It appears DADT is on the way out within the next 60 days. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins struck a compromise which disconnected the repeal from federal budget measures... all of which were in danger of being sunk. At least this was a win of sorts. Hopefully the military will play ball by suspending all current investigations and proceedings in anticipation of the new policy, which doesn't go into effect until the pentagon can advise on a coherent new policy for the military regarding openness.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In my opinion - people have sex. Usually with other people. It shouldn't be more complicated than that. So glad to see this go.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was please to see Sen. Kirk, our new Republican senator, break ranks and vote in favor of the repeal. He ran to the center; maybe this is a sign he well stay there.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
ETA: J.H.C. I'm looking at the Fox Nation culture page. This is the trashiest crap I have ever seen from a major network in my life.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not especially vocal about Fox News, I just ignore it when I can, but oh my gosh that Fox Nation culture section made me want to tear my eyes out.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i'm pretty vocal about fox news cause it actively makes you dumber and less informed if you watch it.
and hey, i like people's brains to be less rotted as opposed to more.
do you or a friend use fox news? educate your family about the dangers of fox news. only you can put out forest fires. of dumb.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I'm not especially vocal about Fox News, I just ignore it when I can, but oh my gosh that Fox Nation culture section made me want to tear my eyes out.
I know right? I knew fox news was crappy for a lot of reasons, I had no idea it had become so blatantly trashy. I mean, those headlines read like ones you might see on Savage Nation or something really bat**** "aliens punctured my testicles" crazy.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Burr hits the nail on the head in his statement when he refers to generational change. Poll after poll shows a clear generational divide when it comes to issues like same-sex marriage and gay rights. As the younger generation of voters become more politically active, the debate is shifting on those issues to the point where, in twenty years or less, people will likely be amazed that we wasted so much time and money fighting over an issue like who a person should be allowed to enter a committed relationship with. There’s a lesson in Burr’s vote for the GOP as a whole. Opposition to issues like same-sex marriage and concentration on issues that appeal only to a tiny part of the base may pay political dividends right now, but in the not-too-distant future, it’s likely to turn off an entire generation of voters.
posted
Uh, haven't they already been showering together? I mean, if 13,000 troops have been kicked out in the past 17 years for being gay, then I guarantee there have probably been at least 10 times that number of gay soldiers. I know several myself. Now, because you can no longer get in trouble for being gay in the military, showering with gays is suddenly a big deal? It's been happening since they invented showers.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
^Was my first reaction to this. I believe it requires some powerful self-deception to not draw that connection immediately.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know of atleast one couple who actually met in the Navy, any demands that one soldier not have to shower with another kind of soldier could only be fixed with private showers for all personel regardless of gender and sexuality. It seems a bit petty for the US military, being in the service isnt exactly famous as being comfortable and adaptable to the wants of a whiney bigot.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Showers in the canadian military are fairly private, the stalls each have walls and a door.
IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe on halfway-permanent bases that are actually in Canada. If you had been to Iraq or Afghanistan you might have found some different showers.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Showers in the canadian military are fairly private, the stalls each have walls and a door.
The ones you saw did. That is not sufficient information to state such a claim, unless you are actually aware of some standard in the Canadian military which must be met in that regard.
Also, we're talking about the US military, where I do believe in some cases private toilet facilities are not provided, much less showers.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Maybe on halfway-permanent bases that are actually in Canada. If you had been to Iraq or Afghanistan you might have found some different showers.
These were basically in those portable shipping containing type facilities, the ones I imagine to be quite portable and would be lifted into such places or hauled on trains/flatbed trucks.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Showers in the canadian military are fairly private, the stalls each have walls and a door.
It depends on where you are. The barracks I live in look somewhat like hotel rooms - you have 2 walk in closets, 2 secretaries, 2 beds, 2 end tables, as well as a large desk/bookshelf thingy with 2 chairs and a fridge. It's got a private bathroom, just like you'd find in an apartment. In boot camp/SOI, though, we slept in a squad bays and had a "rain room" with 12 shower heads. When you need to get 80 men cleaned in 10 minutes, private stalls just aren't practical. We'd usually double up on a shower head, and have a third guy soaping up while the other two rinsed.
At first it was a little uncomfortable, especially trying to navigate a small shower room with a bunch of other guys... you'd try and squeeze out to grab your towel and feel something squishy slap against your leg. By the end, though, we lost any sense of modesty and there was a lot of ass slapping and oil checks and guys soaping up each others backs and so forth. I think if you put a bunch of naked guys together long enough, things naturally drift in that direction. It only seems weird to civilians because they're not used to living, eating, sleeping, shooting, running, talking, digging, and showering with the same group of guys for months on end. Actually, I don't think many people outside the military ever have platonic relationships that close, which is kind of sad.
Anyway, it seems to me all this fuss is being caused by people who have no friends or family members who are gay, and don't really understand it. They think that a gay man is going to lust after all his brothers in a shower room... to counter that, I say, remember being a kid and taking a bath with your sister? Now imagine for whatever reason you had to take showers with your siblings nowadays. You may be attracted to females, but you're not going to be lusting after your sister, are you? (at least, I hope not) It's sort of the same idea, I think.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I showered in the large open shower rooms when I was in the Army. I never once saw any man offer to soap up another man's back. Not in 3 years.
I would be uncomfortable showering with a gay man, despite being comfortable and confident with my sexual orientation. I know a few guys who were gay when I was in the Army, and I just made sure I showered at a different time than they did, and they took no offense at it. As a matter of fact, they usually tried to shower when others weren't in the shower room as well, for their own comfort.
But denying it could cause a lot of potential problems is not facing reality.
In situations where you are in the field, I imagine they could address this by making another category or two, as they already do for men and women.
And you are not related to anyone else you are showering with, so expecting a man or a woman not to notice the physical form they are attracted to is not realistic. The comparison to bathing with your sister, years before puberty, is a poor one. The fact is that you will now have soldiers bathing with people they already find attractive, only now they are allowed to comment on that attraction.
Nothing that can't be dealt with, of course, but simply saying it shouldn't be a problem doesn't mean it won't be.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: I showered in the large open shower rooms when I was in the Army. I never once saw any man offer to soap up another man's back. Not in 3 years.
I've showered in not so large shower rooms, and I'm in the Marine Corps. I've seen and heard some pretty hilarious things.
I remember one time when we did have separate stalls, we had two SSgts who always played gay chicken with each other. They were getting pretty into it (with fake high pitched voices, much to the amusement of the other men), when one of them said "well, if that's the way you feel, come on over here and tell me about it!" The first one ran over to his stall and rips open the curtain, hoping to freak him out, but the second one grabbed him and pulled him into the stall.
I don't know what time frame you served during, but the Marine Corps is well known for such things. Just look up Man Love Thursday if you don't believe me.
In one of my buddies units, they took it so far that one guy in the platoon who didn't really understand irony or sarcasm complained to the company commander about the rampant homosexuality in his workplace. The captain told him he couldn't do anything about it, but told him he'd arrange him a meeting with the battalion XO. The captain goes and talks to him about it first. Guy meets with the XO, a major, and starts telling him about his problems... the major acts very concerned, then walks around the desk and starts massaging the guys shoulders, telling him to "tell me, how does all this make you feel?"
Then he went on to explain it was just a joke, and the marine ended up lightening up after that.
I think it's interesting you never saw any of this in the Army, but I guess it depends on who you're with.
quote:I would be uncomfortable showering with a gay man, despite being comfortable and confident with my sexual orientation. I know a few guys who were gay when I was in the Army, and I just made sure I showered at a different time than they did, and they took no offense at it. As a matter of fact, they usually tried to shower when others weren't in the shower room as well, for their own comfort.
But denying it could cause a lot of potential problems is not facing reality.
Okay, so you knew the soldiers were gay. And this was during DADT. And you managed to find a way to deal with it in a way that both of you could work with.
Tell me, how does any of this change now that everyone, and not just the other soldiers in their unit, know they're gay? It seems like the exact same situation.
quote:And you are not related to anyone else you are showering with, so expecting a man or a woman not to notice the physical form they are attracted to is not realistic. The comparison to bathing with your sister, years before puberty, is a poor one. The fact is that you will now have soldiers bathing with people they already find attractive, only now they are allowed to comment on that attraction.
Again, maybe the difference between Marines and Soldiers, but I consider the men I work with my brothers - in many ways, a lot of them are closer than any family I've ever had. I couldn't imagine being aroused by showering with them, even if they were female. (much in the same way I can't imagine being aroused by family members. It's not pre/post pubescent, it's just... ew.) Moreover, I doubt your average gay man is really looking to score with straight guys. I think the discomfort many feel comes from them imagining the gay men looking them up and down lecherously, when if anything, they'd actually just feel a little grossed out.
quote:Nothing that can't be dealt with, of course, but simply saying it shouldn't be a problem doesn't mean it won't be.
But it *hasn't* been a problem, not since our military was started! Why should it suddenly become one now?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Maybe on halfway-permanent bases that are actually in Canada. If you had been to Iraq or Afghanistan you might have found some different showers.
No kidding. Being ogled is the least of their worries in those showers.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The fact is that you will now have soldiers bathing with people they already find attractive, only now they are allowed to comment on that attraction.
I'm not certain what you're suggesting here, but nothing that would be inappropriate for a man to say to a woman or vice versa would suddenly become okay under this new law between a gay individual and a straight individual.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, fraternization is still against the rules. It always has been. Perhaps now the staff sergeants will be aware of who is gay, and police fraternization between those people the same way they do between men and women.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Moreover, I doubt your average gay man is really looking to score with straight guys.
Depending on who you talk to you, most people of any gender or sexual preferance are not attracted to thier antithesis in romantic matters. Straight women arent romantically attracted to affeminate gay men while they may appreciate a physique but more for general aesthetic than anything. I find women in general beuatiful but I dont think I would care for the female chollo that comes into my store on the basis that I like to be wanted in return when it comes to a real person rather than a face or name. People need to get away from the idea that homosexuals are rampant perverts with no self control, lesbians will not make your kids gay and gay men will not rape you just because you have a cute butt.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
There seems to be a strong sexual abuse history in the US military, with a surprising number of women soldiers claiming to have been raped or forced into sex by those of higher ranks or by group dynamics of similar ranked soldiers.
Those who seem the most afraid of this new reality seem as ill informed and uncaring of others as the abusers. In other words, as a Sarge I ordered my women to have sex with me. Sure, its against the rules, but hey--everyone is doing it and they really don't mind or they wouldn't have joined the army. Oh--wait, now that big male captain can do the same to me? Oh no. That is not fair.
I was also a bit disturbed by the Chaplain corps reaction. According to information from NPR, there is a growing number of Evangelical Christians in the Chaplain corp--mainly because Catholic Priests are getting rare, and other religions just don't volunteer as much. (The idea of our Army becoming a Christian Army willing to convert via automatic weapon is scary and would make a great story)
Anyway, they complained that having Gay soldiers in the military would make their job more difficult, since they would have to find a way to work with soldiers who believed differently than they do. Wait a minute? Don't they already deal with soldiers who believe differently than they do? Don't they already deal with non-Christian Soldiers, Catholics, LDS, Muslims?
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or perhaps just as important or more-so, they also have to deal with non-Christian, currently predominantly Muslim civilians if deployed overseas.
It is probably for the best if those that have difficulty dealing with fellow soldiers of a different background get discouraged long before they have to get to the task of winning the "hearts and minds" of civilians.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: [QUOTE] People need to get away from the idea that homosexuals are rampant perverts with no self control, lesbians will not make your kids gay and gay men will not rape you just because you have a cute butt.
But isn't it then hypocritical to suggest we separate men and women showers and barracks? Unless you're saying that gay people are inherently more self controlled than straight and therefore more capable of showering and bunking with those they might be physically attracted to?
Posts: 135 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:But isn't it then hypocritical to suggest we separate men and women showers and barracks? Unless you're saying that gay people are inherently more self controlled than straight and therefore more capable of showering and bunking with those they might be physically attracted to?
Men are, on average, larger, stronger, and more aggressive than women. There is also a well-documented history of sexual assault by men against women, including (especially?) within the armed forces. There is no similar history of gay men assaulting other men.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: so the discrimination is based on physical stature and aggression, not sexual attraction?
I'd say it's cultural, as well. We live in a culture where men and women being casually naked together is taboo. There are other societies where it's perfectly acceptable - see some tribes in Africa and S. America that run around naked all the time, or the public baths in ancient Rome.
As far as living quarters, well, it's been statistically shown that time(man + woman)=baby. Soldiers already have ridiculous amounts of unsafe sex and illegitimate children as is, no need to encourage such things...
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: so the discrimination is based on physical stature and aggression, not sexual attraction?
Are you looking for an answer, or just trolling? The paradigm is based on accepted social standards. The sexes do not shower and bunk together if it is feasible to separate them. This is not only because most men and women are sexually attracted to the opposite sex, but also because there exists the strong likelihood that if they were to shower and bunk together, there would be issues of harassment or abuse, or at least undue discomfort. This is simply not the case with homosexuals- there is always the possibility of problems, however they are bound to be less serious ones given that the people involved are of the same sex, and it is socially acceptable anyway for them to shower and bunk together. The problems inherent in separating them are worse than the possible issues they will have together.
Of all straws to grasp at, this is a truly pathetic one.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: [QUOTE] People need to get away from the idea that homosexuals are rampant perverts with no self control, lesbians will not make your kids gay and gay men will not rape you just because you have a cute butt.
But isn't it then hypocritical to suggest we separate men and women showers and barracks? Unless you're saying that gay people are inherently more self controlled than straight and therefore more capable of showering and bunking with those they might be physically attracted to?
Yes, I do in fact believe that by a percentage more gay Americans are able to control themselves in uncomfortable situations seeing as they live in country where complete strangers are willing believe the absolute worst and treat them like monsters with no prompting. Being gay in this country makes you a target to random people that they will have to deal with at any given time. Think of getting stuck in an elevator with a fast food bag and a vegan, except the vegan is insulting you and making threats of violence.
I know of no man on man rape between fellow soldiers in all recorded military history, all military history. Including Spartan.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: [QUOTE] People need to get away from the idea that homosexuals are rampant perverts with no self control, lesbians will not make your kids gay and gay men will not rape you just because you have a cute butt.
But isn't it then hypocritical to suggest we separate men and women showers and barracks? Unless you're saying that gay people are inherently more self controlled than straight and therefore more capable of showering and bunking with those they might be physically attracted to?
Men and women don't always have separate shower and bunking facilities. I dated a girl who had spent time in Iraq. She was the only girl in her unit. She bunked with the guys, and used the same shower facilities. She showered at different times than the guys, but they all slept in the same room.
So, you were speaking from massive ignorance, right? Perhaps you'd like to back down?
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by capaxinfiniti: so the discrimination is based on physical stature and aggression, not sexual attraction?
No, it has more to do with how naked mens and naked womens in same place together is a rigidly ingrained cultural taboo and also related to issue involving naked mens and womens equals baby. Soon as we got coed YMCA showers you could make the (already tenuous) comparison. As it is, no dice.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by steven: Men and women don't always have separate shower and bunking facilities. I dated a girl who had spent time in Iraq. She was the only girl in her unit. She bunked with the guys, and used the same shower facilities. She showered at different times than the guys, but they all slept in the same room.
So, you were speaking from massive ignorance, right? Perhaps you'd like to back down?
Unless you're suggesting that your example above is the norm, please point out where I've displayed massive ignorance.
Why would I "back down" from a reasonable question which has, in fact, been reasonably responded to by others?
Posts: 135 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Yes, I do in fact believe that by a percentage more gay Americans are able to control themselves in uncomfortable situations seeing as they live in country where complete strangers are willing believe the absolute worst and treat them like monsters with no prompting. Being gay in this country makes you a target to random people that they will have to deal with at any given time. Think of getting stuck in an elevator with a fast food bag and a vegan, except the vegan is insulting you and making threats of violence.
I know of no man on man rape between fellow soldiers in all recorded military history, all military history. Including Spartan. [/QB]
I appreciate your honesty and response, it will be interesting to see how this will bear out statistically over the next few years. Admittedly, it's not all that concerning to me but I do find it a compelling topic.
Not having studied all recorded military history, I'll take your word on the rape data. Although I'm doubting the Spartans would have had much of a documented intra-rank grievance process. Posts: 135 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was refering to how Sparta was largely homosexual in part to both genders being raised with only thier same sex beyond early childhood, somehow thier military operated just fine when filled with men whose only emotionally romantic connections with thier fellow warriors.
kmbboots, I dont personally believe anyone is more concerned about sexual abuse and missuse of authority in the military than they have been in the past, rather now that it is okay to say that a soldier is gay homophobic people in fragile positions will use this topic and others like it to discredit said soldiers without calling them catamites.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: kmbboots, I dont personally believe anyone is more concerned about sexual abuse and missuse of authority in the military than they have been in the past, rather now that it is okay to say that a soldier is gay homophobic people in fragile positions will use this topic and others like it to discredit said soldiers without calling them catamites.
Right. I was referring to all the people who are so worried about the possibility of men being harassed by gay men. Where were they when women soldiers by the thousands were being harassed?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Reading Kmboots' link, perhaps this will solve a growing problem.
It seems that when women in the military say no to some men, these men assume that only a Lesbian would say no to them--so they report them under DADT.
Now these idiots won't ruin a woman soldiers career because she isn't interested in his 30 second joy ride.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:How many women have had invasive patdowns at the airport and yet the national outcry comes when a man's junk is touched.
In fairness, it's been some rather loud men that have amplified the outcry. "Don't touch my junk" is a pretty catchy rallying cry without a female equivalent. It's been guys that have shown up at the airport with cameras or wearing speedos. If there have been an equal number of outspoken women that have been ignored, I'd be curious to hear about it, but I don't think this was a sexist thing. Personally, I don't care about getting felt up at the security check point, but I would be bothered by my wife getting the same treatment. Maybe that just makes me paternalistic?
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
