Search
Not Logged In
0
Your Username:
Your Password:

[ sign up | recover ]

Discussion Forums » In The News
Page:  1  2 
DADT repealed
0 likes [|reply]
18 Dec 2010, 20:59
Chris
Post Count: 1938
Get ready for hot, gay sex distracting soldiers in the battlefield, ladies and gentlemen.

But seriously. Congress had to vote to give fellow human beings some basic equality.

At least it's a step in the right direction.
0 likes [|reply]
20 Dec 2010, 03:37
Greta Garbage
Bloop Community Organizer
Post Count: 309
But hot, hetero sex wasn't distracting the soldiers? Just gay sex? I am glad we are finally heading in the right direction.
0 likes [|reply]
20 Dec 2010, 15:38
Lovin'MyLittles
Post Count: 322
I wanted DADT repealed but after a huge long discussion with my Husband and some military members.. I'm not entirely sure it's a good thing.
The problem with soldiers/marines/etc being openly gay is that it is riskier for THEM to be openly gay.. they can be openly lesbian and if they so much as touch a fellow soldier/marine, they can claim it was sexual harrassment.. the problem is also that other members of the service may not be comfortable sharing a shower room (as in basic training where you shower in a GROUP and not privately) or sharing quarters with a homosexual service member. So while repealing DADT may be a great STEP.. it's merely that.. a STEP.. and they still don't have a really good answer for this situation. They can't provide private quarters or private showers in basic training for homosexual members becaue then everyone's going to want to be homosexual so they can have privacy and that isn't what basic training is about..

The whole thing is a mess as far as my opinion goes.
0 likes [|reply]
20 Dec 2010, 20:23
queenbutterfly
Post Count: 425
@Stephanie - I totally agree with you. My father, sister/brother-in-law, and brother are all members or veterans of the USMC, USAF, and Army and all of them share the same fears/discomfort your friends/husband share.

So if we are allowing openly gay service members, than we MUST allow for non-homosexual members to shower privately. Because, HONESTLY, a gay member COULD really be sexually attracted to another member and try something or do something inappropriate during basic, right?

They are NOT looking at the FULL picture as you state. They are merely just taking that first step.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Dec 2010, 05:53
Beautiful Lies
Post Count: 402
@Queenbutterfly: Are you serious about separate showering? Do you really think that homosexuals are not able to control their sexual appetites? That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. If those kind of incidents did not happen before DaDt, then why would they happen now?
0 likes [|reply]
22 Dec 2010, 15:14
queenbutterfly
Post Count: 425
@Beautiful Lies - I'm very serious. I'm stating a fact. And merely more so for males. Straight, male guys do NOT prefer to shower with a homosexual male. Is it fair? No. But these are merely things that one MUST think about when putting something like this in to place.

I'm not insinuating that homosexuals cannot control their urges, I'm saying that if men were allowed to openly show their sexuality than this would cause discomfort for all types of people.

And they would happen now, because we are becoming more open about it. So if we are becoming more open about homosexuality than heterosexual men/women would feel the need/want to express their feelings.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Dec 2010, 16:57
Transit
Post Count: 1096
@ Queenbutterfly, if that is the case, then how come in countries where homosexuals are not barred from the forces these problems do not exist? It would only cause discomfort for homophobic people, fact.
0 likes [|reply]
22 Dec 2010, 18:01
queenbutterfly
Post Count: 425
@ Transit - Homosexuals are not barred from the forces - they are simple barred when they go openly. And the problems do not exist here and would probably exist here in America because we are selfish, stupid, people. And someone would step up and fight against it...simple as that.

I'm not stating I'm for or against this. I'm stating issues I think could "possibly" arise from this.
0 likes [|reply]
23 Dec 2010, 05:49
Chris
Post Count: 1938
@Queenbutterfly: "I'm stating a fact."

Can you show me a source for this fact? Because what I see is baseless speculation based on assumption.
0 likes [|reply]
23 Dec 2010, 17:51
Madeline Rain
Post Count: 151
@ queenbutterfly: If the government, especially the military, had to cater to everyone's "preference" we probably would not have a military. I personally prefer to shower alone; does that mean that if I joined the military they would have to accomodate me? Of course not. If, like you said, straight males do not prefer to shower with homosexual males, then they need to brace themselves, because for what I hear, the military is full of things some people would not necessarily prefer. The issue here is, if a person wants to serve their country, should they hide their sexuality in order not to affect others' preferences? Should the military create separate quarters for heterosexuals and homosexuals? Unless you are of the opinion that all homosexuals are sex crazed maniacs, you should understand that everyone has sexual urges and everyone needs to control them, period. If there is an instance of sexual misconduct, either by a gay or straight member of the military, it should be deal with appropriate disciplnary action.

The gym I go to has all types of people, and sometimes I have to shower and change there. I am sure there are plenty of lesbians, and plenty of gay men in the men's locker room, and my husband has never once complained that he was molested or even looked at by a member of the same sex. I think this country needs to erradicate the mentality that different = bad and scary and instead make strides towards equality for all Americans.

0 likes [|reply]
24 Dec 2010, 00:59
chiaromezzo
Post Count: 19
Actually, no one is required to give two hoots about whether or not straight soldiers are 'comfortable' showering with known or possibly homosexual men. It shouldn't matter, anyway... there's a little thing called professionalism. Also, nothing about the military is at all comfortable. No one cares if you're comfortable when you're camped out in a foxhole in the middle of a desert, and they CERTAINLY don't care whether or not the guy watching their six is gay, or if the woman running their communications systems is a lesbian. NO ONE CARES in life-threatening situations.

Additionally, you barely have enough time to wash your body in boot camp during shower time let alone give a rat's ass if someone is sexually attracted to you.
0 likes [|reply]
18 Dec 2010, 21:08
Kryssy♥Nicole
Post Count: 9
I don't think it was fair that a group of people get to decide something that should have already been in place.

A historic moment. Long overdue and a GREAT step in the right direction. Shame on those who voted no.
0 likes [|reply]
18 Dec 2010, 21:51
Oprah Noodlemantra
Post Count: 300
About damn time.
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 03:08
.Amber.
Post Count: 260
*Cheers!*
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 03:45
Winged Centaur
Post Count: 301
I'm really happy that they finally voted this down, although I was afraid it would never even come to a vote after the Republicans decided they wouldn't vote on anything until the whole tax thing was resolved.
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 06:39
canceroustears
Post Count: 210
Suh-weet!
Long overdue in realizing that homosexual people are also fellow Americans, and should be treated with the same equality and respect as hetrosexuals.
0 likes [|reply]
21 Dec 2010, 01:43
Aubrey;
Post Count: 377
@canceroustears:
realizing that homosexual people are also fellow Americans, and should be treated with the same equality and respect as hetrosexuals
^^^ Agreed! That's exactly what I thought. Now if they just get to work on letting gays and lesbians get married, too!
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 16:29
Sypha Belnades
Post Count: 64
The funny thing is that the USMC (or some other law applying to soldiers, idr) forbids soldiers from engaging in sodomy or sex in any other form besides missionary. Granted, there's no real way to be punished/kicked out over this provided you don't go around blabbing about your sex life to everyone, but soldiers are STILL being restricted in their personal/sexual lives.

Call me a bad progressive, but I really don't care about the repeal. Prior to DADT, the military's policy was basically "if we find out that you're gay, you're gone". We've never had a time when gays could openly serve. So is there going to be new legislation written in, or are we just going to go back to the old way?

I mean, I was never a fan of DADT, but what, exactly, does this repeal change? Not a hell of a lot, from what I can tell.

(I'm also concerned that this may bring in scores of harassment and assault cases against gay servicemen in the military...hell, just look at how things are for women in the military now.)
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 18:17
Chris
Post Count: 1938
@Sypha: Soldiers SHOULD be restricted in their sex lives while on active duty. This is never what any of this about. Homosexuality isn't just about the sex. This is about people having the right to be comfortable in their own skins while doing their jobs, and for the longest time, they weren't allowed to express their identities.

Prior to DADT, the military's policy was basically "if we find out that you're gay, you're gone". We've never had a time when gays could openly serve. So is there going to be new legislation written in, or are we just going to go back to the old way?

I mean, I was never a fan of DADT, but what, exactly, does this repeal change? Not a hell of a lot, from what I can tell.


No, no, no. With the repeal of DADT, gays and lesbians can now openly serve in the military.
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 20:54
Sypha Belnades
Post Count: 64
The sexual activity restrictions apply to active and reserve forces, and in civilian locations. As you state that you believe soldiers should be restricted in their sex lives, I can assume that you're fine with soldiers being told that there is only one acceptable way to make love to their wives/lovers in the privacy of their own homes or in other private civilian residences, and you're fine that this limits gay servicemen more than straight servicemen, as gay men and lesbians are incapable of having PIV sex with the partner of their choosing.

No, no, no. With the repeal of DADT, gays and lesbians can now openly serve in the military.

So they're writing new legislation to allow explicit permission to serve and be openly gay. Alright. I suppose the new question is, does this mean that gays in the military also have the right to be free from harassment? The military (particularly the Air Force) has long been a haven for Christianists who are of course strongly homophobic, and even among the more mainstream lines there's a very strong undercurrent of homophobia. Does this mean outward expressions of homophobia are considered to be harassment, like open statements of racism are? Will it also require that anti-gay campaigning that might otherwise be considered an "expression of religious belief" be restricted? How is the military going to handle these issues, considering it has considerable power to regulate the speech and behavior of its members?

Will we see a rise in reported incidents of homophobic assaults and attacks? If so, what is the military going to do about it? In this case I'd be willing to bet probably nothing, considering that women have been serving in the military for decades and yet almost all women in the military can expect to be sexually harassed during their career, a third can expect to be raped, and the military's common responses to these incidents is to either do half-assed investigations that lead to nothing, give the attackers very lenient punishments, or tell them to keep quiet for the sake of "morale". Officials will probably respond to homophobic assaults by saying that DADT was repealed and that's concession enough. It also doesn't help that gays aren't a protected class under Title VII of the CRA (though I don't know if UCMJ follows those same definitions. also above I misspelled UCMJ as "USMC", in my defense I had little sleep last night).

This isn't the victory for equality that LGBT people and allies are claiming it is; the military's got a hell of a long way to go from here which is why I'm slightly dismissive of this. But I will say that this will bring about some interesting debates, particularly on if we will have a victory for tolerance at the expense of freedoms of socially conservative uniformed Christianists. It's also going to have some effect on society outside of the military -- just look at Truman's order in 1948, and what that eventually led to for the country as a whole.
0 likes [|reply]
19 Dec 2010, 21:08
Chris
Post Count: 1938
Honestly? Yes. You will see a lot of it. But this is no different than the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Yeah, we still saw discrimination, harassment, and flat-out lynchings after the bill was passed, but I'd like to think it's gotten much better since then. Now, I think homosexuals are probably more accepted today than the African Americans were back in the '60s, however I do foresee incidents were homosexuals will be harassed. It's unfortunate, but you know it and I know it, and everybody serving in the military knows it.

However, this is a step in the right direction. This is a major victory because we got congress to vote on a pro-Gay bill, which is going to set the foundations for more pro-gay legislation in the future.
0 likes [|reply]
20 Dec 2010, 15:04
kein mitleid
Post Count: 592
Or one could consult with the Navy, who's been "out of the closet" for quite a while.
0 likes [|reply]
21 Dec 2010, 00:44
♥Mars.Foxx
Post Count: 64
i know everyone knows this, or should any way but just a reminder, not every gay person is a walking sex maniac. they are people. they understand, just like a heterosexual person does, that sex has a time and place. they understand how to be appropriate and as far as i know, it isn't their job to make sure everyone is comfortable. They are taking the same risks heterosexual soldiers are, going through the same training and dealing with the same new issues and emotions of being far from family and under new stresses. they deserve to feel comfortable in their skin. and hiding them selves so others are comfortable and happy isn't how that's done. as for them being at risk for abuse becasue they are open to others about being gay, i think we should leave that for them to decided. they still can keep it a private thing if they want. they don't have to share that part of them if they don't want to. The step here is that we are being equal. i dont know if anyone still cares about the constitution, but if i am correct its unconstitutional to give one group a certain right or freedom, yet restrict another group.
0 likes [|reply]
21 Dec 2010, 14:49
just samma;
Post Count: 204
I'm glad the whole ordeal is over & i'm not even American. It's been a huge on going process for members of the LGBTQ community as well as allies.
As for the claim that now the harassment against the LGBTQ military members will increase, do you think they aren't prepared for that? Do you honestly think that they do not deal with it everyday of their lives?
You learn very quickly that sometimes it is best to keep that part of your identity quite for the sake of your safety.
Just because DATD is repealed doesn't mean that you will see EVERY gay/lesbian member of the military sporting a rainbow flag & attending anti-prop 8 rallies.
The same goes for sexual harassment claims against LGBTQ military members by straight members, it's something that can & does happen in every day life. This type of thing isn't new, or specific to the military.
EVERY member of the LGBTQ deals with homophobia in one form of another EVERY day.
I just do not understand the thinking of "homosexuals are SO different". Just because someone is gay/lesbian doesn't mean they find EVERY person of the same gender attractive & want to sleep with them.
Do you expect the military to also provide separate sleeping and showering quarters for people of different religions. I mean heaven forbid a pagan is sleeping in the same room a christian!
If people are not comfortable with being around, associating or serving with a gay or lesbian military member then it is something they need to work out with themselves.
It's really not our( & by our i mean LGBTQ community members) fault that homophobia is so wide spread, it's not out fault there are still so many close minded & uptight individuals that can't stop themselves from judging, for spreading hate or using jesus as an excuse to be a bigot.
Ask any LGBTQ American you know, all they want is to be treated as equally as everyone else & not as second-class citizens. Is that really so much to ask?
I promise it's not that scary, it has been that way in Canada for years & our skies haven't fallen yet. =P

0 likes [|reply]
21 Dec 2010, 16:14
starsmaycollide
Post Count: 408
Samma makes a good point that other countries have people openly serve...where are their major problems? oh wait....they're fine, aren't they?

Sometimes I really think people don't stop to consider that the way America does things is not always the ONLY way. I think we should give the military more credit than this....no everyone won't like it, but it'll be okay in the end.

I understand where some people in the military may be coming from, and they are entitled to feel however they want to about how it may or may not affect them. That being said, you can feel however you want, but we have to go by the law. The law was unfair, so now we're going to go through a process to be done with it. End of story. Everyone has to get over it. Integration wasn't about how people 'felt' either, but it was the right thing to do.

The idea that they need separate showers 'just in case' they are attracted to one another? Really?! That makes no sense at all, because it is not going to be a different situation than how it is now. Guys often know who is gay and who isn't, yet they don't out them and they all do their jobs anyway. I mean good grief, that makes them sound like middle schoolers. Are we really to believe that homosexuals would be unable to function without sexual thoughts?
I mean in that case, good grief, how do heterosexuals work with the opposite sex without jumping all over each other?! It must be impossible! And you might say no, the military is different. BS. They are doing their jobs , not just hanging around waiting to find a boyfriend in their roommate. Anyone, regardless of their sexuality who engaged in inappropriate behavior would be subject to punishment anyway. That's not new.

People get upset about this as though it's going to let gays 'in' and make everyone uncomfortable. Newsflash: The gays are ALREADY THERE, taking showers next to other guys. Already there, taking shots just like the rest in the mountains, where people live in squalor. Already there, living in tents and absolute desolate places, sacrificing their time with their families, their loved ones, and possibly sacrificing their lives for you. This doesn't change that. It just says that when this process is done-if they want to, they can admit they are gay out loud, even though all the guys they work and live with and trust with their lives everyday probably already know-and they won't lose their job for doing so.





Post Reply
This thread is locked, unable to reply
Online Friends
Offline Friends