Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
Sigged.Coyote wrote:You say that now, but wait until your avatar shemale, Ann Coulter, tears off her dress and comes at you, screaming, "I ride you now, my love stallion!"Elfdart wrote:I'd be tickled pink if some gay dude looked at my hairy chigger-scarred ass and popped a boner. That's a compliment, Kamikaze Sith, so take it as one you dumb fuck!
Okay. On what does he base this generalization of all the women in the US Army?CmdrWilkens wrote:The context of this ENTIRE argument is wihtin the US Armed Forces since they are, apparently, the horrible offenders. Wihtin the context of the debate saying "women wouldn't tolerate it" is clearly referrant to those women who would be affected by an analogous change in policy.SirNitram wrote:I'm sorry, can you read? You said 'Women don't stand for this'. Not 'The US Military' or 'Women in the US Military'. What, you want to backpedal now? Run back and try and find some ground that doesn't reveal you've got some giant fucking issues?Kamakazie Sith wrote: Last time I checked the US military didn't have three billion individuals.
What rhetoric? You think I'm bullshitting? You think I haven't done all these things? Why? Because your precious worldview would implode at the very concept?Seriously though step back from the rhetoric and ask yourself this:Or, you know, did like everyone else who was too embarassed and brought a swimsuit. It's a body. Everyone's seen a fucking tit before. Get over yourself.If they are all okay with it then that's fine, but I suspect some of them were too reserved to say anything, and just went along with it.
So does a properly fitted dinner jacket. What's your goddamn point?If we were to suddenly end all distinctions in bathrooms and shower facilities would you want a sister or daughter of yours taking a piss in an open toilet with a bunch of guys lined up across the way at the urinal? Would you want the same sister or daughter in a shower with those same men? You can't honestly tell me you would be perfectly comfortable with that. Is it fair to either the men or the women? Fuck no but seperating the bathing facilities removes sexuality from a scenario where our bodies are on full display. What Kamazkazi is saying, and which I understand, is that this whole scenario is analogous to straight and gay men. Sure its nowhere close to "fair" but sperating the facilities acknowledges and removes sexulaity from a situaiton where our bodies are on full display. Its nto seperation for the sake of serpeation its seperation to acknowledge the nature of human sexuality which is that:
A) Its there
and
B) Naked bodies cause sexual reactions
Gosh, people think about sex. Better put all the women in Burqas, because you just described the attitude that is used to justify that particular abomination against human rights: Sexual Attraction Exists.If you could find me some study showing that looking at naked bodies only causes the mind to think about sex a fraciton of the time then yes everything is hunkydorey and we can go about our buisness showering together but I'm betting (admission I don't know for an absolute fact) that you'd find study after study linking nudity and sexuality paticularly in the male brain. Thus removing sexual attraction from scenarios where it could be present is a valid decision to increase efficiency.
WHich is an entirely different cultural subset than the military. We don't see each others naked bodies all day long, we don't spend the whole day in an oen environment liek some such place. Certainly we also don't go jumping the bones of all the women around us (heterosexual men that is) despite seeing them in PT shorts. That said I'm talking about making a reasonable accomodation for comfort. Ahead of everything else the military culture is a generally very reserved one so for better or worse I think everyone would acknowledge there is a lot more body modesty than, perhaps, many people here feel. Given that I don't thnk its unreasonable to attempt to eliminate an innate level of sexual tension from a simple funtion like bathing and sleeping.General Zod wrote:Maybe Wilkens could bother explaining why people who go to nudist colonies or beaches aren't jumping each other's bones 24/7. Once you're around or have seen enough nudity it's just not that big of a deal.
Coyote sorry I missed this jumping to the last page, you nailed it on the head.Coyote wrote:Quite frankly, I think we need some serious discussion below decks. This topic comes up from time to time, as is understandable, but for some reason here discipline broke down and some thoughts and attitudes I'd not previously suspected before are coming up.
I think at this point rational debate on the issue is past. This has gone on far enough, and while I can't actually "issue orders" here as in "real life", I think it's time to put a stop to it.
If it is felt that no more rational discussion can be had, I'd like to request a thread lock.
Oh, you have no idea. Just look at the debates about allowing women to breastfeed, breastfeed, in public.SirNitram wrote:Of course, given that I'm being handed more and more evidence that Americans in general have some freakish terror of the other sex naked, that might explain what he's talking about...
Look, people may get passionate in discussing things here, but that's no reason to kill the issue. How will it ever be resolved if we can't even discuss it on one of the most liberal boards on the web?I'll have to go under with this one discussion as well. It appears that this discussion has turned up very nasty hornets nest. Consider this matter closed for right now...
What, you actually think this argument was getting heated? Oh please. It's not even above standard kitchen temperature yet.Darth Yoshi wrote:Justforfun, we need to take a breather, because people are getting so worked up that they're likely to get themselves banned. No one's trying to kill the issue, but people need to calm the fuck down before any more discussion takes place.
Thanks for the nightmares last night.Coyote wrote:You say that now, but wait until your avatar shemale, Ann Coulter, tears off her dress and comes at you, screaming, "I ride you now, my love stallion!"Elfdart wrote:I'd be tickled pink if some gay dude looked at my hairy chigger-scarred ass and popped a boner. That's a compliment, Kamikaze Sith, so take it as one you dumb fuck!
yup, homophobes are primarily closet cases.Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:The thing is, scientific evidence shows that people who think that they can catch the gay already have it beforehand. But we knew that already.The Yosemite Bear wrote:not so much that the ein's would wack off, it's the fact that the homophobes are afraid they could catch the gayness....
I'm sure that there are people who throw hissy-fits about that too. There's a whole culture of fear when it comes to any potential expression of anything that could possibly be considered sexual in nature.Kane Starkiller wrote:Honestly if we can have nudist beaches where we bring 5 year old children to be looked at by every man on the beach some of which could be pedophiles then what the fuck is the problem with fucking soldiers being naked in the same room? Can't we expect a certain level of professionalism from homosexual soldiers that they won't go around gawking at everybody?
Actually they did adress it and they admit they don't really think this. What's worse though is that they seem to imply that being the "victim" of sexual interest by a male even in their own MIND is somehow a violation of privacy and deserves a response of segregation. That's the real issue and it's arguably even more stupid then the first one.What annoys me is that the main defenders of Pace have yet to adress one of my points. So i'll ask again. Do you really think gay and bi people are so lacking in self restraint that they'll try and fuck anything they take a fancy to?
