Should don't ask, don't tell be repealed?

[keird]

I for one don't want hermaphrodites running our military. What's next, Captain Ga Ga?

You wouldn't, for one, welcome our new hermaphrodite overlords?

That's reta - ga- errr messed up.

:awe:

 

[woolfe9999]

No. I would be interested to know how many of these separations occurred due to unprompted voluntary admission, as well as how many were after 1 Sep 2001; however.

If being openly gay were permitted, I think there are a number of troops that would like to return to service. I'd like them back, please.

I did some digging. The number is not 10,000 since 1991. It is 13,000 since 1993. However, the number did drop off some after 9/11. Pre-9/11 it averaged about 950 per year, but has been about 650 per year since.

Check under the heading "statisitics."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell

- wolf

 

[Carmen813]

I finally found a reason for DADT to be kept in place.

 

[lopri]

I for one don't want hermaphrodites running our military.

Can you explain why?

 

[keird]

I did some digging. The number is not 10,000 since 1991. It is 13,000 since 1993. However, the number did drop off some after 9/11. Pre-9/11 it averaged about 950 per year, but has been about 650 per year since.

Check under the heading "statisitics."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell

- wolf

Meh. I scrolled through them. Passing bad checks have probably forced more troops out of the service. I doubt I'm wrong in this, but the sheer number of separations per annum dwarf these stats.

 

[keird]

I finally found a reason for DADT to be kept in place.

lulz

 

[IronWing]

Can you explain why?

Because Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, a former Marine, warned our nation about those wily hermaphrodites, that's why.

 

[lopri]

Because Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, a former Marine, warned our nation about those wily hermaphrodites, that's why.

Figured that much. Thank you.

 

[nobodyknows]

Should don't ask, don't tell be repealed?

I don't care what they do as long as they treat gays as fairly as the next guy.

 

[keird]

Because Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-California, a former Marine, warned our nation about those wily hermaphrodites, that's why.

I thought that the U.S.M.C. was using that as a delaying tactic for funding. 3 genders vs. 2.

 

[woolfe9999]

Meh. I scrolled through them. Passing bad checks have probably forced more troops out of the service. I doubt I'm wrong in this, but the sheer number of separations per annum dwarf these stats.

I still don't see your point here. Over 13,000 have been kicked out. While a separation for more commonplace reasons likely causes little scandal, you don't think these separations cause a stir among the units these people worked in? And that is not to speak of the fact that lawsuits against the military have come out of some of these, and some have gone to the press.

So how do you quantify the amount of trouble that allowing open gay service would cause, and how do you know that is would be more than what is currently caused by existing policy? I'm not saying your concerns aren't legitimate. I'm just saying you probably should be balancing them against the existing situation, which is far and away not perfect.

- wolf

 

[MotF Bane]

You don't need to be straight to shoot straight.

lol

 

[keird]

I still don't see your point here. Over 13,000 have been kicked out. While a separation for more commonplace reasons likely causes little scandal, you don't think these separations cause a stir among the units these people worked in? And that is not to speak of the fact that lawsuits against the military have come out of some of these, and some have gone to the press.

So how do you quantify the amount of trouble that allowing open gay service would cause, and how do you know that is would be more than what is currently caused by existing policy? I'm not saying your concerns aren't legitimate. I'm just saying you probably should be balancing them against the existing situation, which is far and away not perfect.

- wolf

I don't have a point. I've been drinking a cheap Shiraz.

I can't quantify it. Only the most jaded could. It's like asking me to quantify what the impact of troops who are left handed have been. Ohhh, I have anecdotal stories of a guy from Basic who was kicked out for not qualifying with his weapon. He was not only right handed, but his wall-eye was on his right side. Thus he had to attempt to qualify on his non-dominant hand with his non-dominant eye. That was sad. My wife is left handed. Who gives a fuck? What if we threw out all the left handed people because we made a cost effective weapon for the vast majority of right handers?

17 years later the military makes a new ambidextrous weapon and invites them back. "Needs of the Army"

This is an inebriated illustration of what I care for gay rights. I need shooters.

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't have a point. I've been drinking a cheap Shiraz.

Well jeez, why didn't you say so to begin with?

Shiraz is good stuff BTW, but the cheap stuff? Dunno.

- wolf

 

[keird]

Well jeez, why didn't you say so to begin with?

Shiraz is good stuff BTW, but the cheap stuff? Dunno.

- wolf

Cheers! Snob!

 

[MarkXIX]

I recall a guy in 1995 during basic training that couldn't hack it. Had pics of a girlfriend, talked about her all the time. No indication whatsoever that he was gay and hiding it or anything.

However, one day he decided he didn't like the Army, went to the Drill Sergeant and claimed he was gay and was chaptered out in a couple of weeks. I've heard several other stories that soldiers who were otherwise straight but pissed at the Army claim to be gay and get out. Those numbers roll up into the statistics as well.

However, I agree with keird, don't shit where you eat. Soldiers will make this work and many of them are more progressive today than when I came in 15 years ago.

Also to his point, I heard a very senior officer today remark about how many senior people will likely retire over this policy, validating the consensus that the "old guard" are either homophobes or bigots unwilling to adapt to change. Time for them to move on I say.

 

[Modelworks]

I thought the decision about to repeal this would go over slightly better than it has. Let me explain.
I live about 45 minutes from the main gate of Camp Lejune , NC so I hear a lot locally involving the military. Yesterday on the local news they were interviewing soldiers on the base and while one soldier approved of the decision the other 5 they interviewed were totally against it, using terms like "they can change the rules, but gays will never be welcome" , one guy off camera even commented that if they change the rule they better have extra body bags ready. Even some of the retired people they interviewed were pretty blatant that if they passed it there would be hell to pay.

I was really shocked. I expected some resentment but this was really over the top. My brother also told me of people carrying signs near the base like "You can be gay, just not USMC and gay"

The range of people making the comments was both young and old and even women saying the same thing. I didn't expect so much uproar.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

They used to not let black people serve in white units. Change comes slowly to the services but, it is inevitable.

 

[UberNeuman]

I'd rather the armed forces be all gay and lesbian - that way they can go do the job, which they've done for many years already, and not be worried about the "straights."

\that this argument still goes on is moronic...

 

[Cogman]

it's not about wearing a pink uniform and having a gay orgy on the lawn at West Point, it's about having to purposefully and deliberately hide a major portion of your life or risk losing your job (or expose yourself to getting blackmailed by, let's say, a jilted ex who has pictures of you two and your CO's email address).

could you imagine getting married or adopting a kid and being forbidden from ever discussing it with your coworkers? or not being able to do something as stupid as putting a picture of yourself and your significant other on a social networking site? or, hell, not even being able to be seen with them in public even when you're off duty.

I guess I'm just not understanding the nature of the DADT rule. I just don't see the burning need to go around and tell everyone in a unit "Hey, guess what, I'm so gay!". I can see your point, they should be able to see their spouse off duty or do whatever a regular married solder can do off duty.

I'm a fairly closed person, so myself, I don't talk about family all that often to be honest, if someone asks, sure I'll tell them. But it just isn't something I have the intense need to share with everyone.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I thought the decision about to repeal this would go over slightly better than it has. Let me explain.
I live about 45 minutes from the main gate of Camp Lejune , NC so I hear a lot locally involving the military. Yesterday on the local news they were interviewing soldiers on the base and while one soldier approved of the decision the other 5 they interviewed were totally against it, using terms like "they can change the rules, but gays will never be welcome" , one guy off camera even commented that if they change the rule they better have extra body bags ready. Even some of the retired people they interviewed were pretty blatant that if they passed it there would be hell to pay.

I was really shocked. I expected some resentment but this was really over the top. My brother also told me of people carrying signs near the base like "You can be gay, just not USMC and gay"

The range of people making the comments was both young and old and even women saying the same thing. I didn't expect so much uproar.

Never underestimate how many stupid and truly bad people there are in the world...especially in places like the military.

 

[UberNeuman]

I guess I'm just not understanding the nature of the DADT rule. I just don't see the burning need to go around and tell everyone in a unit "Hey, guess what, I'm so gay!". I can see your point, they should be able to see their spouse off duty or do whatever a regular married solder can do off duty.

I'm a fairly closed person, so myself, I don't talk about family all that often to be honest, if someone asks, sure I'll tell them. But it just isn't something I have the intense need to share with everyone.

Point is, it shouldn't matter...

 

[woolfe9999]

I guess I'm just not understanding the nature of the DADT rule. I just don't see the burning need to go around and tell everyone in a unit "Hey, guess what, I'm so gay!". I can see your point, they should be able to see their spouse off duty or do whatever a regular married solder can do off duty.

I'm a fairly closed person, so myself, I don't talk about family all that often to be honest, if someone asks, sure I'll tell them. But it just isn't something I have the intense need to share with everyone.

It isn't the desire to talk about their personal lives. It's the desire to not be thrown out of the military because someone saw them holding hands with a same sex partner while off duty and decided to report it.

- wolf

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

I guess I'm just not understanding the nature of the DADT rule. I just don't see the burning need to go around and tell everyone in a unit "Hey, guess what, I'm so gay!". I can see your point, they should be able to see their spouse off duty or do whatever a regular married solder can do off duty.

I'm a fairly closed person, so myself, I don't talk about family all that often to be honest, if someone asks, sure I'll tell them. But it just isn't something I have the intense need to share with everyone.

The name DADT is misleading. It's not as long as you don't talk about it you're good. You also can't act on it. So if they find you on a date or any other evidence that you are what you are you can be kicked out; the only restriction being they can't ask you without first having evidence that you are.

 

[werepossum]

I don't have a point. I've been drinking a cheap Shiraz.

I can't quantify it. Only the most jaded could. It's like asking me to quantify what the impact of troops who are left handed have been. Ohhh, I have anecdotal stories of a guy from Basic who was kicked out for not qualifying with his weapon. He was not only right handed, but his wall-eye was on his right side. Thus he had to attempt to qualify on his non-dominant hand with his non-dominant eye. That was sad. My wife is left handed. Who gives a fuck? What if we threw out all the left handed people because we made a cost effective weapon for the vast majority of right handers?

17 years later the military makes a new ambidextrous weapon and invites them back. "Needs of the Army"

This is an inebriated illustration of what I care for gay rights. I need shooters.

This. It isn't about individuals' rights, but about the effectiveness of the unit. Under DADT your unit is unlikely to cause you problems if you are gay and doing your job; they want your gay ass there doing your job, because otherwise they are likely to be a man short. (Actually another man short, as most military units are below TOE anyway.) I imagine most of those discharged came out voluntarily either to get out or as social protest to force a change, as 13,000 discharges over seventeen years is a vanishingly small number for the military.

IMO the biggest danger is not allowing gays to serve openly. It isn't even the number of good warriors you'll lose because they can't hack the change, although I'm betting this loss will more than offset the gain in gay soldiers. The biggest danger is that in our rush to provide "equal rights" we will make other changes to make a fairer, more gay-friendly environment. The military is unlike any other workplace in that a screw-up often means that people die. Military leadership and rules are designed to minimize that possibility while maximizing the chances of successfully performing dangerous and demanding tasks, often with one hand tied behind its collective back by politicians. We should all remember that when we wish something changed to suit our own sensibilities.