posted
It seems that the whole shower question of why not separate gay men from straight men since we separate men from women can be answered culturally: In this society (and in many societies) we already separate men and women. School gym lockers, dormitory bathrooms, public restrooms, etc. It's a culturally accepted norm. I'm certain that the vast majority of soldiers can handle situations in which they must share resources with both genders.
There is no current societal norm for separating gay men from straight men, or gay women from straight women. Nor do I think there should be. And therefore it does not seem logical to create this standard in the military. Individually, people can choose solutions within the allowances of their community (military, school, etc). And in all cases, sexual harassment is illegal and should be recognized and punished accordingly.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that homosexuals aren't capable of being rapists too, Achilles. They're human beings, which is rather the point of admitting them to the military in the first place...and that means they're capable of being rapists. It seems like you're getting a bit carried away.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Voila. I've actually been through several rape classes which discuss male on male rape. At one of them an NCIS agent said one of the major problems was they often go unreported, or unprosecuted, due to the shame felt by the victim, as well as worries that he might be thought of as gay for being raped. It's certainly an issue, though less publicized than male-on-female rape in the military.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, technically he only said he didn't KNOW of it, so... that's true, but only because he didn't look very hard.
Anyway, I'm just glad the law finally changed. I think all the "worries" are vastly overblown. After all, the exact same homosexuals are already IN the showers with the other men RIGHT NOW! (Not to mention the fact that shower facilities exist in the civilian world without problem.) I hardly think that having someone "come out" is going to cause them to suddenly start staring at their shower mates.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure Achilles meant there was no homosexual rape in military service, ever. I think it's more likely just a miscommunication, or a case of Achilles getting rather carried away on other points into some hyperbole that in retrospect he probably wouldn't mean when not in the heat of an argument. I think that's more likely simply because the idea of someone believing there is no homosexual rape, ever, in military history seems so unlikely to me that I'm seeking an alternative explanation than them believing it's literally true.
And...Kwea, I realize you're getting pretty intense about this, but I don't think even if Achille did mean exactly what was said, precisely, about homosexual rape, it would even approach being the dumbest thing said on the board. Or if it did that your saying so would be especially good politics, communication, what have you.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Note the "I" part of that, and that whole line was just to make the Spartan referance for reasons I have already clarified. My whole argument has been that for as long as there have been organizations of humans there have been homosexuals throughout those organizations military or otherwise, and as a species we have done pretty well despite it.
Sorry for the confusion/aggrevation, I really was just making an intro to the Sparta referance.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, Achilles, then if by saying, "I know of no..." you weren't making a statement of anything except your own knowledge (ignorance, really, because it's such a well-known fact that homosexual rape does happen, homosexuals being human beings, I'm not sure why you said it.
The way you communicated didn't seem to make much sense at all, and still doesn't, really. To me at least. Frankly it comes off as some serious backpedaling and double-talk when you said something that was, by any standards I can think of, pretty absurd.
-----
It's also, to my mind, a form of prejudice in itself, an idea such as homosexuals aren't going to be rapists in the military, and haven't ever been. It's just more polite than thinking that they're all sexual deviants who just can't wait to get in the shower with you.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: kmboots- women are still objects. It is natural for a man to have sex with a woman, regardless of her desires. But when it is a man abused, suddenly it is unnatural and must be avoided. How many women have had invasive patdowns at the airport and yet the national outcry comes when a man's junk is touched.
More men are prone to conflict when certain lines are crossed and seem less embarrassed in hopes of vindication on the matter, I think that a man at the airport is more willing to raise a fuss when touched. I know of several stories of women speaking out about the TSA's actions, notably was a young woman who was stared at and chosen by a male agent at "random" to go through the scanner concievably because whe was well-endowed. And no one seems to have cared.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's also, to my mind, a form of prejudice in itself, an idea such as homosexuals aren't going to be rapists in the military, and haven't ever been. It's just more polite than thinking that they're all sexual deviants who just can't wait to get in the shower with you.
Being openly gay will not make more men rape other men, they have been there the whole time and I would find it a bit silly for someone to ignore the sexually charged abuse of power against women that has has happened much more often. Ive already expressed my opinion that only now worrying about what homosexual soldier may or may not do is a sign of homophobia and not rationality.
And yes, it is more polite than expecting every gay man to infatuated with every straight male simply because of congenitally pre-disposed organs.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not related to the current subject of rape prevelance, but related to DADT: It appears as though gay people who were discharged will now be allowed to rejoin. Why would they want to. I think they should be allowed to reenlist and should never have been kicked out I just don't understand why they want to. If I had been treated that way by an employer, they would need to be some reparations to get me back. From what I have read, there is nothing like that planned. So having been treated like dirt, why go back? If I were making decisions, I would be in favor of some sort of benefit to coming back- like counting some percent of the time in civilian life towards their time served.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about accrued rank and benefits from before they were booted? if reenlisting means starting from scratch I doubt many people who had already put years in would be willing to go through the motions all over again.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Most of the plans assume you come back at the same place you were discharged- so if you did 5 years, were discharged, and the been in civilian life for two years, you come back at rank when discharged with 5 years experience. It sounds as though there was some discussion of having you come back at same rank, but with say 7 (or perhaps some amount between 5 and 7) years towards retirement and stuff. But that was rejected. Though I know the exact plan regarding reenlistment has not been determined.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because they still want to fight for their country? Wasn't that kind of the point of all this?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Patriotism after being abandoned would be a hard sell to a lieutenant-sargeant reenlisting at private. Besides most of our soldiers enlist for the benefits not intending a life-long career.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scholarette, being a member of the armed forces is different than working for a company. It is their sense of duty and love of country that drives many to want to defend this country, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation.
Further, the policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was created by politicians and abused by a few, but mostly run lawfully. Those who were dismissed have a right to be angry at the politicians who ordered it, and perhaps the individuals who outed them, but many do not have any anger at the military branch that did what they were ordered to do.
Although I would hope not, I do expect the next fight not to be Gay Marriage, but reinstating those who were kicked out with anywhere close to their last rank or privileges. The right makes a big point of "They broke the law to get here" argument against illegal immigrants. They will make the same argument for reinstatement.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Bear in mind that these people chose IN THE FIRST PLACE to serve in an organization that they knew would expel them if it found about about them. This suggests that they care more about it in the first place than the typical employee cares about their job.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Being openly gay will not make more men rape other men, they have been there the whole time and I would find it a bit silly for someone to ignore the sexually charged abuse of power against women that has has happened much more often. Ive already expressed my opinion that only now worrying about what homosexual soldier may or may not do is a sign of homophobia and not rationality.
Now you're changing the subject. The subject I'm discussing with you was your strangely expressed notion that homosexual rape didn't exist in military history. It wasn't ignoring heterosexual rape, which is of course awful, or the many other contradictions involved in how we treat homosexuals which range from prejudiced to awful.
quote:And yes, it is more polite than expecting every gay man to infatuated with every straight male simply because of congenitally pre-disposed organs.
You missed the important word, though: prejudice. Perhaps you ought to treat, in terms of your expectations, homosexuals as you would any other human being and not bring anything to the table other than, well, expecting them to be sexually attracted in some degree to their own gender.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chris Bridges: Because they still want to fight for their country? Wasn't that kind of the point of all this?
I guess I just don't see being willing to die for a country that treated me as a second class citizen, denied me my civil rights and spit on my willingness to serve. Which makes me think that gays who do join the army must be a whole lot more patriotic than I am.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Not related to the current subject of rape prevelance, but related to DADT: It appears as though gay people who were discharged will now be allowed to rejoin. Why would they want to. I think they should be allowed to reenlist and should never have been kicked out I just don't understand why they want to. If I had been treated that way by an employer, they would need to be some reparations to get me back. From what I have read, there is nothing like that planned. So having been treated like dirt, why go back? If I were making decisions, I would be in favor of some sort of benefit to coming back- like counting some percent of the time in civilian life towards their time served.
This is probably the most I've ever talked about military service on line (I typically don't even mention my job), but I figured since I started I might as well get into it.
Not many people join the military merely for the sake of employment, or for the benefits. There are some that do, but they mostly stick to the Navy and Air Force. As a Marine especially, we have the worst equipment, the worst benefits, the worst housing, the hardest training, and by far the highest chance of injury and death than any other branch of service. Army infantry is pretty comparable, non-infantry Army has it a bit easier, but not much. Nobody joins the Marine Corps or Army and expects to be treated well, or eat good food, or make a lot of money.
Then again, not many people have patriotism as their main reason for joining, either. It's instilled during training, and later on, once firsthand experience shows us how much we owe our country for our way of life, and how much effort it takes to maintain the freedom we enjoy. But at the beginning of boot camp, anyway, most of the people I went with didn't give a rat's ass about the concept or reality of America.
It's something else... as an old Master Gunnery Sergeant told me and a group of marines as we were checking into our A school, "there's something f'd up about every one of you. You all gave up the chance to finish college (every one of us had at least a year of college, it's pretty common in my MOS) and get high paying jobs to join the Marine Corps. That's not a rational decision."
Almost every marine I know has father issues, either abandonment or a very abusive relationship. I think the main reason I joined, and the thing I love the most about it, is the presence of strong male role models. I've never felt quite comfortable as a man, never knew how to hold myself, how to act decisively, lead other people, speak with passion and confidence, talk to a woman, build a career. I've always felt awkward and clumsy, and never enjoyed sports.
Since my first drill instructor, I've had a series of older men who have taken an active interest in teaching me and building confidence. I still remember near the end of boot camp, walking by myself to the uniform exchange, I got ambushed by a group of new drill instructors out for blood. Standing there at attention, with 6 huge men jumping around, screaming in my face I felt completely relaxed, showing no emotion at all, and answered every question in a calm, loud, clear, dispassionate voice. I remember how empowering that felt, no know nothing outside my mind could phase me - 3 months prior to that, something like that would have left me shaking and stuttering and confused.
This has continued throughout my career, from various seniors taking me aside and saying a few quiet words, to this afternoon, my current workout buddy mentors me on the walk to and from the gym. I remember the first time I marched a platoon of 80 men, or the first time I was billeted as squad leader and lead 20 men through a FEX, making split second decisions and enforcing them in a calm, determined manner. These are things I never thought I'd be capable of doing only a few years ago.
In short, I love serving because I love the person it's made me, and because I love the men (and handful of women) I serve with. The community, the camaraderie, is unlike anything I've ever experienced, and it's finally made me a whole person.
I like the fact that when I get out, I'll get 36 months of free college, and a decent stipend during those years. But I could've had a much easier time just taking out a loan, then paying it off while living in comfort at a decent job. (and I've got more than enough brains and ambition to get a good job) I like the fact that my serving is some way makes my country a better place to live, but I could have had a much more direct (and probably greater) impact by being a social worker, politician, cop, librarian or any other type of civil servant. It's the environment of the military that makes me, and many others like me, want to serve.
Oh, and I really, really like guns. Like, being paid to shoot an M249 SAW was a pretty big incentive to join.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you, that was really well written and insightful. I appreciate a glimpse into what brings someone toward enlistment.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
After reading this thread again... do you think posters here would be receptive to an "Ask a Marine" type thread? One where those of us who have had some military experience (Kwea, mal, others I'm sure) could answer questions that people have about it.
Because it strikes me that most people's understanding of the military is limited to movies (many of which are painfully wrong) and books and video games, and those mostly cover all the exciting bits, and none of the training or day to day lives of marines.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know of any specific questions I have right now, but I definitely enjoy reading about the day to day life of people in the military. Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really enjoyed Dogbreath's response to my question before, so I would read the thread for sure. I don't know if I have any specific questions though.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dogbreath, perhaps you should just start with a narrative and update it when you feel like it. That might be nice.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: Because it strikes me that most people's understanding of the military is limited to movies (many of which are painfully wrong) and books and video games, and those mostly cover all the exciting bits, and none of the training or day to day lives of marines.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
