Gen. Pace calls homosexuality immoral

[Aaron]

Logistical problems, how so? Do you mean providing separate quarters on base or other facilities?

I don't see how it's any different from integrating women into the service. I think some of the people opposed to having known gays in the service (I'm not singling you or anyone else out here) comes from a hysterical belief that gays will start to make sexual advances against straight service members.

Some gays and lesbians will make advances on straight service members, I've seen it myself. It's no different than a guy making a move on a female soldier or vice versa and mature soldiers can handle it. In my experiance a firm "no thanks" ends it right there.

[FSTargetDrone]

Some gays and lesbians will make advances on straight service members, I've seen it myself. It's no different than a guy making a move on a female soldier or vice versa and mature soldiers can handle it. In my experiance a firm "no thanks" ends it right there.

Exactly, but I doubt it's the majority who do so. And as you say, that can be handled easily enough. If there is a problem of harassment, well, I suppose that can be addressed.

[General Zod]

Personally, while I don't have much of a problem with gays in the service, they would pose some logistical problems implementing such a policy- so you better save your fork for someone who actually disagree's with ya.

What logistical problems? Besides the existing servicemen's own bigotry that is. . .

[Aaron]

Exactly, but I doubt it's the majority who do so. And as you say, that can be handled easily enough. If there is a problem of harassment, well, I suppose that can be addressed.

The harrassment road is, I doubt one that anyone wants to head down. Sexual harrassment is pretty much a career ending complaint if it's found to be valid. And if the US military is suddenly admitting gays and lesbians I wouldn't doubt that they'll be pretty sensitive to such complaints.

[consequences]

Personally, while I don't have much of a problem with gays in the service, they would pose some logistical problems implementing such a policy- so you better save your fork for someone who actually disagree's with ya.

What logistical problems? Besides the existing servicemen's own bigotry that is. . .

Shower facilities spring to mind immediately, possibly along with separated barracks or at least bedrooms. The same reasoning for reducing opportunities for heterosexual fraternisation and misconduct would apply.

Of course, the bigotry is also one of the primary issues. The amount of pressure that gets brought to bear on anyone who even behaves differently from expected gets pretty intense, even without the perceived stigma of homosexuality. Throw in some accusations of that, and the death threats and suicide watches start right up.

[General Zod]

Shower facilities spring to mind immediately, possibly along with separated barracks or at least bedrooms. The same reasoning for reducing opportunities for heterosexual fraternisation and misconduct would apply.

Does the Canadian military have separate showers for homosexual/bisexual members? If not then I'm not sure why there would need to be any except to cater to the bigotry of the currently existing personnel.

Of course, the bigotry is also one of the primary issues. The amount of pressure that gets brought to bear on anyone who even behaves differently from expected gets pretty intense, even without the perceived stigma of homosexuality. Throw in some accusations of that, and the death threats and suicide watches start right up.

You could have said the same thing during the 40s-50s when they were desegregating the military.

[Aaron]

Does the Canadian military have separate showers for homosexual/bisexual members? If not then I'm not sure why there would need to be any except to cater to the bigotry of the currently existing personnel.

No we don't all quarters are mixed. That goes for male/female quarters as well. With only the rooms and bathrooms being segregated but often times a female room will be next door to a male room.

You could have said the same thing during the 40s-50s when they were desegregating the military.

Like I said before the only way to change the thinking on this issue is to mandate a change and start kicking people out for not getting on board. Offer them counselling on the issue first and a probation period but if that doesn't work then your gone.

[Big Orange]

You said this was 'Not News', then you say it's on the same level as Mad Mel's antisemitic rants that made the news the world over? Which is it, hatfucker? You certainly seem like you don't want this to get people's attention for some reason. I wonder why?

The point is a high-ranking official, to put it bluntly, said that being gay is wrong. There's no defense for that.

Of course there is no excuse for what that reactionary idiot said but why should I take his opinion seriously when he's shown his true colours and demolished his credibility as a military leader? And while Mel Gibson's drunk rambling hit the international news, his bigotry and idiocy was clear for all to see for many years leading up to his DUI offence nearly six months ago (Braveheart was certainly vehemently homophobic).

[Aaron]

Oh sorry, showers are mixed as well. But the showers are not open concept but seperate stalls.

[consequences]

Shower facilities spring to mind immediately, possibly along with separated barracks or at least bedrooms. The same reasoning for reducing opportunities for heterosexual fraternisation and misconduct would apply.

Does the Canadian military have separate showers for homosexual/bisexual members? If not then I'm not sure why there would need to be any except to cater to the bigotry of the currently existing personnel.

For that, all I can say is ask Kendall. From my personal view, if you are going to force people to get ogled in a way that makes them uncomfortable, you might as well shove everybody together Movie SST style, so that everyone but the exhibitionist nymphos feel exposed.

Or they could just renovate the barracks to get rid of the communal shower horseshit in the first place, but that would be entirely too much like progressive thought.

Of course, the bigotry is also one of the primary issues. The amount of pressure that gets brought to bear on anyone who even behaves differently from expected gets pretty intense, even without the perceived stigma of homosexuality. Throw in some accusations of that, and the death threats and suicide watches start right up.

You could have said the same thing during the 40s-50s when they were desegregating the military.

Unfortunately, the whole don't ask, don't tell policy has only made the situation worse than it had to be. Now, if you find out that Private Johnson has been gay since before Basic it feels like a betrayal on several levels, leading to ill feelings at best, and violent confrontation at worst. It was a ham-handed jury-rig, that people have been trying to treat like a permanent fix.

[Aaron]

Of course there is no excuse for what that reactionary idiot said but why should I take his opinion seriously when he's shown his true colours and demolished his credibility as a military leader? And while Mel Gibson's drunk rambling hit the international news, his bigotry and idiocy was clear for all to see for many years leading up to his DUI offence nearly six months ago (Braveheart was certainly vehemently homophobic).

The thing is, he hasn't destroyed his cedibility as a military leader. Bush and the majority of the Christian right are going to see him as a fine upstanding man who is defending their values. At the worts the rest of the military is going to see him as shooting his mouth of about something he can't control. Do you know how many times we saw and heard things from the Brigade Commander or the Chief of Defense Staff when I was in that we ignored because it was nonsense but didn't affect our opinion of the man one iota? The answer is alot. Soldiers get bombarded with alot of bullshit and they tend to ignore alot of it. I doubt that this will affect his credibility with the troops much, they probably already think he's an idiot. But the higher up leadership and the adminstration will think he's a good ole boy. And the Christian Right will love him so he'll write a book and get a good speaking junket after he retires.

[General Zod]

For that, all I can say is ask Kendall. From my personal view, if you are going to force people to get ogled in a way that makes them uncomfortable, you might as well shove everybody together Movie SST style, so that everyone but the exhibitionist nymphos feel exposed.

Since showering with a bunch of naked men is enough to make some people uncomfortable alone, then I'm not really sure your point has much in the way of weight. The same reasoning can be applied to high school and college gym showers.

Unfortunately, the whole don't ask, don't tell policy has only made the situation worse than it had to be. Now, if you find out that Private Johnson has been gay since before Basic it feels like a betrayal on several levels, leading to ill feelings at best, and violent confrontation at worst. It was a ham-handed jury-rig, that people have been trying to treat like a permanent fix.

Which changes my point how? You can replace gay with Jewish, Muslim or Rich and it's practically the same argument.

[Enforcer Talen]

As a rule, what generals said tended to have very little effect at the squad level. He might say, move this regiment here, but he doesnt really dictate the squad level.

Hence, being out would be more of a squad dynamic thing, from what Ive seen.

[Wicked Pilot]

About the whole shower issue, because I'm sick of hearing about it, is that it's been my experience that if you're showering with someone else it's either because you're in basic training, or in the field, in which case you don't have time sneak a peak. You're there to wash, rinse, and get the fuck out before you get bitched at for wasting water.

[Plekhanov]

Wow, knee jerk much? You don't even know if Lonestar agree's with or disagree's with the central question and 'your done with him'? All he's argued about right now is 'it doesn't matter' what the jarhead numbnut said because he couldn't change the damn policy if he wanted to.

That's simply not true Lonestar has done much more than argue 'it doesn't matter' in this thread such as launching a series of personal attacks against Einhander and basically stated that Einhander doesn’t have the right to have or express an opinion on this issue simply because he takes drugs. As such is it any wonder Einhander has lost patience with Lonestar?

Personally, while I don't have much of a problem with gays in the service, they would pose some logistical problems implementing such a policy- so you better save your fork for someone who actually disagree's with ya.

All but a few European countries have homosexuals openly serving in their militaries have any of them experienced these mysterious and unspecified ‘logistical problems’?

[Enforcer Talen]

About the whole shower issue, because I'm sick of hearing about it, is that it's been my experience that if you're showering with someone else it's either because you're in basic training, or in the field, in which case you don't have time sneak a peak. You're there to wash, rinse, and get the fuck out before you get bitched at for wasting water.

Eh, our barracks had it on the way to Iraq (but not in Iraq, yay seperate stalls), but the water was so cold it was rarely used.

[Enforcer Talen]

Wow, knee jerk much? You don't even know if Lonestar agree's with or disagree's with the central question and 'your done with him'? All he's argued about right now is 'it doesn't matter' what the jarhead numbnut said because he couldn't change the damn policy if he wanted to.

That's simply not true Lonestar has done much more than argue 'it doesn't matter' in this thread such as launching a series of personal attacks against Einhander and basically stated that Einhander doesn’t have the right to have or express an opinion on this issue simply because he takes drugs. As such is it any wonder Einhander has lost patience with Lonestar?

Personally, while I don't have much of a problem with gays in the service, they would pose some logistical problems implementing such a policy- so you better save your fork for someone who actually disagree's with ya.

All but a few European countries have homosexuals openly serving in their militaries have any of them experienced these mysterious and unspecified ‘logistical problems’?

Most of it would involve asking the question: Are we keeping the gay military types in a seperate barracks area? The concern is with undue fratnerization, which is why the females are kept in seperate barracks as well.

[consequences]

For that, all I can say is ask Kendall. From my personal view, if you are going to force people to get ogled in a way that makes them uncomfortable, you might as well shove everybody together Movie SST style, so that everyone but the exhibitionist nymphos feel exposed.

Since showering with a bunch of naked men is enough to make some people uncomfortable alone, then I'm not really sure your point has much in the way of weight. The same reasoning can be applied to high school and college gym showers.

I would have thought that the line I wrote following, that you left out, would have made my feelings on the matter quite clear. In case I haven't been clear enough, I'm not particularly enamored of the military's stance in this and other matters. To say it again, the easy fix is to just install separate showers stalls, and this solution will no doubt be nixed for a variety of excuses, ranging from whining about cost to appeals to tradition.

Unfortunately, the whole don't ask, don't tell policy has only made the situation worse than it had to be. Now, if you find out that Private Johnson has been gay since before Basic it feels like a betrayal on several levels, leading to ill feelings at best, and violent confrontation at worst. It was a ham-handed jury-rig, that people have been trying to treat like a permanent fix.

Which changes my point how? You can replace gay with Jewish, Muslim or Rich and it's practically the same argument.[/quote]

It doesn't, as I'm agreeing with you, and pointing out that the military's so-called solution is just making it worse. The fundamental message is that you can't love your country enough to defend it and simultaneously be gay, and it's a really shitty message.

[consequences]

About the whole shower issue, because I'm sick of hearing about it, is that it's been my experience that if you're showering with someone else it's either because you're in basic training, or in the field, in which case you don't have time sneak a peak. You're there to wash, rinse, and get the fuck out before you get bitched at for wasting water.

Or stuck in a shitty-ass temporary barracks that should have been condemned before the eighties for a month or more while the army tries to figure out what to do with your unit.

Not everyone was smart enough to continue down the hall to the Air Force recruiter after all.

[General Zod]

Most of it would involve asking the question: Are we keeping the gay military types in a seperate barracks area? The concern is with undue fratnerization, which is why the females are kept in seperate barracks as well.

Since straight members wouldn't have any interest in undue fraternization with homosexual members, why would this be a problem, exactly?

[Enforcer Talen]

The obvious hypothetical concern would be that public homosexuals would pursue others in the barracks in the same manner that straight military people would pursue each other if in the same barracks.

I'm from the infantry originally, so we didn't see too many women. Im just pointing out aspects which might cause concern.

[consequences]

Most of it would involve asking the question: Are we keeping the gay military types in a seperate barracks area? The concern is with undue fratnerization, which is why the females are kept in seperate barracks as well.

Since straight members wouldn't have any interest in undue fraternization with homosexual members, why would this be a problem, exactly?

From the military's viewpoint, there's a couple of things that make this a problem. If you put the homosexuals in the same area, you are encouraging fraternisation between them. If you bunk the homosexuals with the heterosexuals, then you are exposing the poor innocent bigots to those damned queer cooties(I can't be bothered to come up with a reasonable sounding rationalisation right now). If you give all the homosexuals separate rooms, you are giving preferential treatment and disrupting unit cohesion.

Whatever you try to do, there's going to be a bullshit excuse that makes it an unthinkable solution.

[Aaron]

Most of it would involve asking the question: Are we keeping the gay military types in a seperate barracks area? The concern is with undue fratnerization, which is why the females are kept in seperate barracks as well.

You mean to tell me that in the 21st Century your still keeping the women and men in seperate barracks? Fuck me, the US is backwards. No wonder the US troops used to shit a brick when they visited our barracks on exchange.

More to the point, besides the rare occurance I doubt that the gays are going to be propositioning the straights if there's a bunch of gays around.

[General Zod]

The obvious hypothetical concern would be that public homosexuals would pursue others in the barracks in the same manner that straight military people would pursue each other if in the same barracks.

I'm from the infantry originally, so we didn't see too many women. Im just pointing out aspects which might cause concern.

I would imagine most wouldn't be so obvious about their shagging each other like rabbits. Which leads back to the whole bit about soldiers having bigotry issues. Replace "black people" with "homosexual people", and "straight people" with "White people". Your point isn't really much of one.

[jegs2]

Some gays and lesbians will make advances on straight service members, I've seen it myself. It's no different than a guy making a move on a female soldier or vice versa and mature soldiers can handle it. In my experiance a firm "no thanks" ends it right there.

Happened to me on a Navy base (go figure), while I was enlisted in the USCG about a decade and a half ago. Didn't know I was being hit on - thought the fellow was just being friendly. Once I realized what was going on, I told him I wasn't into dudes.