Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: cav58d on December 10, 2006, 08:04:21 PM
-
For those of you currently serving, or who have served in the past, what is your opinion about gays in the military? Not so long ago I would say there is no place for them, but recently my mind has changed. I say that if an American is willing to take the oath of service, and possibly risk limb and life for this country then he should be able to without being discriminated against because of sexuality. I do not buy into the whole "homosexuals have a much stronger sex drive then heterosexuals". I dont think there is any room for flambouyantly gay homosexuals, nor do I think there is any room for heterosexuals, who use the military as a tool to advance their sex life. If a homosexual was openly trying to pursue a relationship with a male soldier, or any heterosexual aggressively trying to pursue a sexual relationship with a female soldier, then I think they should be punished accordingly, but I just dont get why a mans (or womans) sexuality can block them from protecting our country.
What do you think
-
GWAD if this isn't a Troll what is?
-
Originally posted by AWMac
GWAD if this isn't a Troll what is?
How about that last thread you started?
BTW, you misspelled 'gawd'
-
Not a troll at all. Serious question, and i'd to hear some opinions.
-
No problem.
They need someone to take point in recon missions :D
-
if gays get to shower with the heterosexuals, the heterosexuals get to shower with the women. It's only fair.
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
No problem.
They need someone to take point in recon missions :D
LMAO cute...
:rofl
Mac
-
Originally posted by cav58d
For those of you currently serving, or who have served in the past, what is your opinion about gays in the military? Not so long ago I would say there is no place for them, but recently my mind has changed. I say that if an American is willing to take the oath of service, and possibly risk limb and life for this country then he should be able to without being discriminated against because of sexuality. I do not buy into the whole "homosexuals have a much stronger sex drive then heterosexuals". I dont think there is any room for flambouyantly gay homosexuals, nor do I think there is any room for heterosexuals, who use the military as a tool to advance their sex life. If a homosexual was openly trying to pursue a relationship with a male soldier, or any heterosexual aggressively trying to pursue a sexual relationship with a female soldier, then I think they should be punished accordingly, but I just dont get why a mans (or womans) sexuality can block them from protecting our country.
What do you think
Newsflash,
Gays can and do serve in the military.
-
I'm talking about openly serving...But the shower point is a very good one.
-
Originally posted by john9001
if gays get to shower with the heterosexuals, the heterosexuals get to shower with the women. It's only fair.
Ha!
The current system is ok by me. They're around and everyone knows it, but as long as they don't start having parades or kissing each other in formation I don't really care. What I don't know won't hurt me.
Every once in a while a couple of them will get caught in the act, but it's not much of an issue otherwise. They can sneak off to some dark corner and twist each others nipples all they want as long as I don't have to find out about it.
As far as the "we're here, we're queer, deal with it" crowd wearing mascara and running amok thru the PX, I'd have to say no.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
I'm talking about openly serving...But the shower point is a very good one.
Your orriginal post didn't mention openly serving.
But why stop at gays.....why not disabled? lets make special jobs for them in the military as well. WHy discriminate against retards (I think someof the trainees I get are acttually in this catagory)
They could get jobs filling sand bags and such right?
The army is hard up right now. Lets get a 3 strikes and you enlist for drug offenders rule going. The military could traine them and detox them at the same time.
They are people too you know.
And before I get berated for saying I'm bad for comparing gays to mental handicapped or druggies I'm simply saying the argument is mad that they are born that way.....well so are those with addictive personalities and disabilities its about changing the mold to fit the needs of the few.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
I'm talking about openly serving...But the shower point is a very good one.
Why does it have to be open? Why is that an issue?
Do hetero's have anything "out in the open" when it comes to their sexual preference?
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Why does it have to be open? Why is that an issue?
Do hetero's have anything "out in the open" when it comes to their sexual preference?
nope,
Sexual Harrasment is absolutly not tolerated in the military. Talking about your sexual encounters at work is the quickest way to end up at the MEO (Military equal oppertunity)
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
Your orriginal post didn't mention openly serving.
But why stop at gays.....why not disabled? lets make special jobs for them in the military as well. WHy discriminate against retards (I think someof the trainees I get are acttually in this catagory)
They could get jobs filling sand bags and such right?
The army is hard up right now. Lets get a 3 strikes and you enlist for drug offenders rule going. The military could traine them and detox them at the same time.
They are people too you know.
And before I get berated for saying I'm bad for comparing gays to mental handicapped or druggies I'm simply saying the argument is mad that they are born that way.....well so are those with addictive personalities and disabilities its about changing the mold to fit the needs of the few.
Actually I cn agree with all those ideas.
I am sure there are plenty of tedius jobs even a retarded person can do that would free up regular people to do other things.
Im for removing the age limit as well.
Im 45 and I dont see why my body cant stop a bullet any better then that of a 20 year old provided I am willing to put it on the line.
I think its a grand idea to force criminals into military service.
Particularly gangbangers
As well as illegal ailians
-
Originally posted by Donzo
Why does it have to be open? Why is that an issue?
Do hetero's have anything "out in the open" when it comes to their sexual preference?
Maybe i'm not portraying my thoughts correctly...I don't think there is any room for homos or heterosexuals to be sexual in the military, or at any job for that matter...You're personal life should never come to work with you, especially in the military. But if someone in the military finds out about that personal life, you risk being discharged. I just don't think thats right. I dunno. If I get the commission I am applying for, I really don't think I would care about the sexual preferences of the guy to the right of me, as long as he does the right thing and keep his sexual desires at home. What matters to me is his or her leadership abilities, dependability (sp), and how they would react when bullets start flying, and I don't think homosexuality compromises any of those characteristicstststtststssss .
And gun, I think you're waaaaaaaaay off with the comparison of homosexuals and mental/physical retardations....
-
Gunslinger - How does the whole "jail time, or Marine Corps" work? Have you experienced many of these guys coming through your BT? Whats your thoughts
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Maybe i'm not portraying my thoughts correctly...I don't think there is any room for homos or heterosexuals to be sexual in the military, or at any job for that matter...You're personal life should never come to work with you, especially in the military. But if someone in the military finds out about that personal life, you risk being discharged. I just don't think thats right. I dunno. If I get the commission I am applying for, I really don't think I would care about the sexual preferences of the guy to the right of me, as long as he does the right thing and keep his sexual desires at home. What matters to me is his or her leadership abilities, dependability (sp), and how they would react when bullets start flying, and I don't think homosexuality compromises any of those characteristicstststtststssss .
Ok, what you described above is NOT "serving openly".
-
It sure is serving openly. To be able to serve without the threat of losing your job because of sexual preference is open to me
-
I dont mind at all. If I experience gays in my future career I hope it is on good terms. As long as I dont know about it Im fine with it. And its their right to not tell everyone about it.
-
Who cares if you know he is gay? If he comes to work and acts as a sailor, soldier, airman or marine should, why does it matter that on the couch at home waiting for him is another man? The whole thing comes down to profesionalism (sp)...Profesionalism that should apply to armed service members of either sexual preferences. If a gay or a heterosexual break those professional standards then they should be punished without question, but if they are doing there job correctly, who cares about who they go to bed with.
You guys are essentially saying that if you were in the fight for your life, and a gay man volunteered to fight alongside you, risking it all, to preserve what you both believe in, you would turn him away?
-
Nevermind.
-
Personally, no problem with it. Secure in my promiscuous hetero pursuits and I'm not a homophobe.
Reality is: they are in the military now, just not openly. Some you can tell, many not. Right up there with the policy of women not serving in combat.... but it happens every day "in-country". Policy and reality not on the same page. One of the better .50 cal gunners in my battalion for convoy escorts was a little gal not much bigger than the Ma Duce she gunned.
History is: There will be disruption. Same as when women (skirts, ladies, girls) gained greater roles in the military, and African Americans (Blacks, People of Color, whatever is in vogue) were added to the general ranks from a segregated military. There will be tensions. There will be incidents. The forces will adjust.
** during active military operations may not be best time to make this change when some recruitment numbers are hurting among combat MOS's**
Military legal argument often is that sodomy is against the UCMJ, but the UCMJ are, in actuality, federal laws regarding military personnel, and the Supream Court struck down the Sodomy Laws across the country, IIRC..... So the UCMJ laws regarding sodomy are against Federal Law, if I interpret this correctly (I'm not JAG).
And to hear many of the heterosexual military personnel as they regale you with their tales of sexual exploits, a large number of them are in violation of the UCMJ anyways (see above, and look up the definition). Such a thing as upholding the law on an equal basis to everyone, right? But the UCMJ is not prosecuted evenly when it comes to this.
What is really funny is that some of the most homophobic male soldiers I've known that get really up in arms about the subject of gay males in uniform, have absolutely no problem with gay females around them.... other than wanting to watch.
And it's not like any new regs would be needed. Current sexual harrassment regs and the appropriate standards in behavior as a soldier would cover any situation that comes up.
Actually, I think this is far more a political issue than it would be among the fighting soldiers. It's yet another platform for the Religeous Reich.... er... Right.
-
I agree ted, but if you let the extremist left resolve the issue, the gays would be wearing lipstick, mascara and rainbow uniforms lol
-
Originally posted by cav58d
I agree ted, but if you let the extremist left resolve the issue, the gays would be wearing lipstick, mascara and rainbow uniforms lol
Would just come down as "Conduct Unbecoming" --- like I said, just following and enforcing existing regs, sexual harrassment policies, and standards of conduct take care of most of the fearful situations that some people say would come out of a change in policy.
It would be a bigger problem in the halls of the Capitol Building than it would be at Fort Bragg.
Just be another "clique" in the ranks. Not much different than the racial tensions that effect some units to this day. Heck, story goes that years ago there were units in Ft. Carson in which Gang relations were a serious issue..... had to seperate Crips and Bloods into seperate Companies! And there are still problems with some serving soldiers being "closeted" card carrying members of the KKK and other white supremacists groups.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
For those of you currently serving, or who have served in the past, what is your opinion about gays in the military? Not so long ago I would say there is no place for them, but recently my mind has changed. I say that if an American is willing to take the oath of service, and possibly risk limb and life for this country then he should be able to without being discriminated against because of sexuality. I do not buy into the whole "homosexuals have a much stronger sex drive then heterosexuals". I dont think there is any room for flambouyantly gay homosexuals, nor do I think there is any room for heterosexuals, who use the military as a tool to advance their sex life. If a homosexual was openly trying to pursue a relationship with a male soldier, or any heterosexual aggressively trying to pursue a sexual relationship with a female soldier, then I think they should be punished accordingly, but I just dont get why a mans (or womans) sexuality can block them from protecting our country.
What do you think
Not always.
Lets skip all the PC niceties and just admit that most military / police (quasi-military) guys are hard core alphas who bond best with two things; females and like alphas. Once you get someone who doesn't bond well with others, it can be a problem.
We had an openly gay male officer at the Dept and for whatever reasons you want to assign; homophobic, haters blah blah he just didn't feel right around us, us with him especially in the locker room.. the gallows humor of a police locker room is enough to totally offend anyone not in the "gang", it always seemed like we were offending him, or he'd report us for sexual harassment.
He ended up dressing before he got to work, that allievated the locker room uneasiness and from there was did a professional job as a cop and there was not problem with his lifestyle. However some guys just hated him, period, always paranoid he was checking em out.
Some guys made a huge issue of searching people; male cops can touch females almost anywhere using the knife of the hand, or a flashlight over the clothing... idea being you cant "cop a feel" (heh) with the edge of a hand.. so is it ok for a male homosexual to palm search other men? and should a citizen be told or given the option to not allow a gay man to search them? These never got resolved, but some guys just wouldn't let it go.
We also had a gay (well bi) female officer that could school 9 of of 10 dudes in a fight, and was fairly hot... we had no problems with her at all, she was good police. She was a bigger distraction off duty, she partied with us and often brought one of her freaky BI friends... it got real weird sometimes. You typical egomaniac cop thinks he'll be the one to finally pork her straight and jumped at the chance of being sandwiched between the two... so there was some drama, but it was off duty soap opera crap.
The deciding factor, IMO, is the person, their professionalism... not the fact they are gay. But its not always going to be a nice "lets all love each other" fit eathier, you cannot force political correctness on anyone in the life or death business. When your job includes bullets, death and stuff, theres an elevated level of game face all the time, and you only want the most solid team possible watching your back.. guys do not like the idea 1 persons sexual preference can fracture that team... and when it does, well it gets ugly.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
The deciding factor, IMO, is the person, their professionalism... not the fact they are gay. But its not always going to be a nice "lets all love each other" fit eathier, you cannot force political correctness on anyone in the life or death business. When your job includes bullets, death and stuff, theres an elevated level of game face all the time, and you only want the most solid team possible watching your back.. guys do not like the idea 1 persons sexual preference can fracture that team... and when it does, well it gets ugly.
Shouldn't the spotlight be on the team member(s) who didn't like the "persons sexual preference" then?
Certainly in a perfect world, professionalism and discipline should run both ways...I would think individual unit members who decide who they want to serve with is a more fracturous issue.
I do think the deciding factor should be if the member of a unit can conduct himself/herself in a professional manner whether they are gay or not.
Tronsky
-
Personally I believe they are mentally ill so handing them a gun doesn't make much sense.
-
Originally posted by Mightytboy
Personally I believe they are mentally ill so handing them a gun doesn't make much sense.
Actually its probably best discribed in most as a born in abnormality. Like a 6th toe on a foot.
Not particlarly harmful.
Just not the norm
-
while it is true that some men are suspiciously way too homophobe....
the current way of dealing with gays in the military is the only realistic one.
If you want to give everyone their own room and bathroom and the privacy of the workplace it may be different. Why not let the women shower with the men? It is not homophobe to not want to share beds and showers with a homo nor is it homophobe to not want to camp out with em.
It is not unreasonable to think that homosexual men will have blood that will kill you. this is a disadvantage in combat situation.
It is not homophobe or even hypocritical to be disgusted when seeing two males together but not when watching lesbians. the human is an empathetic creature. A heterosexual male does not want to put himself in certain situations... No one for instance wants to watch someone making out with their mother or grandmother say.
I also love it when someone allways brings up that they know some woman that can whup 9 out of ten men or whatever... if she has done so then the 9 she whuped were not really men. No... women aren't like starbuck on batlestar galactica.... they can't fight. Men have an overwhelming advantage in a fight. It is common for a man to hold back tho and get hurt. The warrior princess is probly one of our best urban myths at this point... fueled by whacked out sex drives and the media no doubt.
If it were true...you wouldn't see it in action movies...you would see it in ultimate fight matches and men vs women boxing... oh wait...you do once in a while... I recall "the worlds fitest woman" getting beat to a pulp by an aged, fat, alcholic and slow joey buta****o who was out of breath trying to get through the ropes into the ring...
lazs
-
Gay folks in the military??
Sure, why not. No reason to belive they are worse soldiers or have more medical conditions than your average joe.
-
As long as its not an "American Idol" contestant I dont care. They have issues with some chemicals or electrical pulses not firing correctly! :huh
-
nelson... are you saying the incidence of HIV/aids in the US is the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals?
lazs
-
Originally posted by cav58d
Gunslinger - How does the whole "jail time, or Marine Corps" work? Have you experienced many of these guys coming through your BT? Whats your thoughts
We actually have a procedure in the USAF BMT for this specifically in the manual. There's also a video that we have to show them in the first week on the DOD policy on "Don't ask Don't Tell".
Basically it's this:
If a trainee say's he/she is gay I personally first react that they want to go home and they want to say anything to get there. I try and convince them to stay and tell them that the quickest way out is to actually graduate BMT. WHen there flight graduates they will still be here in a holding squadron trying to get seperation orders.
More serious admissions get reffered to our operations officer who has a reg that tells him how to react to specific situations.
Admissions of homosexuality alone are not grounds for seperation. Admissions of actual homosexual acts after being made aware of their rights are in fact grounds for administrative actions.
Basically somone can be gay but as long as that aspect of their life is kept personal and not shared they are free and clear to serve. Once you cross the boundry of actually admitting to homosexual acts it's a different story.
Keep in mind there are all sorts of checks and balences in play here that prevent a good troop from leaving the military, and the troop gets referred to all sorts of different agencys before any type of adminstrative actions are performed.
Each time they are counsled by these agencies they are made aware of their rights to keep their private lifes private and that if they don't wish to talk about it the process ends right then and there.
IMHO and based on my experience 9 times out of 10 an admin sep from the military for homosexuality is because the person doesn't want to be there any more.
as far as "jail time or the military" that no longer exists in any service (other than the Army) most service meet or come close to their recruiting goals that they don't have to hire criminals and usually out right refuse anyone who had a judge tell they they'd get off parole early if they enlisted.
I had a fellow "hat" get in trouble because one of his trainees wanted to go home and told his instructor that he was gay. This instructor proceeded to undo his belt and unbutton his pants and say "prove it". The kid then say he wasn't gay after all but got the instructor in trouble for "mal-training"
-
Originally posted by Mightytboy
Personally I believe they are mentally ill so handing them a gun doesn't make much sense.
Yes, but your belief's a based on squat. I doubt you've ever taken a course on abnormal psychology let alone got degree or done any research on the subject.
But guess what, these guys have.
"Is Homosexuality a Mental Illness or Emotional Problem?
No. Psychologists, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals agree that homosexuality is not an illness, mental disorder or an emotional problem. Over 35 years of objective, well-designed scientific research has shown that homosexuality, in and itself,is not associated with mental disorders or emotional or social problems. Homosexuality was once thought to be a mental illness because mental health professionals and society had biased information. In the past the studies of gay, lesbian and bisexual people involved only those in therapy, thus biasing the resulting conclusions. When researchers examined data about these people who were not in therapy, the idea that homosexuality was a mental illness was quickly found to be untrue.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association confirmed the importance of the new, better designed research and removed homosexuality from the official manual that lists mental and emotional disorders. Two years later, the American Psychological Association passed a resolution supporting the removal. For more than 25 years, both associations have urged all mental health professionals to help dispel the stigma of mental illness that some people still associate with homosexual orientation."
http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html#mentalillness
-
Sorry but I dont think the military is the place for them.
-
There are already many gays serving in the military.
I see absolutely no reason to keep them from serving openly.
-
Originally posted by cav58d
I agree ted, but if you let the extremist left resolve the issue, the gays would be wearing lipstick, mascara and rainbow uniforms lol
Yanno something though.
They may just be on to something with that idea.
The enemy would laugh themselve to death LMAO
-
Originally posted by Sandman
There are already many gays serving in the military.
I see absolutely no reason to keep them from serving openly.
I agree completely.
thats why I said to have em at point during recon missions.
Cant get much more open then that :D
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Gay folks in the military??
Sure, why not. No reason to belive they are worse soldiers or have more medical conditions than your average joe.
I would like people who say its a mental illness to find me FACTUAL details stating why exactly a gay persons brain is "defective" or something like that compared to a hetero's brain. I know of a few people that are gay and they are fine. there are hetero people who are fine and there are also the ones who go out and murder people because of mental problems with little voices telling them to do things.
The brain is a complex thing...
-
Originally posted by Billy Joe Bob
I would like people who say its a mental illness to find me FACTUAL details stating why exactly a gay persons brain is "defective" or something like that compared to a hetero's brain. I know of a few people that are gay and they are fine. there are hetero people who are fine and there are also the ones who go out and murder people because of mental problems with little voices telling them to do things.
The brain is a complex thing...
As I said earlier. and I was perfectly serious. In the majority of cases
Its probably best discribed as more of an abnormality.
Like a 6th toe.
Not particularly harmful Nor is there anything particularly wrong with it other then its different.
But with only something like 4% of the population being gay.
Its definately not the norm.
Gay,Bi, Whatever.
Not really an issue with me
Two women are even less of an issue :D
-
Who is better :
the homosexual serving his country
or
the heterosexual republibot starting meaningless posts in the AH O'club ?
-
as far as I'm concerned, homos are good in a police department for the wider range of ability it provides - undercover officers on our studmuffin detail in the parks were routinely excoriated as "nazis" until a homo cop was transfered into the unit and wired up for the arrests that result in charges like exposure of sexual organs, battery, and lewd and lascivious conduct for public bj's and the like. the officers are still excoriated, esp in "cruising guides", but there is now a certain added credibility to the studmuffin detail and a continued high rate of successful prosecutions resulting in a far better quality of life for users of the parks who complain about public sexuality.
in the m ilitary, I don't have any problem with homos that conduct themselves according to the military code. I have always been content to allow the military to handle the homo issue as they see fit. I have the utmost respect for our military in that regard - it seems that they are very advanced when it comes to dealing with social issues.
-
sandie... if it is another sex then it should be treated as such. My preference is for women and for some reason they don't let me bunk with the women or shower with them or even use the womens bathrooms... they don't allow me to be a girlscout leader or any of a number of sexualy discriminatory things. If I am sent to jail I would prefer to spend it in a womans prison but... they discriminate against me..
soo... sexual orientation is used all the time to discriminate.. you would not want a homosexual male to be the scout leader taking your son on a campout for instance. Does that make you biggoted or wrong? of course not.
We have every right... duty even.. to discriminate based on sexual preference.
lazas
-
Just don't let them design their own uniforms:
(http://hallbuzz.com/images/unlinked/gay_cruise.jpg)
-
doesn't matter to me
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
Shouldn't the spotlight be on the team member(s) who didn't like the "persons sexual preference" then?
Certainly in a perfect world, professionalism and discipline should run both ways...I would think individual unit members who decide who they want to serve with is a more fracturous issue.
Tronsky
In a perfect world with perfect people, sure, but police depts differ greatly from the military in that we were all subject to extensive psychological testing / profiling... depts want personalities to fit the city (fast cities want aggressive ofcrs, sleepy towns like less aggressive). We had 9 hard core aggressive alpha males on my shift, we talked and joked about drinking, pune tang conquests, taking down violent felons... we partied, fought, trained and hung out together.. we were a kick bellybutton unit. And then there was the 1 who just isn't on the same page, doesn't relate, hang out... the odd man out. The reality is that odd man isnt trusted, and in that business where ANY and EVERY call you go on could end your career / life.. you dont want anyone around you cant trust.
Once you get someone who falls outside the psychological parameters of everyone else, should the "focus" be on the majority that bond well, or the few who dont? One guy can literally fracture unit cohesiveness, make everyone else uneasy / suspicious... and in the life or death business its just not tolerated well... it just is what it is and there is probably no definitive answer as to "why" or "how can it be fixed"
Gay females though, are openly accepted by the guys... chalk it up to human behavior I guess, something policies wont ever change.
-
Good points all...
I still think its a shame that anyone who would stand up and want to serve their country, especially when plenty of others won't - are thought to be unreliable because of something so trivial...
Tronsky
-
I don't think I said anything about unreliable.
lazs
-
I'm more concerned about greys in the military.
(http://www.mactonnies.com/trumansom.jpg)
-
As a ex marine i have no problem with gays in the military,just put them all in the airforces single seat fighters :noid
-
Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Actually I cn agree with all those ideas.
I am sure there are plenty of tedius jobs even a retarded person can do that would free up regular people to do other things.
Im for removing the age limit as well.
Im 45 and I dont see why my body cant stop a bullet any better then that of a 20 year old provided I am willing to put it on the line.
I think its a grand idea to force criminals into military service.
Particularly gangbangers
As well as illegal ailians
I'm 46 now, in fairly good shape, and one MAJOR thing that I see kids have all over me is being able to function on low sleep--When I was a kid, I could go to school from 8-2, work from 4-midnight, hit the bars till 3...do that all week long. NOOWWWW...If I launch a 40 minute jug mission at 11:00pm...I'm gonna feel like watermelon all day when alarm goes off at 6:cry
-
Im far to far from perfect to be telling anyone else how to live...As long as it doesnt become a problem to me,I dont see the issue.Gays dont bother me...Male or Female.
-
But but... isn't the Navy considered a part of the military?
-
i hope the pentagon doesn't let mooks drive SAC B-52s
-
If I was to categorize homos I saw around here, there are two types: a girlish and regular male. The first type is just like a girl due to extreme physical and mental weakness. The other type is normal male with odd sexual preference. I have no problem with second type being in military. The first one has no place in military. IMHO
-
no problem with gays as long as they don't bother me or my family or march and say look at me look at me.