Should don't ask, don't tell be repealed?

[daishi5]

You didn't have showers in public school for gym class and athletics? I don't mean open to the public. I mean for the students.

The way I think of it is this. There would be some "weirding out" in the transition period, like right after the policy was put in place. But it wouldn't take long before people would get over it, though sporadic gay bashing incidents would likely occur in individual cases from time to time, indefinitely. As has been pointed out, most of our allies allow people to be openly gay in the military, and they don't seem to have any problems with it. Are our troops more homophobic than say British troops?

- wolf

Same boat here, the showers were there, but when I went to school they were not used. I have only used community showers in the boy scouts, and even then yes it was weird because it was so very rare.

 

[K1052]

This is the way I see it. Not all gay guys, but many of them creep me out. My lawyer is gay, but he's not "flaming" and you wouldn't know he was gay until he told you or he mentions his boyfriend. No gay lisp, no limp wrists, no fairyness. He shoots guns, goes hunting, etc. I respect him, and I think he'd be a good soldier.

HOWEVER, and this is a big however, there's no way I would feel comfortable showering with him knowing he is gay. If he wasn't able to suppress his homosexual tendancies and remain straight, how is going to act/feel showering with 20 nude, built soldiers?

I'm sorry but showering next to a dude with a raging hard on because he is around other dudes is a complicated situation. It doesn't mean I would feel any less safe with him on the battlefield, but it's in living situations, etc. that would be weird. I'd just rather not know.

I mean, how would you expect me (ME, TECHBOYJK) to feel and act showering with 20+ sexy soldier ladies?? Certainly my body chemistry would react to that situation.

Gays are already in your locker rooms and have been since the beginning of time, yet somehow sexual chaos hasn't descended upon us.

If it really bothers you that much I think there is a larger problem in how secure you really are with your own sexuality.

 

[woolfe9999]

Other countries also have tits, and ass in shampoo commercials. Other countries are generally as a whole more tolerant of homosexuals throughout their cultures, but what is good for them doesn't mean it will work here, or is even a good idea. Personally, I don't see why it's even an issue, someone sexuality shouldn't be a criteria if they can do the job, there's no reason to make it public other than for some political agenda.

Fine, but why is it that people can be thrown out of the military even when they stay in the closet, because someone discovers they are gay (by seeing them with a same sex partner at a bar when off duty, for example), then denounces them? Some 10,000 people have been thrown out of the military because of this since DADT came into effect. Would you approve of a policy that basically said, OK, you can't serve if you are openly gay, but you also can't be thrown out because someone else denounces you? Shouldn't people's continued service in the military be based on merit?

- wolf

 

[nageov3t]

the Israeli army is famous for their poor unit cohesion and inability to blow things up.

 

[JS80]

IMO the biggest issue is the opening up a can of legal liability. You know if it's repealed some douchebag will harm/discriminate/or watever some outed gay and looking for a payday there will be a bazillion lawsuits against the military on the taxpayer dime.

 

[OutHouse]

I'm sorry but showering next to a dude with a raging hard on because he is around other dudes

ive taken MANY communical showers from jr high, high school, gyms and my military career and im pretty sure the odds are that several of those guys who happened to be in the same shower bay were gay and i have NEVER seen a dude with a hardon in a shower.

just curious, how many men have you seen excited in the shower?

 

[nageov3t]

IMO the biggest issue is the opening up a can of legal liability. You know if it's repealed some douchebag will harm/discriminate/or watever some outed gay and looking for a payday there will be a bazillion lawsuits against the military on the taxpayer dime.

the same argument would apply to a mixed-race army.

 

[K1052]

ive taken MANY communical showers from jr high, high school, gyms and my military career and im pretty sure the odds are that several of those guys who happened to be in the same shower bay were gay and i have NEVER seen a dude with a hardon in a shower.

just curious, how many men have you seen excited in the shower?

I think the lady doth protest too much.

 

[nageov3t]

is it worth throwing it out there that DA/DT affects females much more than males, proportionally?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Get rid of it.

 

[JS80]

the same argument would apply to a mixed-race army.

Apples to sushi comparison.

PS I'm personally for repealing, I don't think it'll be that big an issue if at all. I have high respect for servicemen and I am sure they will act like the finest of men. I was just bringing it up because I think it's on the list of discussion points.

 

[woolfe9999]

ive taken MANY communical showers from jr high, high school, gyms and my military career and im pretty sure the odds are that several of those guys who happened to be in the same shower bay were gay and i have NEVER seen a dude with a hardon in a shower.

just curious, how many men have you seen excited in the shower?

Somehow I think he may have trouble answering that without tacitly admitting that he is the sort of person who counts boners in public showers...

- wolf

 

[nageov3t]

Apples to sushi comparison.

are people who don't like gay people significantly more likely to assault others versus people who don't like minorities?

 

[MrEgo]

I won't put a list up (but see how many are expelled), but there's one I'm primarily concerned with: it's unjustified discriminaton, allowing bigotry to set policy.

Pardon my ignorance of the subject, but is it currently legal to discriminate gays in any way if the military discovers their sexual preference?

 

[JS80]

ive taken MANY communical showers from jr high, high school, gyms and my military career and im pretty sure the odds are that several of those guys who happened to be in the same shower bay were gay and i have NEVER seen a dude with a hardon in a shower.

just curious, how many men have you seen excited in the shower?

/me looks at first three letters of name, avatar. *giggle*

 

[Patranus]

Why should anyone in the military be asking (or telling) their sexual orientation in the first place (be it heterosexual or homosexual)?

 

[woolfe9999]

is it worth throwing it out there that DA/DT affects females much more than males, proportionally?

I actually didn't know that, but it's an interesting point. There are some sexual politics here, but something tells me that women have less of an issue with the "shower room" type arguments than men. Also, I am betting that a higher proportion of females serving in the military are gay than males. I am stereotyping, I know, but I'm still betting that I'm correct.

- wolf

 

[Carmen813]

I'd rather we got rid of DADT and started focusing on the real sexual problem in the military: rape.

 

[JS80]

are people who don't like gay people significantly more likely to assault others versus people who don't like minorities?

I don't know. But I would guess it's a different type of "fear."

 

[woolfe9999]

Why should anyone in the military be asking (or telling) their sexual orientation in the first place (be it heterosexual or homosexual)?

Straight people in the military can and do talk about their opposite sex partners, relationships, sexual escapades, etc. without fear of denunciation or reprisal. Not so with gays.

- wolf

 

[xj0hnx]

Would you approve of a policy that basically said, OK, you can't serve if you are openly gay, but you also can't be thrown out because someone else denounces you? Shouldn't people's continued service in the military be based on merit?

That's pretty much what I said. I'd guess from my own time in that most of the guys I was enlisted with as a whole didn't care whether or not someone was gay, the problems arise when it does become a problem, the resulting problems, no matter how far apart are bad PR that the military doesn't need. It is more of a cover your ass thing than a "We don't like gays" thing. If a gay soldier gets beat up, and hospitalized, or worse, it isn't going to be public opinion that the guys that did it are the bad guys, it's going to be "the Army is blame", and oh here comes some sensitivity training, and a few blocks of instruction on how to not offend gay soldiers, and now a whole new litigation teams to deal with the harrassment, and discrimination suits, it's just a big, unnescessary social mess that doesn't have any place in our military. You can also bet that with open gay service there will come a whole new round of regulations, special treatments, and accomodations, so it will be seperate but equal, and that's not going to do anyone any good.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Can someone please explain to me why DADT is a bad idea? I'm on the fence about this and I'd like to hear what opponents of DADT say about it.

I won't put a list up (but see how many are expelled), but there's one I'm primarily concerned with: it's unjustified discriminaton, allowing bigotry to set policy.

It is a policy created out of fear, sterotyping, bigotry and lack of knowledge (stupidity)

A unit is made of people that you trust with you life.
A gay soldier realizes that he has to earn the trust just like every other soldier. Those that want to be in the service are going to make sure that they do not weaken that bond by stiring up trouble.

They may choose to frequent places that cater to gays but only a stupid one is going to start hitting on people in the unit.

 

[Carmen813]

That's pretty much what I said. I'd guess from my own time in that most of the guys I was enlisted with as a whole didn't care whether or not someone was gay, the problems arise when it does become a problem, the resulting problems, no matter how far apart are bad PR that the military doesn't need. It is more of a cover your ass thing than a "We don't like gays" thing. If a gay soldier gets beat up, and hospitalized, or worse, it isn't going to be public opinion that the guys that did it are the bad guys, it's going to be "the Army is blame", and oh here comes some sensitivity training, and a few blocks of instruction on how to not offend gay soldiers, and now a whole new litigation teams to deal with the harrassment, and discrimination suits, it's just a big, unnescessary social mess that doesn't have any place in our military. You can also bet that with open gay service there will come a whole new round of regulations, special treatments, and accomodations, so it will be seperate but equal, and that's not going to do anyone any good.

The arguments you are using have been used before. Care to guess when?

 

[PrinceofWands]

Can someone please explain to me why DADT is a bad idea? I'm on the fence about this and I'd like to hear what opponents of DADT say about it.

Unless a straight version is equally implemented it's discriminatory. It places an undue burden of responsibility on gay military members to hide their lives or face disciplinary action/discharge. It opens the door to blackmail/exploitation since anyone who finds out about a members sexual tendencies could use the information to harm the individual. It's inherently a violation of personal rights and privacy since sexuality is never any of the governments business anyway.

Take your pick. I've got more.

 

[nageov3t]

Why should anyone in the military be asking (or telling) their sexual orientation in the first place (be it heterosexual or homosexual)?

if you broke up with your girlfriend and your jilted ex sent pictures of you two kissing to your commanding officer, you wouldn't get kicked out of the army.

if I broke up with my boyfriend and my jilted ex sent pictures of us kissing to my commanding officer, I could get kicked out of the army.

it's not just about self-disclosure.