-
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
DADT repealed
- Thread starter GreenLantern330
- Start date
- Status
bluemarlin04
Well-Known Member
Where does being gay have any bearing on the "pussification" of America? Can gay's not kill people for some reason?
America is becoming softer. DADT and being gay has nothing to do with that. That is an entirely different subject from someone's sexual orientation imo.
bluemarlin04 wrote: "If someone wants to be different and go prance around like a fairy, go right ahead. Don't drag me into it and we'll be O.K."
Careful Grasshoppa, Here in the land of happy cows and unhappy gays -the gays have pulled their "race card" so to speak in a big way with their legal opposition efforts aimed at the voter approved Proposition 8. The gays pissed off the African Community locally with civil rights ideology but that didn't matter to them. When they feel justified in anything -they don't care who they throw under the bus. The "gay civil rights movement" (as they call it) has attempted to turn the successful Prop 8 marriage vote that passed a couple of years ago, into a civil rights issue. You would be extremely naive to believe that once on active duty they would not do the same. The gay legal team is very formidable and it's very aggressive- anyone who thinks they won't take on the MIL, is underestimating these legal teams.
In summary- "the don't drag me into it" theory of live and let live is not a prudent way to move forward in your career as an officer. In their eyes- if they feel they've been discriminated against, real or not, someone WILL PAY. Be vigilant.
Careful Grasshoppa, Here in the land of happy cows and unhappy gays -the gays have pulled their "race card" so to speak in a big way with their legal opposition efforts aimed at the voter approved Proposition 8. The gays pissed off the African Community locally with civil rights ideology but that didn't matter to them. When they feel justified in anything -they don't care who they throw under the bus. The "gay civil rights movement" (as they call it) has attempted to turn the successful Prop 8 marriage vote that passed a couple of years ago, into a civil rights issue. You would be extremely naive to believe that once on active duty they would not do the same. The gay legal team is very formidable and it's very aggressive- anyone who thinks they won't take on the MIL, is underestimating these legal teams.
In summary- "the don't drag me into it" theory of live and let live is not a prudent way to move forward in your career as an officer. In their eyes- if they feel they've been discriminated against, real or not, someone WILL PAY. Be vigilant.
phrogpilot73
Well-Known Member
And breaking.
I often remind people that our job is to kill people and break things. If it's a military dude, I get a laugh. A civilian dude? I get the look of shock and horror. Seriously, WTF do they think war is??
Agree with the colonel's rant for the most part, though I'd have to know him personally to judge whether he's a true warrior giving a somewhat sage parting shot or just a guy bitter at getting the shaft, maybe even justifiably. A lot of guys are self-styled Great Santinis, whether or not they actually rate it--sometimes they're just regular assholes.
In itself, it has nothing to do with DADT or the repeal thereof. I agree that the way the military goes about this is extremely important. If it is handled the way female combat integration was in the early '90s, this will be an unmitigated disaster, not by any fault of the gays, but by the fault of our leadership.
In the '90s, everyone was afraid to even look at a female servicemember sideways for fear of getting charged. For the most part that wasn't the women's fault, but due to the overcorrection forced by the leadership, military and civilian, at the time. I can see gays being blamed for extremely lame standdown briefs, NKO, and MarineNet training that they have nothing to do with. Everntually things will settle down, just as they did with with female integration, for the most part. Hopefully we have learned from our mistakes of the past and this will go much more smoothly.
In itself, it has nothing to do with DADT or the repeal thereof. I agree that the way the military goes about this is extremely important. If it is handled the way female combat integration was in the early '90s, this will be an unmitigated disaster, not by any fault of the gays, but by the fault of our leadership.
In the '90s, everyone was afraid to even look at a female servicemember sideways for fear of getting charged. For the most part that wasn't the women's fault, but due to the overcorrection forced by the leadership, military and civilian, at the time. I can see gays being blamed for extremely lame standdown briefs, NKO, and MarineNet training that they have nothing to do with. Everntually things will settle down, just as they did with with female integration, for the most part. Hopefully we have learned from our mistakes of the past and this will go much more smoothly.
^^^Exactly Phrog.
As with most things, the tone of the transition totally depends on the leadership. How much dissent they're willing to tolerate, how they're going to handle the logistics and berthing, and the flood of issues that will come along with the changing of the policy. I am glad the top brass is behind the changing of the policy, I just hope they have enough historical SA to make sure not to mess it up. Previous integrations were not easy or pleasant, but had to be done. This'll be just like those, only I think the military as a whole is much more mature and professional than it was during Desegregation in the 1940s and more tolerant than the military of the early 1990s.
In the end of the day, it's just another change everyone will have to get used to, and they will. In twenty years it'll be a virtual non-issue like race and gender are in our very professional forces now.
As with most things, the tone of the transition totally depends on the leadership. How much dissent they're willing to tolerate, how they're going to handle the logistics and berthing, and the flood of issues that will come along with the changing of the policy. I am glad the top brass is behind the changing of the policy, I just hope they have enough historical SA to make sure not to mess it up. Previous integrations were not easy or pleasant, but had to be done. This'll be just like those, only I think the military as a whole is much more mature and professional than it was during Desegregation in the 1940s and more tolerant than the military of the early 1990s.
In the end of the day, it's just another change everyone will have to get used to, and they will. In twenty years it'll be a virtual non-issue like race and gender are in our very professional forces now.
ryan1234
Well-Known Member
Hacker and Huggy probably have a better outlook - but from all of the guys I've talked to on the Guard side - the guy is pretty much a legend
I've been reading this thread with a certain amount of interest, and I have to admit to being impressed/surprised that for the most part folks have kept it from getting personal. For myself, I don't see this as a big deal from a readiness point of view, and I just can't see the Navy having nearly the same amount of growing pains as we did integrating women aboard ships. First of all, I think we are dealing with vastly lower numbers here. Even if you took Kinsey's number of 10% of the population being gay - and I wouldn't as a quick google of more scientific surveys seems to suggest less than half of that - there is a further self-selection issue that our all-volunteer force puts into the equation. The gay folks already in the service have demonstrated an ability to get along with their straight counterparts at least well enough to have survived DADT up to this point, and at the risk of stereotyping, the all out flaming drag queens that some people in this thread are concerned about probably aren't all that interested in joining up. Secondly, pregnancy is a huge readiness issue aboard our ships (though it does keep the gedunks and pass/tag offices well manned for shore commands) and if I understand the process correctly that isn't going to be a problem with repealing DADT.
Having said the above, is it possible that an activist with an agenda could make it through the enlistment process, then through boot camp and initial schools, just so he could arrive at a ship and act out in pursuit of some gay agenda goal that I can't picture at the moment? I suppose, but that risk is small enough I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Are gay activists going to move on from this fight to the gay marriage fight? Probably, but I don't care about that and it isn't going to be the military's problem - Congress or the courts will decide whether or not the military has to recognize same sex marriage.
Other issues, and the ones that seem to have sparked the most debate within this forum, are the questions of people's moral objections and comfort levels. For those with moral objections, I've got nothing to offer. Since I personally can't give a rat's ass less about a fellow service member's religion, sexual preference, tv watching habits, etc, I recognize that I lack the ability to show any empathy to people's moral objections so I try to stay out of those discussions. For people with comfort level issues, they will have to decide if their objections to serving with gay's in close quarters out-weigh their desire to stay in. If that is the case and you feel like you have to get out as soon as your obligation allows, then thank you for your service and no hard feelings on my account.
Overall, I think that in 5 years the fuss over this will be gone, and by the time my son (now 4) might be able to join up no one will care anymore.
Having said the above, is it possible that an activist with an agenda could make it through the enlistment process, then through boot camp and initial schools, just so he could arrive at a ship and act out in pursuit of some gay agenda goal that I can't picture at the moment? I suppose, but that risk is small enough I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. Are gay activists going to move on from this fight to the gay marriage fight? Probably, but I don't care about that and it isn't going to be the military's problem - Congress or the courts will decide whether or not the military has to recognize same sex marriage.
Other issues, and the ones that seem to have sparked the most debate within this forum, are the questions of people's moral objections and comfort levels. For those with moral objections, I've got nothing to offer. Since I personally can't give a rat's ass less about a fellow service member's religion, sexual preference, tv watching habits, etc, I recognize that I lack the ability to show any empathy to people's moral objections so I try to stay out of those discussions. For people with comfort level issues, they will have to decide if their objections to serving with gay's in close quarters out-weigh their desire to stay in. If that is the case and you feel like you have to get out as soon as your obligation allows, then thank you for your service and no hard feelings on my account.
Overall, I think that in 5 years the fuss over this will be gone, and by the time my son (now 4) might be able to join up no one will care anymore.
What's the over/under on that?
Extremely well put Mumbles. Sometimes the comments on here amaze me knowing that they come from winged Naval Aviators and potential new ones. I feel like I am reading a book club blog from Yale sometimes. People may not think the repeal of DADT and all the other PC crap that has befallen the military in the previous decades hasn't had an affect on our military's "warrior culture" but they couldn't be farther from the truth. And it has nothing to do with hating homos or loving them. The fact that so many of you are worried about offending them that we actually have debate about proper PC titles (homo vs homosexual...) is laughable. Who the f*** cares? To me, it seems like many of you are coming in to the wrong line of work. And I truly wonder sometimes how some of the delicate sensibilities of members of this board will be "offended" when it comes time to drop a 500lb JDAM on a group of real people.
You know what, you're right. All this caring for families and sending flowers when my Marines have a kid is taking away from our "warrior culture". Let's get back to the days of "if the Corps wanted you to have a wife, they would have issued you one".
This is not about not offending anyone's sensibilities, it's about doing the right thing by LCpl Timmy (who is already working for some of us) who can't have an intimate relationship or talk to anyone in the command if he's having relationship troubles. And doing the right thing by LCpl Jimmy, but last I checked LCpl Jimmy doesn't get to make his own rules about serving alongside blacks or Muslims. I don't really give a damn about offending Timmy, but a lot of you seem to be bending over backwards to not offend Jimmy.
If either Timmy or Jimmy wants to act effeminate and un-"warrior"-like, I'll give them shit regardless of who they're fucking at home.
If Timmy and Jimmy show up to Penn State and get roomed together, the pimply 21-year old Senior who's the RA on their floor manages to work out their differences without having to kick Timmy out of school. How the hell is it we expect less of our Marines and want to coddle their preferences? That's pretty damn un-warrior-like.
Real manly warriors we are if we're going to be all squeamish about some dude gazing at our cock in the shower. Do you go running off screaming if you're ground fighting and the other dude brushes your package?
This is not about not offending anyone's sensibilities, it's about doing the right thing by LCpl Timmy (who is already working for some of us) who can't have an intimate relationship or talk to anyone in the command if he's having relationship troubles. And doing the right thing by LCpl Jimmy, but last I checked LCpl Jimmy doesn't get to make his own rules about serving alongside blacks or Muslims. I don't really give a damn about offending Timmy, but a lot of you seem to be bending over backwards to not offend Jimmy.
If either Timmy or Jimmy wants to act effeminate and un-"warrior"-like, I'll give them shit regardless of who they're fucking at home.
If Timmy and Jimmy show up to Penn State and get roomed together, the pimply 21-year old Senior who's the RA on their floor manages to work out their differences without having to kick Timmy out of school. How the hell is it we expect less of our Marines and want to coddle their preferences? That's pretty damn un-warrior-like.
Real manly warriors we are if we're going to be all squeamish about some dude gazing at our cock in the shower. Do you go running off screaming if you're ground fighting and the other dude brushes your package?
Since homosexuals are going to be able to serve openly soon, leadership might want to care how they offend those who work for them and those they work with.
I'm guessing you wouldn't tell your female pilot about the hot broad with the incredible ass you saw the night before...kinda the same thing. You might call it PC, I just call it good headwork.
bluemarlin04
Well-Known Member
Times change imo. Look at old warrior cultures from hundreds of years ago. Different cultures used to do things people today would laugh at. The human body and mind adjust accordingly and does what is needs to. Should we go back to the culture of WWII and not let women and colored people serve and be promoted? Every generation I have ever spoken to has told me that they have had it so much harder and how different it was. Yet, every generation after them has adjusted and made it work with what they were given.
Worried about offending them with what I call them? How about I try to make a conscience effort to speak without stereotypes and not offend others in general when I'm in the workplace. Would anyone here go around their W/C calling people other stereotypes that people may find offensive? No, they wouldn't. I fail to see how that is laughable.
This policy won't be a big deal. It won't eliminate the warrior culture like people think. All that will happen is the few gays serving can be open about it and people will go about their business. A few NKO courses and mando training and everyone will be good to go.
Aw God, I can't take it... I wouldn't sleep tonight if I didn't say this....
We are being enlightened by a C-20 "Master of Loads" (consisting of 1 VIP, rope and minions) on the vector of warrior culture... I hope you were a goddamned SEAL before you took on the warrior like task of filling out THAT weight and balance sheet... the human body and mind??? What kind of existential Freudian, Pavlovian, Kensian, Ensteinian BULL SHIT IS THAT?????
Cripes.
This generation is arriving, raised watching a big gay Purple Dinosaur named Barney, who loved you and me... and the generation for which noone was "out" after getting tagged in the face at dodge ball on the playground...
We are being enlightened by a C-20 "Master of Loads" (consisting of 1 VIP, rope and minions) on the vector of warrior culture... I hope you were a goddamned SEAL before you took on the warrior like task of filling out THAT weight and balance sheet... the human body and mind??? What kind of existential Freudian, Pavlovian, Kensian, Ensteinian BULL SHIT IS THAT?????
Cripes.
This generation is arriving, raised watching a big gay Purple Dinosaur named Barney, who loved you and me... and the generation for which noone was "out" after getting tagged in the face at dodge ball on the playground...
- Status