If gays want to openly serve in the military, they must deal with the consequences: segregation from straights in private matters. Just as we find it prudent to give men and women separate restrooms and dormitories, so too must we segregate homosexuals from straights, otherwise straight people will be made uncomfortable by the gays looking at them in the showers/dorms with longing eyes.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
How does segregating them that way help? I doubt a gay man wants to be stared at lustfully by other gay men. I should think women would feel the same way.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
F-
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: How does segregating them that way help? I doubt a gay man wants to be stared at lustfully by other gay men. I should think women would feel the same way.
It would help the straight people though.
Anyway, you can then start having separate quarters for the different type of gays as well, you know, tops/buttoms etc.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: How does segregating them that way help? I doubt a gay man wants to be stared at lustfully by other gay men. I should think women would feel the same way.
It would help the straight people though.
How so? I was under the impression that service men already have individual stalls when they shower, change clothes, etc.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I dunno. Hear the man out. It's not like merely partitioned washroom stalls helped a certain Republican senator Maybe we should start by segregating the Senate.
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 12368) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade:
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: How does segregating them that way help? I doubt a gay man wants to be stared at lustfully by other gay men. I should think women would feel the same way.
It would help the straight people though.
How so? I was under the impression that service men already have individual stalls when they shower, change clothes, etc.
We segregate men and women in public bathrooms despite there being private stalls.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: Anyway, you can then start having separate quarters for the different type of gays as well, you know, tops/buttoms etc.
People, please, don't feed the ridiculous troll.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I am posting in this high quality clive candy thread
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I guess if we have to go through Clive's thread cycle again predictably, dancing bears and cookies are better.
Posted by capaxinfiniti (Member # 12181) on :
disregarding the poster, i think this is an important issue to address as it has implications outside of the military. it goes beyond the debate of gays and alleged gay rights and involves privacy in general. western society permits the segregation of restrooms, locker rooms, etc based on both gender and sexuality. if its illegal for a male, straight or otherwise, to enter even a womens restroom -let alone a shower area of a womens locker room- why is it not illegal for a lesbian to do so? or perhaps why are current laws, if such exist, not enforced? many locker room and changing facilities, both private and public, dont have individual stalls etc. the best examples i can think of are high school and college locker rooms. i dont want to workout on campus then got ogled by a gay guy while im showering or be victim to anothers public exhibition. in a twisted crusade to remain politically correct and protect the rights of everything under the sun, our society is denying basic rights of privacy to a very large segment of the population. and its a poor legal precedent to permit "sexual predators masquerading as protected [homo]sexuals". this issue is ripe with lawsuits, litigation and legislation and should be addressed.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I forget: is the consensus that capax is another puppet, or not?
Posted by Parkour (Member # 12078) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: so too must we segregate homosexuals from straights, otherwise straight people will be made uncomfortable by the gays looking at them in the showers/dorms with longing eyes.
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: i dont want to workout on campus then got ogled by a gay guy while im showering or be victim to anothers public exhibition.
What is this, Homophobia on Parade?
What are the gays supposed to do? Wear something that identifies them as gay?
Posted by capaxinfiniti (Member # 12181) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I forget: is the consensus that capax is another puppet, or not?
i cant remember the last time you said something constructive on this forum. im as much a puppet as you are a muppet.. are you going to address the topic or not?
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
capax-
I find reading your post to be more effort than I care to put forward. Please use proper capitalization. It makes it far easier to read.
Posted by capaxinfiniti (Member # 12181) on :
quote:Originally posted by Parkour:
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: so too must we segregate homosexuals from straights, otherwise straight people will be made uncomfortable by the gays looking at them in the showers/dorms with longing eyes.
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: i dont want to workout on campus then got ogled by a gay guy while im showering or be victim to anothers public exhibition.
What is this, Homophobia on Parade?
What are the gays supposed to do? Wear something that identifies them as gay?
how does speaking out on privacy constitute homophobia? if your wife, daughter, sister or mother was made to feel uncomfortable or disgusted by a guy creeping around the shower area of a local gym what would you call that?
what are the gays supposed to do? that is what is being alluded to in the op. no one is asking for there to be some sort of patch with a phallic symbol for the gays so they can be identified before entering a restroom. but by law there should be separate facilities provided for gays and lesbians and those that are openly gay should be required to use the provided facilities. there will be dishonest people and sexual predators who disregard the laws but the current double standard shouldnt be sanctioned by the government.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:i cant remember the last time you said something constructive on this forum.
You'll forgive me if I don't hang my self-image on your opinion. Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: but by law there should be separate facilities provided for gays and lesbians and those that are openly gay should be required to use the provided facilities.
By WHAT law?
Posted by JanitorBlade (Member # 12343) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I forget: is the consensus that capax is another puppet, or not?
That's a bit rude to say off the bat Tom, though there have been alts creeping about, that's not a good enough reason to just start throwing that accusation around.
Posted by Pegasus (Member # 10464) on :
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: ...western society permits the segregation of restrooms, locker rooms, etc based on both gender and sexuality...
quote: ...but by law there should be separate facilities provided for gays and lesbian...
Quite a big jump from "permits" to "by law there should be"
quote: ...the current double standard shouldnt be sanctioned by the government.
If you lost the hyperbole, you might get more discussion.
Of course, then you wouldn't have an argument. Oh well.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Capax, have you ever thought about the fact that a gay man might ALSO prefer to not get ogled by another gay man in the shower? Your separate facility idea doesn't actually solve any of your problems, it just puts them out of your sight.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
When has western society segregated restrooms, locker rooms, or similar by sexuality? As far as I know, they're segregated by gender, full stop. Or do you have any examples of segregation by sexuality?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Wonder what the poor bisexuals will have to do. Maybe they can be given a pit off to the side, somewhere.
Apparently if gays are allowed to openly serve, instead of secretly serving as they've been all along, they'll suddenly turn into leering, lecherous fiends with no self-control or sense of decorum.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
For the record: if a homosexual wants to leer at me in the shower, have at it. You poor blind bastard.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: how does speaking out on privacy constitute homophobia?
Solely speaking out on privacy doesn't constitute homophobia, here we already have two distinctly homophobic arguments. 'They'll make me uncomfortable with their constant staring and the longing eyes' .. 'I don't want to be ogled by the gay men while I'm showering, I don't want to be the victim of their public exhibition' ..
But I wouldn't want to get you all wrong. As I recall, nobody's homophobic just because they're creeped out by gay people and want to restrict their legal rights because of it, framing the argument for legal protections against gays in terms of supposed licentiousness and creephattery. Nobody. Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
This is an odd thread....
Also, I personally find it a little silly that public restrooms (with stalls) are segregated. What is the purpose?
Posted by malanthrop (Member # 11992) on :
I spent well over a decade in the Navy. Every command had it's gays. They didn't have to tell and no one had to ask....everyone knew. All you really need is a sexual harassment policy. In practice, the gay sailors waited for the rest to shower, before they entered. The known gay sailor wanted even less, to shower with the straights in the berthing. It's understandable that heterosexuals don't want homosexuals sharing a shower room. The "known" homosexuals understood this. Even with "don't ask, don't tell"......the lesbian with a mullet is an obvious cue. The effeminate sounding man is just as obvious. The 50 straight sailors in my birthing had less to fear than the 1 gay sailor. He self segregated himself, out of consideration for the rest.
If gays are accepted openly, they need to eliminate the concept of male and female bathrooms or create a third and fourth category for the gays and lesbians. The only other option: make it sexually neutral....women and gays are still soldiers.....let all soldiers shower together.
Posted by Emreecheek (Member # 12082) on :
The only way to fix the problem as laid out by the troll is to have single-room, unisex bathrooms. I'll go for that. Works for me.
Oh my, this looks like an unrelated link that has nothing to do with the topic.
There have been significant problems with men harassing women, particularly in the military. I think there is still an argument for segregating by sexes that doesn't have anything to do with privacy and everything to do with prudence and the safety of women.
Posted by malanthrop (Member # 11992) on :
There are different military cultures. I spent my first 10 years in the regular navy. Senior enlisted had their own quarters and chow halls. Fraternization was the big issue. I entered joint service and was exposed to Army. In the Army, under certain situations, women and men, officer and enlisted, senior and junior, share living spaces together. An E1 woman shares a tent with an O4 male.
In the navy, entering a female area, a male has to announce,...."male on deck". Maybe gays should be required to do the same, "gay on deck". Not really against the don't ask, don't tell opponents.....announce it proudly. Gay on deck.... Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Now I totally want a "Gay on Deck!" t-shirt.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
As a female who has changed in the same room with lesbians, the general impression I have had from other females about lesbians is eh, whatever. But women generally don't fear rape or attack from other lesbians, whereas from straight men, there is good reason to fear. Most women know at least one rape victim.
Posted by Ginol_Enam (Member # 7070) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Most women know at least one rape victim.
Most military women? Most women in certain careers? Areas? Income levels? I find it hard to believe that "most women" in general could personally at least one rape victim.
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: As a female who has changed in the same room with lesbians, the general impression I have had from other females about lesbians is eh, whatever. But women generally don't fear rape or attack from other lesbians, whereas from straight men, there is good reason to fear. Most women know at least one rape victim.
I was under the impression that most male rapists are straight. Not gay.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I hate to validate this thread, but I don't think it's at all fair to men to say that there is "good reason to fear" rape from men in a changing room.
First of all, rapists aren't going to limit themselves to waiting around a unisex bathroom, they don't give a crap - they're violent criminals.
Second, regular guys seeing women in their underpants doesn't turn them into rapists.
I've seen women come in to the men's restroom at a bar to pee. I've been on a bus with dozens of co-ed band students all changing clothes. I've been to clothing-optional beaches. At none of these places was anyone ever raped in my presence.
I realize that rape is a horrible crime, but there is also a culture of fear and BS about it, that isn't helpful to anyone.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I forget: is the consensus that capax is another puppet, or not?
i cant remember the last time you said something constructive on this forum. im as much a puppet as you are a muppet.. are you going to address the topic or not?
You've NEVER said anything constructive, so what's your point?
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh: This is an odd thread....
Also, I personally find it a little silly that public restrooms (with stalls) are segregated. What is the purpose?
To embarrass me when I walk in the wrong one Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: An E1 woman shares a tent with an O4 male.
I have never heard of anything like this happening. Could you tell me in what circumstance it would?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I've been in the RIGHT one and been chewed out by a woman with her daughter in tow, leaving a stall.
I eventually asked her one question....." Lady, when is the last time you had a urinal in a Ladies room", because that was what I was using.
A urinal. On the wall.
Oddly enough, this took a second for it to sink in. Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by airmanfour:
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: An E1 woman shares a tent with an O4 male.
I have never heard of anything like this happening. Could you tell me in what circumstance it would?
Me either, nor has any of my relatives, all of whom were in the service.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ginol_Enam:
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Most women know at least one rape victim.
Most military women? Most women in certain careers? Areas? Income levels? I find it hard to believe that "most women" in general could personally at least one rape victim.
If you changed "rape" to "sexual assault/sexual molestation," I'd consider that a true statement. Of course, I question whether most women KNOW that they know a victim of sexual assault. More women are speaking openly to friends about their experiences as its becoming less stigmatized, but its still an issue many women won't share with even their closest friends and family.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
According to a study from the U.S. Dept. of Justice, 20 million out of 112 million of women in the U.S. have been raped, with 18 million being forcible rapes. This is not counting the ones that go unreported, of course. Studies referenced in that report put the numbers more succinctly: 1 in 7 women have been raped in their lifetime.
It is a dangerous thing to be a woman, and a far more dangerous thing to be a female soldier. And people are wasting time worrying about feeling icky because someone looked at them wrong in the shower? Go kick some sense into the violent oversexed straight guys first before you worry what the gay ones will do.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
No, Chris, because if you find a woman outside the schoolhouse, library, or home, she's probably looking to trap a man into marriage or child support, remember? This being Clive Candy and all.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
Frankly, this would all just be settled if we just outlawed clothing.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
That would also make it substantially more difficult to be a suicide bomber. Win-freakin-win.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
Having gays and lesbians is akin to having straight men and women share restrooms.
I personally don't see what the big deal is. Its a restroom/shower. I seriously doubt a gay guy goes into a restroom hoping to see a straight mans dangly parts.
I also think that a gay guy has more to worry about when taking a shower than the straight guy does. If you are a straight man, imagine taking a shower with a bunch of naked and athletically fit military women. Without being graphic, how much control would you have to exert not to get overly...."excited" from being in there?
Oh, and you have my vote for the no clothing thing. Lets write up a bill and send it to Congress... I'm sick of wearing clothes here in Vegas. It was 109 last week.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Originally posted by Juxtapose: That would also make it substantially more difficult to be a suicide bomber. Win-freakin-win.
It makes us safer! We MUST do it!!! Anything is okay if it makes us safer!!!
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
What if being naked in public -- and here I'm thinking of me -- represents a clear and present danger as well as a public health emergency? What takes precedence?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: What if being naked in public -- and here I'm thinking of me -- represents a clear and present danger as well as a public health emergency? What takes precedence?
Can we weaponize it?
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Not according to the Geneva Conventions, no.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
Posted by malanthrop (Member # 11992) on :
quote:Originally posted by airmanfour:
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: An E1 woman shares a tent with an O4 male.
I have never heard of anything like this happening. Could you tell me in what circumstance it would?
In austere circumstances....
Sexual segregation is the last domino to fall. It's quite common for officer and enlisted army to share living quarters. Navy,....never happens. It's a matter of culture. It's only the closet gays you need to worry about. The mullet sporting woman who walks like a male high school jock and the man who instigates questions like, "was that a man or a woman".....don't ask don't tell is pointless.
How will you react when the military requires gays to announce, "gay on deck"...just as they do for "female on deck" and "male on deck".
One's sexuality is private. Even thought I'm a heterosexual, my sexual activities with my wife, are none of the government's business. Gay business, is private as well. Open acceptance sounds good on the surface but gays have always been there, and everyone knew it. Make them equals, they'll have to announce "gay on deck"
[ August 30, 2010, 11:22 PM: Message edited by: malanthrop ]
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I have never seen an officer share with enlisted. Ever. Even in the field.
And if you think every person who looks like that is gay, or every gay looks like that, you are more lost than usual.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I think his point is that the sneaky closeted ones don't always look like that, so they'll have to announce someone's gayness in order to fairly warn the other people "on deck" that they might be in the presence of someone who could potentially find them attractive.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Well, the militaries of nearly every other western country have all managed to incorporate openly gay people without any 'gay on deck' or shower squeemishness.
The US can just copy what they do.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
But Bella Bee, we are the great and amazing USA! We can't just copy what others have done. We must reinvent the wheel in the most inefficient way possible. The fact that other nations can do things successfully is no indicator of the US's ability to do so. Kinda like how other nations do health care without death panels, but we will have them. Cause we are just that cool.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
I'm confused. By their very nature how would you know the closted ones are gay in the first place? Maybe they are just staring because they are straight but jealous.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:By their very nature how would you know the closted ones are gay in the first place?
That's what makes them so dangerous! The odds are good that, at this very moment, a soldier taking a shower is being desired by someone just a few feet away!
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: ... By their very nature how would you know the closted ones are gay in the first place?
They join the Senate or Congress and advocate strongly against gay rights Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: ... By their very nature how would you know the closted ones are gay in the first place?
They join the Senate or Congress and advocate strongly against gay rights
The quieter ones just start threads on writer's message boards.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I love you guys. Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop:
quote:Originally posted by airmanfour:
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: An E1 woman shares a tent with an O4 male.
I have never heard of anything like this happening. Could you tell me in what circumstance it would?
In austere circumstances....
That's not doing it for me. The regulations that disallow fraternization are unwaiverable per the UCMJ and austerity is not a justification for a violation of those regulations.
Posted by Misha McBride (Member # 6578) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: ... By their very nature how would you know the closted ones are gay in the first place?
They join the Senate or Congress and advocate strongly against gay rights
The quieter ones just start threads on writer's message boards.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)