Debate and Discussion

US military chief says gays are immoral
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 1:55PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
Because apparently gays > infinite nukes.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
ozoneocean at 2:14PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 25,054
joined: 1-2-2004
ian_feverdream
Why is the military threatened by openly gay individuals?
The article doesn't say it is, it just quotes that one man's opinion that he bases on his own stupid personal moral system. He may hold the position he does, but it wasn't him that came up with the discriminatory compromise regarding homosexual people in the US armed forces.

You would be much better off asking why he feels the way he does; the answer would obviously have something to do with his simple mind and his simple “faith”. The other thing to wonder about is why is there the “don't ask, don't tell” policy in place to start with; the answer would be a similar one I'd imagine, coupled with ingrained prejudice because of it.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:26PM
ccs1989 at 2:47PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 2,656
joined: 1-2-2006
Well, he's a guy from the Pentagon. No one expected him to be tolerant.

The problem is if there's a draft people can just say they're gay to get out of it.
http://ccs1989.deviantart.com

“If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.”
-Henry David Thoreau, Walden
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:38AM
reconjsh at 3:13PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Well, here's my 2 cents.

I don't think this man is in a position to call gays immoral on behalf of the military (which is what he's done, btw). I don't see how morality is an issue of whether or not gays can be good soldiers on the basis of morality when there is immorality in abundance with heterosexual soldiers… and I mean in abundance.

The author of the thread asked: Why is the military threatened by openly gay individuals?

I'll apply this to my experience: I was in a combat arms MOS on active duty.

The answer is complex, but I'll start of with only a simple explination. The bulk of soldiers in combat arms are heterosexual… I'd estimate by a ridiculously large margin. And the real concern for these heterosexuals is a matter of comfort. They are “not comfortable being around gays who potentially get turned on by their nudity”. Consider some of the things combat arms soldiers do together:
* Shower. In a big 8-20 man stall. Quite literally hip to hip sometimes.
* Wash each other.
* Change in front of one another.
* In a chemical enviroment - wipe each others' butts and jiggle each others penises after peeing. Seriously - it's because you could chemically contaminate yourself… a partner has a less likely chance of that.
* And there's many, many more examples of soldiers being completely or partially nude around one another.
* This is not to mention all the physical contact that can/does occur. Carrying each other, sleeping together, mouth to mouth resuscitation, spooning to keep warm in extreme cold weather, etc etc… all normal actions in certain situations.

Now, I have no reason to believe that the “gays” would be turned on by any these activites… and this is not my point. The heterosexual soldiers would be uncomfortable. Just as they'd be uncomfortable if instead of gays, they did these tasks with females.

So, “why is the military threatened by gays?” Because most of the soldiers that fight aren't gay and would not operate at 100% due to their uncomfort. In the civialian world, “being comfortable” might not mean much and seems an upsurd justification. In the army in combat settings, not being at your best from not being comfortable means people will die. This is just the way it is. This will not change until we, as a society and gender, treat nudity and physical contact as nothing sexual. And clearly, this is not the case now.

NOTE: Please don't consider this MY take on the whole thing. I personally don't have a problem with gays and they're welcome to wipe my butt and spoon with me to keep warm just like anyone else. ;) I'm speaking from my experiences and conversations with 100s of soldiers in a variety of settings.

NOTE: The above doesn't quite apply to military jobs that don't go into combat. But we all know, there really aren't many of those. Even pencil pushers push pencils with artillery flying over their heads.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
CorruptComics at 3:59PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 191
joined: 1-16-2007
While I have no problem with homosexuality, until we become a culture that has no reservations about them, the efficiency of the military is more important than to allow gay men and women to serve openly.

Some might argue that unless we let them openly serve we'll never get to that point. Baby steps, baby steps. Of all the jobs in the world, the last one we need a homophobic and a homosexual going at it would be in the dammed military.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:46AM
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 5:22PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
Oh no, I'm sure the gays are so upset that they don't get to sit around in Mid-Eastern countries getting shot at.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
Phantom Penguin at 5:31PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
He has said it was his personal feelings, so oh well. Not like its the offical army stance on the subject.

I dont think homosexuals are immoral. But i think homosexuals are incompatable with the armed forces.

Same reason Recon said. I mean i sit in a damned metal box for hours on end, sweating my ass off and most the time iam half (or in a few occasions) 100% naked. I dont need to go around asking, but open gay people would make the bulk of combat arms incredibly uncomfortible, and in some cased out right hostile.

it wouldnt work.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
reconjsh at 5:33PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Atom Apple
Oh no, I'm sure the gays are so upset that they don't get to sit around in Mid-Eastern countries getting shot at.

Are you asserting that there aren't gays who want to be in the military? If yes - then that's ridiculous. If no - then what's your point?
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 6:11PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
Only that joining the army because you want to go fight in Iraq is retarded.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
Phantom Penguin at 6:36PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 1,075
joined: 1-6-2006
Atom Apple
Only that joining the army because you want to go fight in Iraq is retarded.

Thats why i signed up.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:42PM
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 6:50PM, March 13, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
Are you sure you aren't thinking of the other part of the war?

Oh well, I just kind of assumed people didn't want to fight for it because it seems like nothings getting done. I don't even know what's suppose to be getting done.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
Vagabond at 8:18PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 93
joined: 1-30-2006
Well… I think that when bullets are flying and you're all running for your lives, a homosexual isn't right behind you checking out your ass.

I can understand how uncomfortable it would be to be in the military and have to wonder, "gee, is the other guy enjoying seeing me naked a little too much?“ but that argument could also be made about letting women in the army. However, there's never going going to be 4 sets of bathrooms (man, woman, lesbian, and homosexual) so I think ”don't ask, don't tell" is going to have to cut it for now.




(PS: SPARRTTAAA!!!)
last edited on July 14, 2011 4:38PM
reconjsh at 8:28PM, March 13, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Vagabond
Well… I think that when bullets are flying and you're all running for your lives, a homosexual isn't right behind you checking out your ass.

I can understand how uncomfortable it would be to be in the military and have to wonder, "gee, is the other guy enjoying seeing me naked a little too much?“ but that argument could also be made about letting women in the army. However, there's never going going to be 4 sets of bathrooms (man, woman, lesbian, and homosexual) so I think ”don't ask, don't tell" is going to have to cut it for now.
(PS: SPARRTTAAA!!!)
Yeah, that's why women aren't in combat arms MOSs too. :)

Not letting homosexuals in seems like unfair discrimination. But forcing a heterosexual to do all the things I listed above with a homosexual seems pretty bad too.

Don't ask, don't tell works for me. Homosexuals get to serve and heterosexuals get to remain blissfully ignorant and thus not uncomfortable.

Anyone agree or disagree?

And note: it's not like “I'm gay” is an EASY way out. Getting kicked out of the military can have lifelong repercussions.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
reconjsh at 12:13PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
All good points Ian… your partner had a very solid point too.

I think one thing to consider is that sex and sexuality is at the core of our being. Sex is one of the 4 core drives we have… all controled by the same satiety center. (Eat, drink, sleep, and sex) So while being uncomfortable around “a race that we think is inferior” is ridiculous and some outer layer of consciousness, being uncomfortable around “gayness” is more deeply rooted (but probably ridiculous too), I would think. I'm not saying that it's fair or right… I'm just pointing out that it is perhaps a bit more complex than skin color.

NOTE: “That kind of intimate contact” is unique to combat arms, combat settings and/or pretty rare anyways.

I don't have a problem letting homosexuals into combat arms; they're already there anyways. One of my closest friends on active (a staff sergeant/E6 back then) was (is) a homosexual. I was the only person he came out to and we had no problems functioning within combat settings before or after I fully knew… nor did I witness any discomfort in him or other soldiers who were with him (though they didn't know). Of course, I think he only came out to me because I figured it out, but that's not really relevant.


I do worry I'm mildly black though. ;)
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
kingofsnake at 12:23PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,374
joined: 9-27-2006
Would it be ok to let straight male and female soldiars share the same showers?

Both sides have a point. On one hand you have this approach to the gay population that seems as if we should've really gotten over by now, its not the 1950's. On the other hand sexuality is a force that drives people and alters motivations. If it's not appropriate for men and women to share communal showers or the like, why is would it be appropriate for gay men or women to share those showers as well. Is it our physical differences that cause this segregation or our sexual differences?
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:15PM
reconjsh at 12:42PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
kingofsnake
Would it be ok to let straight male and female soldiars share the same showers?

Both sides have a point. On one hand you have this approach to the gay population that seems as if we should've really gotten over by now, its not the 1950's. On the other hand sexuality is a force that drives people and alters motivations. If it's not appropriate for men and women to share communal showers or the like, why is would it be appropriate for gay men or women to share those showers as well. Is it our physical differences that cause this segregation or our sexual differences?

Tough to say.

I would say that it's more okay for gay and straight men to go through the things I mentioned in my first post than for a straight man and a woman. At least homosexuals have simliar parts and will have similar experiences regarding combat situations. Who knows what's going on with women's bits and pieces?!? lol

I also should point out that… EVERY SINGLE extended deployment we did… whether it was training or combat… men and women were constantly caught doing sexual stuff. And very often it was when one or both of the soldiers had an important duty they severely neglected in order to hook up… like guard duty, patrol, etc etc. And this is NOT isolated to the “bad soldiers”. Some of our finest (in my eyes) found themselves comprimising their sense of duty. Human nature and sexual drive over-rid these soldiers' minds causing them to make horrible… and potentially very dangerous/lethal descisions. This was enormously more prevelant when men and women worked side by side or near eachother.

And I have no reason to believe this wouldn't also apply to homosexuals as well. Just a thought.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 2:26PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
ian_feverdream
I can and always have been able to control myself in the shower with straight men.
I was going to explain that just because you're gay doesn't make you a sex machine. Oh well, I got beat to it.
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
reconjsh at 3:13PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
Someone
Not that it's a realistic solution, but by Recon's logic the military needs to recruit a class of people who have self control.

The world just needs to become a better place.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
CorruptComics at 3:17PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 191
joined: 1-16-2007
that's why we have a military
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:46AM
reconjsh at 4:06PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
CorruptComics
that's why we have a military

It is? I must of missed the point while I was in then. ;)
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
CorruptComics at 4:13PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 191
joined: 1-16-2007
Well I assume it's harder to see from the inside. Armies always make the world a better place.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:46AM
reconjsh at 4:32PM, March 14, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
CorruptComics
Well I assume it's harder to see from the inside. Armies always make the world a better place.

I love absolute words like “always”… lol. But I'll let someone else handle this, I lack the energy.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM
rengori at 4:44PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 196
joined: 3-10-2006
Someone
Armies always make the world a better place.
Even the Nazi army from 1939-45?
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:05PM
CorruptComics at 4:47PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 191
joined: 1-16-2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:46AM
rengori at 4:48PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 196
joined: 3-10-2006
You kinda set yourself up for it by saying “Armies ALWAYS make the world a better place.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:05PM
7384395948urhfdjfrueruieieueue at 4:49PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 6,921
joined: 8-5-2006
rengori=pwnt
i will also like to know you the more
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:03AM
CorruptComics at 4:49PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 191
joined: 1-16-2007
And you provided a great place to use that link.
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:46AM
Aurora Moon at 11:56PM, March 14, 2007
(offline)
posts: 2,630
joined: 1-7-2006
ian_feverdream
Do gays have more control than straight people? Bwahahahaha!

Not that it's a realistic solution, but by Recon's logic the military needs to recruit a class of people who have self control. Or maybe only recruit eunuchs who won't be distracted. Or require all soldiers to take sex suppression drugs.

So the military is afraid that a gay man may hit on them, since many of the straight men will hit on anything that is warm and vaguely concave?

Sadly that seems to be the case for the majority of straight people that I've seen.

It seems that since while open gays are becoming more common and accepted, it's still not fully accepted in a lot of places. so most gay people I've met had to think carefully and to move carefully regarding who they sleep with, etc…..
so the gay people seem more used to having to exercise self-control and also exercising caution more than straight people do. After all, any wrong move could land them in deep shit with some folks out there.

Straight people on the other hand, they don't have to worry about being discriminated against, they don't give a fuck about what other people would say about them….
after all, to them, their relationships are the norm. so They don't need to exercise caution or self-control unless they happen to be married and are friends with members of the opposite sex or something. At least that seems to be the mindset for a lot of people out there. “I'm an straight, single man… so that means I can have sex with as many as women if I want to, provided that I use protection! being Laid is so imporant to me!”
So I doubt that straight people, especially unmarried people, would have the experience of exercising that much self-control and having to think about the consequences.
they don't think much beyond: “Man, the person of the opposite gender in front of me is really hot! I find him/her so sexually attractive. We're both unmarried… so why not?”

If I offended any straight men/women reading this post, then sorry. I'm only talking in Gerenally speaking from expernice of people I've met.
I'm on hitatus while I redo one of my webcomics. Be sure to check it out when I'n done! :)
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:10AM
kingofsnake at 5:21AM, March 15, 2007
(online)
posts: 1,374
joined: 9-27-2006
ian_feverdream
Personally this is a strange argument. I'm a gay man. I can and always have been able to control myself in the shower with straight men. Did I discreetly look? Yes. I assumed they were doing the same. But that was it. I never did anything to make anyone uncomfortable. Are straight people unable to discreetly look and leave it at that? Do gays have more control than straight people? Bwahahahaha!

Self control shouldn't factor into it. I could probably shower communally with a bunch of women and limit myself to looking discreetly. That doesn't mean it's appropriate in a goverment organization.

You never answered my question. Why do they segregate men and women? Is it because of our sexual differences or our physicial ones? Or is it a combination of the two? I'm not saying we should start building gays-only bathrooms or anything, but you can see why there are people who are uncomfortable with the notion.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:15PM
reconjsh at 7:57AM, March 15, 2007
(online)
posts: 663
joined: 12-18-2006
kingofsnake
You never answered my question. Why do they segregate men and women?

ADULT CONVERSATION BELOW]Well, if I were a female, I'd probably be uncomfortable around 10 showering men “discretly looking” but not so discretly displaying their erections - an involuntary act.

Field rotations sometimes last 15-30 days where men can't get any form of “release”… even the few minutes of alone time for self-release is impossible to come by. I would not want to be in that shower at all… let alone around a woman bathing.


Not to mention the complications of dealing with woman phsyiology and menstral cycles and stuff.
last edited on July 14, 2011 3:02PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved