These Republicans should be chased out of Office

Takeda Shingen · 12-19-10, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

That is not what DADT said.DADT realized the impact of an openly gay member could have on a unit.Esp those living in close quarters, perhaps having to shower together etc.Which is a very real concern.Much easier for them to just not tell because they wont be asked.

Replace 'gay' with 'black' and you may see why it was a problem.

Platapus · 12-19-10, 06:00 PM

I can only offer one personal data point so it is anecdotal, but I don't think my experiences were that unusual.

When I was in Korea '88/'89, my roommate was a homosexual. We lived in a 10x10 cell... uh dorm room and shared a bathroom with the next cell.

No issues. No concerns. Everyone respected one each other.

One of the misconceptions that many heterosexuals have is that homosexual men are sexually attracted to every other man. According to my roommate, that simply is not true. One of the other myths is that homosexual men have no control over their sexual actions. That is also not true. Many homosexual men have no sexual interest in heterosexual men. And no, most homosexual men are not interested in "converting" heterosexual men. Some may, but I doubt many.

Anyway, I am one data point where rooming/crapping/showering/etc with a homosexual man caused no problems. I never worried that he would sneak up on me while I was sleeping, nor did I ever worry about him seeing me naked. It simply was not a problem.

antikristuseke · 12-19-10, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

I can only offer one personal data point so it is anecdotal, but I don't think my experiences were that unusual.

When I was in Korea '88/'89, my roommate was a homosexual. We lived in a 10x10 cell... uh dorm room and shared a bathroom with the next cell.

No issues. No concerns. Everyone respected one each other.

One of the misconceptions that many heterosexuals have is that homosexual men are sexually attracted to every other man. According to my roommate, that simply is not true. One of the other myths is that homosexual men have no control over their sexual actions. That is also not true. Many homosexual men have no sexual interest in heterosexual men. And no, most homosexual men are not interested in "converting" heterosexual men. Some may, but I doubt many.

Anyway, I am one data point where rooming/crapping/showering/etc with a homosexual man caused no problems. I never worried that he would sneak up on me while I was sleeping, nor did I ever worry about him seeing me naked. It simply was not a problem.

We had a couple of homosexuals in my platoon while doing my national service, no issues came up. There were allso some women from the Communication batallion finishing their com specialization with the staff company who recon shared a barracs with, they bunked in the same room with the men and went to the sauna with us all, there was nudity and that also caused no issues. As long as there is mutual respect between people serving sexuality should never become an issue.

Bubblehead1980 · 12-19-10, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

I can only offer one personal data point so it is anecdotal, but I don't think my experiences were that unusual.

When I was in Korea '88/'89, my roommate was a homosexual. We lived in a 10x10 cell... uh dorm room and shared a bathroom with the next cell.

No issues. No concerns. Everyone respected one each other.

One of the misconceptions that many heterosexuals have is that homosexual men are sexually attracted to every other man. According to my roommate, that simply is not true. One of the other myths is that homosexual men have no control over their sexual actions. That is also not true. Many homosexual men have no sexual interest in heterosexual men. And no, most homosexual men are not interested in "converting" heterosexual men. Some may, but I doubt many.

Anyway, I am one data point where rooming/crapping/showering/etc with a homosexual man caused no problems. I never worried that he would sneak up on me while I was sleeping, nor did I ever worry about him seeing me naked. It simply was not a problem.

I get that, I know some gay guys, even call a few friend.I actually know an openly gay man who thinks DADT is a good idea.I've read a few blogs also where openly gay men say they are in favor of it.I can understand if a civillian company demands gays live in the closet etc, but that is far different from the issue of being openly gay in the military.

I think about the locker room in high school or in college at my my frat house.We lived in close quarters, many openly walked around nude from time to time if in transit from shower to their room etc.No one thought anything of it because as far as we knew, no one in the house was gay.Now had someone been openly gay, it would be different.Sorry, its different if you know the guy prefers the male form, even if he's not into you.Sort of like a guy being in the girls locker room kind of thing.Just basic dynamics.Now, I get your story about your roommate, perhaps it was different for you.However, I have known a lot of military growing up where I did, Officers and Enlisted and still know many.Pretty much all share the same tune, they'd rather not know if the guy in the barracks or shower is gay, because you feel different.

Another dynamic also, what new regs will accompany this that will in turn hurt morale? For example, sailors on a ship when off watch or Marines in the barracks just hanging out, talking, chewing the fat etc Lots of friendly insults get thrown around, fag, homo, ass clown etc are some of them.Will they suddenly due to the PC police not be able to say so if they know an openly gay man is in the room? Will he now be able to complain since DADT is gone? Will a good Marine or Sailor get into trouble for simple smack talking? This will affect morale.Senators and Congressman, esp on the Left side do not understand or just do not care about this dynamic.Obama has no clue because he has no backround related to military, simply a community organizer

Why risk affecting morale when morale in the armed forces is already kind of low.Why not just continue the sensible policy of DADT.

Takeda Shingen · 12-19-10, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Another dynamic also, what new regs will accompany this that will in turn hurt morale? For example, sailors on a ship when off watch or Marines in the barracks just hanging out, talking, chewing the fat etc Lots of friendly insults get thrown around, fag, homo, ass clown etc are some of them.Will they suddenly due to the PC police not be able to say so if they know an openly gay man is in the room? Will he now be able to complain since DADT is gone? Will a good Marine or Sailor get into trouble for simple smack talking? This will affect morale.

Said the same thing about allowing women.

Quote:

I do not feel sorry for those dimissed, they knew the policy when they joined.A career in the military is not a right, you abide by their rules, don't expect them to change for you.

And just how many good marines went home because of that law? It cuts both ways. You can't say that you support dismissal over regulations regarding Don't Ask, Don't Tell and then oppose it when it comes to regulations regarding speech. That's not an opinion, that's cherry picking the rules.

razark · 12-19-10, 06:37 PM

Bubblehead1980, what countries are you aware of that allow openly gay service members, and what issues have been seen in those militaries?

Platapus · 12-19-10, 06:38 PM

As I posted in the other thread, if the military actually followed DADT, I would not have a problem with it. Unfortunately, the military did not follow DADT and considered third party reporting as self-reporting. It was not the way DADT was supposed to work.

Since the military, or at least a large portion, choose not to follow either the letter or the spirit of DADT, I can not consider it a successful program.

12-19-10, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Sorry, its different if you know the guy prefers the male form, even if he's not into you.

So Bubble it looks like your problem with this is basicly just your own hang ups and insecurities.

Bubblehead1980 · 12-19-10, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So Bubble it looks like your problem with this is basicly just your own hang ups and insecurities.

lol wow tribes, that is a low blow. You love to get personal eh? You sir are a troll. I will not put you on ignore though, even trolls should get to say their nonsense.

No, not a hang up or insecurity, it's a real concern that I've heard people actually in the military express.I simply related a time I lived in close quarters.I wouldn't have cared that much but saying many would.Bottom line, it's better if they just don't know.

antikristuseke · 12-19-10, 08:21 PM

Those that cant live with it need to grow the **** up, simple as. It will not happen overnight, but if you keep forcibly closeting the gays the problem will never resolve.

12-19-10, 08:25 PM

Quote:

lol wow tribes, that is a low blow. You love to get personl eh?

It was the only possible deduction from what you wrote,
After all it does seem you have a real hang up over poofs.

Quote:

Bottom line, it's better if they just don't know.

And its funny that you think wilful ignorance would somehow make it better.

Quote:

^^ Hear hear!

Yep hear hear to Firewall, well said.

krashkart · 12-19-10, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Bottom line, it's better if they just don't know.

How are they supposed to learn anything if they're protected from it? How is society supposed to learn if it doesn't experience these kinds of growing pains? I understand where you're coming from, but nothing gets solved if people continue to deny the reality of the world we live in.

Change is a tenacious beast -- it's always there, and there is always somebody who is afraid of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

Those that cant live with it need to grow the **** up, simple as. It will not happen overnight, but if you keep forcibly closeting the gays the problem will never resolve.

Absolutely.

Bubblehead1980 · 12-19-10, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Replace 'gay' with 'black' and you may see why it was a problem.

That is apples and oranges.Race and sexual preference are two different things, sorry.Segregation based on race was just wrong, segregation based on homosexuality is wrong but that is not what DADT did.DADT simply said...we won't ask, you won't tell, no problem.They lively openly gay in the military, then it became a problem.Nothing wrong with the law and we will find it's repeal was a mistake and similar law will hopefully be put in place someday, we shall see.

Takeda Shingen · 12-19-10, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

That is apples and oranges.Race and sexual preference are two different things, sorry.Segregation based on race was just wrong, segregation based on homosexuality is wrong but that is not what DADT did.DADT simply said...we won't ask, you won't tell, no problem.They lively openly gay in the military, then it became a problem.Nothing wrong with the law and we will find it's repeal was a mistake and similar law will hopefully be put in place someday, we shall see.

No, they had to essentially live in fear of being exposed. In short, it was a de-facto ban on homosexuals in the military, as evidenced by the 13,000+ dismissals over the matter. And the assertion that having homosexual members in a unit will cause disruption was the very same argument used against racial intergration. This is a large step forward for both the military and the country.

Bubblehead1980 · 12-19-10, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

No, they had to essentially live in fear of being exposed. In short, it was a de-facto ban on homosexuals in the military, as evidenced by the 13,000+ dismissals over the matter. And the assertion that having homosexual members in a unit will cause disruption was the very same argument used against racial intergration. This is a large step forward for both the military and the country.

I do not feel sorry for those dimissed, they knew the policy when they joined.A career in the military is not a right, you abide by their rules, don't expect them to change for you.

Well segregation based on a race was just wrong, no exceptions.The disruption argument was just racists trying to fend off intergration.This is a whole different issue and it's rather dishonest to try and group in the civil rights struggle for blacks with gays in the military.Now, if this was say Bank of America or something saying you can't be openly gay, I would be opposed.Military is as I have said, a whole different ballgame.

12-19-10, 06:00 PM	#2
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,379 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	I can only offer one personal data point so it is anecdotal, but I don't think my experiences were that unusual. When I was in Korea '88/'89, my roommate was a homosexual. We lived in a 10x10 cell... uh dorm room and shared a bathroom with the next cell. No issues. No concerns. Everyone respected one each other. One of the misconceptions that many heterosexuals have is that homosexual men are sexually attracted to every other man. According to my roommate, that simply is not true. One of the other myths is that homosexual men have no control over their sexual actions. That is also not true. Many homosexual men have no sexual interest in heterosexual men. And no, most homosexual men are not interested in "converting" heterosexual men. Some may, but I doubt many. Anyway, I am one data point where rooming/crapping/showering/etc with a homosexual man caused no problems. I never worried that he would sneak up on me while I was sleeping, nor did I ever worry about him seeing me naked. It simply was not a problem. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

12-19-10, 06:37 PM	#6
razark Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 2,731 Downloads: 393 Uploads: 12	Bubblehead1980, what countries are you aware of that allow openly gay service members, and what issues have been seen in those militaries? __________________ "Never ask a World War II history buff for a 'final solution' to your problem!"

12-19-10, 06:38 PM	#7
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,379 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	As I posted in the other thread, if the military actually followed DADT, I would not have a problem with it. Unfortunately, the military did not follow DADT and considered third party reporting as self-reporting. It was not the way DADT was supposed to work. Since the military, or at least a large portion, choose not to follow either the letter or the spirit of DADT, I can not consider it a successful program. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

12-19-10, 08:21 PM	#10
antikristuseke Silent Hunter Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Estland Posts: 4,330 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	Those that cant live with it need to grow the **** up, simple as. It will not happen overnight, but if you keep forcibly closeting the gays the problem will never resolve.