Gays in Military

[Simon Darkshade]

"I wish that America could learn something from many European countries, who have really turned sexuality (Not just homosexualism) into a normal thing. Which in reality is WHAT IT IS."

True, one cannot but agree.

I can see where you are coming from with your other point, but not every gay male is openly gay, and I do believe that making a big open issue of it is rather pointless. If no one knows, then there are no problems in terms of the one you raised.

 

[Sodapop]

Yeah sure, I wonder how gays can be less effective at defending their country than a normal heterosexual man. In fact, they could be even better (or worse). They are human, and except the fact they don't have the same kind of sexual relationship, they are capable of the same great (and worst) things we are all doing.

 

[Flatlander Fox]

I failed to mention that I am a firm believer in the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.

If you don't tell anyone, it isn't a problem. When you do tell, it CAN become an issue, which is dangerous not only for the person, but for unit cohesion.

There is no doubt that a gay person, or a straight person is equally qualified to defend his or her country.

It is absolute crap if anyone says otherwise.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

I do agree, Flatlander. If someone keeps their inclination, whatever it is, quiet and private, then problems with morale etc do not occur.

"Don't ask, don't tell" is a much maligned policy that seems to me to be the most appropriate.

Unless the soldier in question is accidently detected by a secret NSA gaydar that is being tested to see if there is any military use

 

[VoodooAce]

I served with a few guys that, well, let's just say they dressed a lot snazzier than I did.

We all knew. The guys from Arkansas got more sh!t for being from Arkansas than gays did for being gay.

Simple as that. I just don't by into the 'its for their own good' philosophy.

Now, flambouancy may in fact be an issue. I mean, if you're flaming, you may have some trouble.

But it should be up to them if they want to deal with it. If a soldier is not professional enough to just do his job, straight or gay, then its their fault if their life expectancy drops lilke a lead weight once the shooting begins. If some guy is too worried about the man in the foxhole next to him (which he won't be) when the shooting starts I don't want HIM in the foxhole with ME.

 

[Flatlander Fox]

Some people can't let things like that go...

I cannot say enough that I serve with a group of outstanding professionals, from top to bottom.

But people are people, and it cannot be said enough that old habits, and old hatreds die hard...

Granted, I have served with a guy who was as close to openly gay as you can get. He was not harrassed in any way at all.

But there were several people in my organization who were very critical of this individual. But not being in any position to do anything about it, they mostly leered and made fools of themselves.
And we would defend our friend, and therefore it was a distraction.
It cannot be helped.

 

[DinoDoc]

I think that we should form special units of soldiers formed exclusively of homosexuals like they did in Ancient Greece. We could even name the units "Sacred Bands" like they used to.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Well, it didn't seem to affect the fighting prowess of the Spartans.

 

[Flatlander Fox]

I think watching your big strong lover get hacked to pieces by crazed barbarians would be quite motivational...

Or maybe not .

 

[Padma]

Having retired from a 20+ year career in the US Armed Forces, I do understand where they are coming from. I don't necessarily agree, but I do understand. They have a serious fear of these people, and a fear of what letting them in will do to 'unit cohesion'.

You've got to remember that most of the current crop of leaders are from a generation that was taught that this was a 'sin'; that such people are warped; that they shouldn't be allowed to associate with 'normal' people. Combat units get much of their strength from male bonding. These guys are afraid of what might happen if you throw the possibility of sex into what has ben glorified for centuries as major example of platonic love.

Back in the '70s I was stationed in Germany in a unit that had several very openly (for the time) gay members. One was my roommate for almost two years. We got along fine. He knew he could flame as much as he dared in my presence, and I wouldn't care. (What was funny was when I left to go home to visit my wife during the birth of our daughter: "you mean you're not... but we thought...."

Back on topic, Flatlander is right. While a gay person can serve honorably, if he lets his orientation be known, he could become dead meat.

 

[DinoDoc]

From what I gather, Fox, the theory was that you would fight harder to protect your big strong lover from being hacked to pieces by crazed barbarians, ie you'd fight with extra vigor.

 

[Flatlander Fox]

Why yes Dino, that's what I meant about those Spartans!!!

Padma, nice to see another Nebraskan on the board...

Far too few of us übermenschen here on this forum.

 

[MrPresident]

I think if the navy can be gay then so should the army and the air force.

 

[Ptolemy]

It would be ok with me if they have their own bathrooms!
I don't think I would like a gay to stare at me (and my thing):aargh3:

 

[Simon Darkshade]

"I don't think I would like a gay to stare at me (and my thing)"

Why do you automatically presume that they would stare, or want to?
Would you be alright if it was a straight guy sharing your bathroom and copping an eyeful at every opportunity.
This is one of the misnomers I was talking about - the belief that gays are after every single man out there, with evil intent.

 

[Jimcat]

There already ARE gays in the military, and always have been.

I believe that, like any other profession, the military should judge them on how well they perform their duties, and not on irrelevant details like sexual orientation.

A gay man who makes passes at all the soldiers around him is not going to be good for the unit, and should be disciplined or expelled. A man who performs all his duties well, sets a good example to his peers, and displays good leadership is a credit to the unit, and should be promoted or rewarded. If he happens to be gay, that shouldn't make a difference.

Given that, at least in the US, the military is an all volunteer force, I think that most of the people are in there because they want to be. For gays to join the military, knowing of the prejudices against them, I think that most of them must REALLY want to be there. I'd think that people like that would be more likely to overachieve to "prove themselves", and this might even ultimately benefit the organization.

 

[MrPresident]

Why do you automatically presume that they would stare, or want to?

Because we (men) have only the experience of being a man. If there is a naked woman in front of a straight man then the man will look. So straight man apply this to gay man. I am not saying it is true but there is a logic behind it. Personally I wouldn't mind a man staring as long as he didn't say something like:
"Where is the rest of it?"

 

[FearlessLeader2]

I'm against gays in the military. Then again, I'm just plain against them being ANYWHERE. Go ahead, call me a bigot. At least I'm an honest bigot.

Homosexuality is a choice, not a disease, and it is all about self-gratification. It's one of those things that God doesn't want us to do, and they choose to do it anyway. Fine. That's between them and God. But if they have to do it, can't they at least have the decency to do it at home, and not expose other people to it?

I say Boo. Loudly and in public. Booo! Hisss! Booo!

It's a matter of principles, and being willing to stand up for them.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

OK, FL2, you are what you say you are. And being honest to yourself is what counts. We disagree on this matter, and I continue to be unable to find any logic or basis in fact for the argument.
As in our other discussions on the matter, we disagree vehmently on your assertion that homosexuality is all about self gratification. I contend that it is not, and challenge anyone to prove that it is.
But, I know neither of us will give ground, being firmly convinced of our points of view, so we can just avoid the argument and agree to disagree on this matter.

And would someone chuck out that strange portly guy at the back booing and hissing at something?

 

[Adebisi]

edit