The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent
vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums
here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled PA Forums. Please let me (Hahnsoo1) know if something isn't working. The Holiday Forum will remain up until January 10, 2025.
Time for gays in the military?
Posts
Sexual preference makes no difference. The upper ranks of the American military, like many other parts of our society, have long been full of bigots who can only feel good about themselves by putting someone else down. Now that the military is unable to discriminate based on race, and barely able to discriminate against women, those men are desperate to hold on to their last little bit of bigotry and pretend that they're better than gays.
As for what gay soldiers want, they just want the same treatment any other professional in the military gets. Don't ask Don't Tell has always been a joke at best; the military still harasses people suspected of being gay, still runs secret investigations into their sex lives, and still destroys their careers, with no censure from Congress or the President. The only way to end this is to force the bigoted military leadership to stop acting on their stupidity and treat all soldiers equally.
The military is losing numbers fast enough thanks to insurgents and terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why lose even more who are willing and capable soldiers just because there are some bigots who will be forced to reflect upon their irrational hatred in order to work together. I don't see how enforcing this during peacetime would actually be better than doing it during wartime. During peace you have every reason to expect there to be beatings and such when the lights go out since there is nothing to fear. In the middle of a combat zone I'd doubt that it will occur as often. Besides, Jeeps is dealing with enough bullshit as it is. Why make it last even longer.
Women are in the military. Why should this be any different? There are going to be a few sexual misconduct issues either way, that's human nature.
The idea that they should sleep in seperate barracks or shower seperately is ridiculous. They're already sleeping in the same barracks and using the same showers and there isn't a giant mass of gay rapes in the military.
Edit: Then there's the fact that now that civil unions are being allowed in certain states, gays are being ripped off of thousands of dollars of benefits every month.
That get reported...
Which is still probably very low.
Imagine the amount of sexual harassment women get that goes unreported.
The rules for sexual misconduct remained the same, because they apply regardless of gender and were originally written in a fairly gender-neutral form anyway, since sexual misconduct can go both ways.
All this happened with no outcry, public or otherwise, and no disruption to the military itself (who were engaged in Afghanistan, I think).
I'm betting it'll happen eventually in the US, and those who are opposing it will be surprised by the anticlimax.
I don't think that the ones who really oppose it will be surprised by the anticlimax.
Seriously you have a point, the intolerant "community" is more of a echo chamber than the internet.
Here's how I feel about gays in the military: Anyone … dumb enough … to want to be in the military … should be allowed in. End of fucking story. That should be the only requirement. I don't care how many push-ups you can do – put on a helmet, go wait in that fox hole. We'll tell you when we need you to kill somebody. I've been watching all these Congressional hearings and all these military guys and all the pundits going, "The esprit de corps will be affected, and we are such a moral …" Excuse me, but aren't you all a bunch of fucking hired killers? Shut up! You are thugs, and when we need you to go blow the fuck out of a nation of little brown people, we'll let you know. Until then …
"Don't Ask Don't Tell" has been out of date in the Army for years now, tho. Currently it is the S.A.M. method of deciphering one's sexuality. If someone says that they are gay (Statement), they perform a gay act like blowing someone (Act), or they enter into a homosexual partnership (Marriage), then there is grounds to kick them out of the military. Usually if someone's sexual orientation enters into paperwork, it's merely a scapegoat to boot an otherwise broken soldier.
One of my troops just wrote me from Basic, and she said that her only problem with homosexuality in the Army was that it made headcount during firewatch a little difficult. She's had to tell a few couples to stop licking each other so her count would come out. The Army doesn't really care, just some of the bigoted higher ranking personnel.
Nobody really cared. As long as you did your job and weren't a screw up you're fine.
There are some people who do care, most don't.
Please do. And Don't Tell is out of date.
That may be a reason this is going on, or that they think they can get away with it.
admittedly I have no experience in this area....just thinking about what the source of the bigotry really is
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
With a little Google, you could find out that over 9,000 people have been discharged under the policy. HRC
There's fun little bits like SLDN.
And if you haven't heard about the Arabic linguists, you've been living under a damn rock.
Officers are human like anyone else. And some of them that would cheerfully put their soldiers first in every other regard are quite capable of hounding people suspected of homosexuality out of the military.
I assure you, this sometimes is already the case. 'Least in the Air Force.
How is this SAM so different from DADT that DADT is now outdated and irrelevant? Doesn't SAM simply expand or clarify the list of ways a person can 'tell'? As far as I can see, the actual policy of DADT is still in place--and it's nice that you've met sweet and tolerant officers who will tolerate homosexuality, but I don't think 'out of date' quite sums up the situation.
Considering flamboyant gay people are a minority rather a majority, and those same people wouldn't even dream of going into the military..flamboyant behavior should *not* be a reason why they keep gays out.
Along those same lines, we should keep black people out because *some* or maybe even *a little* of them do drugs, screw hoes, and hate the white man.
Yeah, but they got rhythm and keep the rest of us in step when calling cadence so it evens out.
"Black guys, help the white guys!"
-Bill Murray (or was it Harold Ramis?), Stripes
And gay people would make sure you look good in your otherwise drab uniform.
You can be fabulous!
[/myoverlyflamboyantqueenside]
Murray
and ironically, we had one black guy in basic who couldn't stay in step to save his life, the black Drill sergeants would poke fun at him all the time for his lack of "the rhythm"
Of course, we also had a white guy who, I shit you not, carried a rock in his right trouser pocket so he would remember which way to turn when he heard "right face"
SHould've done the L backwards L thing with his finger and thumb.
Thank God they don't let women in!
It kind of works against the removal of DADT since the sacred band of thebes were totally having the butt secks with each other in the shower. That's what commanders are afraid of happening. Plus it adds some legitimacy to the Yar rape reflex.
The thing is, the Band of Thebes actually increased in warlike rage when their male lovers were killed. They fought harder.
Imagine that applied to the soldiers fighting in Iraq and you have a better fighting force overall.
Not that I think gays can't fight, but the "protecting your lover" angle doesn't seem to be a good arument in favor. Also, it might be balanced out by petty jealousy and relationship drama within the unit. It already happens with women and men serving together, so it's not a special reason to keep gays out, but it's certainly not something to strive for now.
reminds me of my great grandpas comments about the navy when he server durring WW1...
"I saw guys drop their pants for a quarter!"
There doesn't seem much of a need for professionalism in an already unprofessional war.
True, but it does show that being gay doesn't necessarily reduce ones combat effectiveness, even if the whole 'relationship drama' thing involved in the Sacred Band may not make it a perfect example. Instances such as this show that it can't simply be argued that gays will reduce combat effectiveness in such vague and unspecified manner.
Also, the christian right's pathological objection to/hatred of homosexuals would be somewhat diminished (or at least, look even more retarded, if that is possible) if some of the brave soldiers fighting for them were gay...
Considering the high-percentage of members of the military who are also members of the Christian right, I'd doubt it.
As bad as it sounds, I think the only way to get gays openly into the military is to cram it down their throats.
It needs to be done.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
This is a misconception, it's not nearly as bible thumping as people think.
Again I can only speak for what I saw first hand, but the vast majority of people around me weren't religious at all. They came from all walks of life.
We had one bible thumper, and he got shit constantly for it.
That's been my experience interacting with the military as well. On the whole, they're fairly irreverent. The anti-gay thing is probably, on the whole, a by-product of the military holding up homos as a bogeyman and slur during basic training.
So if a gay man wanted to join the military, knowing full well they dont allow gays, couldnt he, just you know, lie.
Its not like there's a test for homosexuality. I just dont understand how this rule is enforced at all in any way, shape or form.
cue family guy 'you've got a gay' clip.