorance. What would you do w/ a female onboard who made unwanted advances? 1st, prob talk to her. After that, you'd use the chain just like you should in the "if" scenario you mentioned.
I think there's no prob with openly gay people in the military. As we've already discussed, there's PLENTY we just don't know about. I think it's ridiculous to ask someone defending their country to hide their sexual orientation. That's not to say "flaunt" it. I don't even find it appropriate for straight guys to have "yeah, I'd bang her!" talk outside of their tight friend circle. I think that is just lack of class. The real problem isn't them being gay, it's the backwoods mentality of many of their fellow military members that would cause the disruption.
What needs to be done about having to hot bunk with a gay? If some day in the future we find out out of the blue that homosexuality is some sort of viral disease you can catch, I will share your concern. However until then, as there is no chance of the hypothetical gay man's penis materializing out of the mattress and slipping into my butthole, I can't.
MBs scenario on the other hand is a very real concern, albeit one that would be unaffected by the status of DADT. I definately would not label you as a caveman for not wanting to be oggled by a gay. I would lump that into my category of "unwelcome romantic solicitations". It would have to be dealt with the same way you would if uggosaurus rex was eye raping your junk every time you passed her in the corridor.
Just for the record I'm not an advocate of removing or retaining DADT. Call me apathetic regarding that issue if you will.
You think the spouse's club causes drama now? Wait til there are a few queens in the mix. They'll be running SERE refresher after every TDY.
"Who was with you at DeJavu!? Was it Bill or Mike!?" slap slap
"No more lies, we know when you're lying" slap slap
They'll debrief eachother looking for conflicting statements.
Hot bunking will be the least of your worries once the Velvet Mafia gets inside the Wive's Club.
"Who was with you at DeJavu!? Was it Bill or Mike!?" slap slap
"No more lies, we know when you're lying" slap slap
They'll debrief eachother looking for conflicting statements.
Hot bunking will be the least of your worries once the Velvet Mafia gets inside the Wive's Club.
I think there are good, educated, arguments to be made against having gays openly serve, the best of which is probably that having a sound military is far more important than nearly everything, making the military a bad venue for advancing social policy.
When society at large has reached a point (and my opinion is that we are headed there and, like it or not, that point is not too far off), where homosexuality is by and large accepted by mainstream society, then it will make sense to let gays openly serve. Most of the ridiculous stereotypes that make this an issue (many of which conveniently appear in this thread) will by then have dissipated so that will be far less of an issue than it would be today.
But until that happens, whether it should be so or not, moving past DADT presents a real danger to good order and discipline (again, one need look no further than this thread confirm that is the case) and using the military to further a social cause, no matter how just that cause may be, it too dangerous. Social experimentation needs to happen organically and in places where the disruption won't threaten national and global security. Once that's taken place, then the results can trickle in to the military where, thanks to the social evolution that took place outside our bases and posts, it will be much better received than it would be if we tried to create that social change within the military.
- Status