Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Discussion in 'Politics' started by arkfarmbear, Sep 2, 2010.

  1. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    One of the major reasons for not repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell is that some soldiers will be uncomfortable being in close proximity to out gays and lesbians.

    Why does this matter? If you talk privately to active duty soldiers many will voice strong bias and bigotry where black people are concerned. They will also admit that they resent having to obey commands issued by black superiors.
    We don't permit soldiers to act on their feelings. I support these rules. Therefore, the leadership, military and civil, are speaking out of both sides of their mouth.
     
  2. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    OK, please explain how taking orders from a superior is somehow different when the person above you is black versus any other skin color? Also, explain how any of this has anything to do with DADT?
     
  3. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,279
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,095
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    I read his post as that he was making an analogy, that we wouldn't tolerate soldiers complaining about black people and we also shouldn't tolerate soldiers complaining about gay people. I believe he supports the repeal of DADT. I thought the analogy was an apt one.
     
  4. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    14,785
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    538
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Asia
    Re-read the post VB. You're jumping to a conclusion that shouldn't exist.
     
  5. B_mitchymo

    B_mitchymo New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,706
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Rugby, England
    I guess some men are a little bit worried about being eyed as a sexual being, they might start flipping out and not know what to do. They might start behaving in an exhibitionistic kind of way, flexing their muscles and caressing themselves when they wash, naturally in a sexual manner. Other soldiers might look at them and start thinking they have become eccentric. Eventually the time will come that someone will tell them to 'man up'. This will be devastating to their ego, knowing that puffs are fighting like men whilst they are having their ego crushed for being a curious wuss....

    The military would collapse. It must not be allowed to happen, rah rah rah. :rolleyes:
     
  6. D_Gunther Snotpole

    D_Gunther Snotpole Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    14,610
    Likes Received:
    5
    Mitchy, are you in the Army Cadet Force?
    Just askin ...
     
  7. porn_addict

    porn_addict Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2010
    Messages:
    712
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    369
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    DADT sucks. It's just another issue created and upheld by heterosexist society to keep us from dealing with other issues: poverty, education, the economy and bad fashion sense being just a few :)
     
  8. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    I was just asking for more clarity and Indy was able to supply it. No worries. Phasers are not set on stun here. :wink:
     
  9. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas

    It is applicable because those opposing the lifting of DADT use "discomfort" among soldiers as one of their biggest reasons for not doing so.
    My point is that DADT is the only policy, at least as far as I am aware of, where bigotry and discomfort are not only tolerated but actually supported by the leadership. Voters apparently do,too.
    If you can't understand the analogy I am sorry and confused. I invite you to post why.
    I'm sure there are soldiers who do not want to take orders from a hispanic, asian or female, blah, blah, blah but they have to suck it up and follow those orders.
     
  10. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Indy already explained the analogy.
    However, to be brutally honest even if the comparison is somewhat valid DADT isn't the only place where bigotry is tolerated once you consider that black people and other notable minorities are usually paid less than others in various careers. But that's a different discussion for a completely different thread.
     
  11. CuteBoiSAV

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2010
    Messages:
    45
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Ojai, CA
    Verified:
    Photo
    Living where I do(less than an hour from Ft. Stewart, and literally the next island south of Parris Island...) I know and talk to a lot of servicepeople. Most are just apathetic about it, they just don't care. Most already know about the gays they serve with, and have from the get-go. The people I've heard talking about it being a good thing are Marine grunts, who possibly see themselves as bigger than God. And that is their right, however, everyone of them will tell you that if ordered, they'd serve with homosexuals. And one of my bestfriends(He's a Marine) he doesn't mind DADT being repealed, but he doesn't wanna have to bunk with a gay, and that includes me. It's like bunking with women. It's just not appropriate!

    But, I also think the military isn't a place where you pick and choose what goes on. You follow orders. End of story.

    Besides, it wasn't the Evil Soviet Union that came up with idea of a "Gay Bomb" and blew $50 million on researching it. In......1995. Just Sayin'.
     
  12. Kassokilleri2ff

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    880
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Enfield (CT, US)
    I always figured DADT was in place so we wouldn't fuck eachother. At least...to make it harder to fuck eachother. Two roommates could be gay but never know it because of the whole DADT thing. I figure, they don't want men and women bunking together in the desert, you can't even go into a member of the opposite sex's room, period while deployed. If they repeal the DADT it just complicates things because the military seriously does not want us fucking eachother while deployed and that's a fact. You can get in serious trouble if your caught having sex while deployed.

    How would you guys prevent gays from having sex with eachother? You absolutely cannot let anybody have sex in a deployed location (for whatever military reason that is, I don't freakin know....BUT they aren't going to EVER change their mind on that so you might as well not bother arguing over whether or not we should be allowed to have sex) so how would you go about preventing gay guys from having sex? Bunk them with the women? What if they are bi sexual?

    Personally I think thats the biggest issue...preventing people from fucking eachother.
     
  13. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    ^ Newsflash: Rules is rules, and people have still been fucking each other since the beginning of time -

    men, women, gay, straight, in between, undecided, in the military and everywhere else. Surprise!
     
    #13 maxcok, Sep 3, 2010
    Last edited: Sep 3, 2010
  14. willow78

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,848
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Australia
    Yes, because that's ALL we ever think and do. For straight people, their sexuality is irrelevant and only affects bedroom activities. But us gays are on a non-stop 24-hour fuck-fest and our sexuality affects EVERYTHING we do. It affects our work, it affects our taste in music, it affects our taste in clothes, our taste in films, tv shows...

    Having us in the military - and we already are in the military so DADT is a completely fucking useless anyway - would seriously affect our ability to defend (if you can call invading another country 'defense') and put the US (and the rest of the world) at risk. I'm sure if I was on a dangerous patrol everyday in the middle of a hot and dry desert, having to keep watch for roadside attacks and bombs, all I would be thinking about is how hot my commander's butt is...
     
  15. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    You report that there are already rules/laws prohibiting sex. And, it is agreed that it doesn't work. Nevertheless, the logical step is to simply include sex between men in the prohibitions. If an openly gay guy refrains from having sex with other soldiers he is safe from any persecution or prosecution.
    Not long ago the military brass finally admitted that suicide among soldiers is a an all-time high. The base commandont made a short speech in which he outlawed suicided on his base. I guess he intends to court martial a corpse!
    It also reflects how the military still refuses to solve a problem.


     
  16. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    If LGBTs are good enough for the Israeli Defense Force, they should be good enough for the US Military, no?
     
  17. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,866
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    598
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    Funnily enough you didnt used to be allowed to have sex outside the military, never mind in, but that changed. Has changed back and forth over the years. Over the years armies have taken different views on whether gay soldiers are good or bad. I dont think its about having sex but being in love and therefore your loyalty to whoever it is overriding your duty as a soldier. Which arguably makes banning sex on duty rather pointless, because people will still be in love and act because of it (or not) irrespective. As to sex, well over the years armies have organised lots of 'camp followers' (pun definitely not intended) so their soldiers can have sex and be happier bunnies. Historically soldiers have even taken their wives along on campaign in some situations. The fact of the matter is that straight guys have to be naked with gay guys all the time. I expect the gay ones who end up sharing in the army figure out whats what.



    so how would you go about preventing gay guys from having sex? Bunk them with the women? What if they are bi sexual?

    Personally I think thats the biggest issue...preventing people from fucking eachother.[/QUOTE]
     
  18. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Our govt officials and fundamentalist preachers both use Israel's policies and practices when it suits their own agenda. However, when other groups do the same they quickly dismiss those facts.
    I also find it bizarre that Jews in the US have typically been Democrats. The Republicans and other right wingers use Israel as the home of "God's Chosen People"as their primary reason when it comes to the US providing protection and billions of dollars in aid.
     
  19. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    There is nothing specifically (nor generally) antisemitic in pointing out that many of today's NeoCons are Jewish. By the very definition of NeoCon, it's a former progressive who's had a political change of heart.

    Second only in number (though perhaps roughly equal) are the Armageddonists who want to initiate the "final days" (complete with the Anti-Christ) in the Near East, and sooner rather than later. These folks are, obviously, not Jewish, though they ape the NeoCon "message" for their own twisted ends.
     
  20. fratpack

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    7,085
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    79
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    nyc
    Unfortunately, the repeal of DADT may become a non-issue after the elections this November. If the Republicans take back enough seats, well, I don't see much hope.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted