Page 46 of 48 FirstFirst ... 364445464748 LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 477

Thread: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

  1. #451
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    DADT WILL be repealed. Pretending there aren't and wont be problems will only ensure that there will be.
    Those same problems have the potential to exist with or without DADT in place. I have never said there will be no problems. The problems that come up will be due to people on either side believing that the repeal allows gays to act in an unprofessional manner.

    There will probably be a few gays who flaunt themselves or openly hit on the straight guys just because they feel they can. They will be wrong and should be punished for causing any disruption.

    There will also most likely be some straight guys who feel that they want to preempt any "flaunting" by those that do come out as gay (just saying they are or bringing a same sex date to a command function) or those they suspect are gay. They will be wrong and deserve to be punished.

    And I am almost positive that the first time something happens in a conflict area that involves a unit with an openly gay guy, whether it be a death or something else negative, it will be blamed on having an openly gay guy no matter what the details of the event really are. I hope and pray I am wrong or that there is enough counter evidence to prove the allegations wrong.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #452
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Those same problems have the potential to exist with or without DADT in place. I have never said there will be no problems. The problems that come up will be due to people on either side believing that the repeal allows gays to act in an unprofessional manner.
    some of them will indeed come from this - but let's not pretend that this is the only place it will come from. the loss of intimacy and unit cohesion in the combat units is real and will occur; though the effect will vary. the increase in sexual favoritism, fraternization, and the loss of good order and discipline that comes from the perception of both will also occur. we don't do ourselves any favors by closing our eyes to this and wishing it weren't so.

  3. #453
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Layla_Z View Post
    Do you have some proof that our soldiers are likely to rape female soldiers? You should be ashamed of saying this. And they say liberals hate the troups.
    How about, you know, the high incidence of rape that already exists? Not any male soldiers being raped by gays, but female soldiers raped by males, often their COs.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  4. #454
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no, but it is required of people in the military that they shower together, bunk together, and all manner of things thereunto pertaining.
    You do realize that some policemen and firemen have to shower and/or bunk together too, right? We are not unique in that regard. Not only that, but the vast majority of the time, we do not have to shower with another person. And the vast majority of the time, you are not going to be sleeping naked with anyone else in your unit.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    i guess i'm generally alot more congenial when i'm not being accused of hatred and bigotry by those who find slinging accusations easier than thinking.
    I cannot recall ever accusing anyone on this board of being hateful or bigoted. And I know I have never accused you of this. I do not consider such things to be particularly helpful in debate.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    so? your religious considerations come far and away second to service in the military. you think you're not going out on patrol because it's saturday and you're Jewish?
    Women aren't in combat units, where such restraints as limited space to the point where separate accomodations are pretty much impossible are an issue. So, actually, yes, the military can take such things into consideration.

    Just like the sexual attraction thing though, it is not the only issue that keeps men and women separated.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    it's easy enough to do - we are ordered not to tempt each other, not to be stumbling blocks. If I honestly believe that lust is sinful, then I shouldn't be forced to partake in actions that may tempt others to engage in it, such as showering with someone who could find me sexually appealing. somehow I think you will not be receptive to those who claim that their religious inclination should keep them from having to shower or bunk with homosexuals.
    No, because if this were true they would not be in the military with DADT in place, because they would still be potentially subjecting others to that same temptation and there would be less of a chance to avoid tempting those people since they are less likely to know who they might be tempting. Trying to close your eyes and say "there are no gays, there are not gays" doesn't work in real life. The gays are still there and denying they aren't there with DADT is lying to yourself, which would be another sin.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    the issues still remain. pregnancy? nah. that's an issue in mixed gender units to be sure, and I agree that introducing females into combat units would be worse than introducing homosexual males. however, the point remains that as far as sexuality is concerned, the basic thrust is the same. I have as much a right to protect my privacy from those who would look on me in a sexual manner as any young female in the military.
    No you don't. You have very little right to privacy in the military.

    Men and women live separately due to essentially an in place policy. It won't change, unless we, as a society change our views enough on the issue or the military brass decides that they are willing to take the chance to allow potential problems to exist because they have found some advantage to allowing coed berthing that outweighs those potential problems.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    why? all members of the military are perfectly professional and disciplined, and hence there is no need for worry, remember?
    I haven't said this. I said they should be. If they do not act this way, they then should be punished appropriately. But it is foolish to change policy that benefits do not outweigh the potential problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    why embarrassed? is being naked and exposed in front of people who will look at you sexually something that generally invades your privacy?
    Because it is about how I viewed the situation not them. I could have known that they were all gay guys, and I still would have been embarrassed. Just like I knew plenty of gay women on board the ship that I had no problem getting changed in front of or even getting naked in front of to climb into the shower. Women all have the same parts and I am not attracted to women, I am attracted to men.

    However, if I was ordered to get naked in front of or sleep with a man (as in the way you describe sleeping in a tent or bag together), I would do it if it were my job because it is what was required of me. I wouldn't be comfortable doing it, but until the guy tried something, I wouldn't have any reason to believe that the particular guy I was assigned to sleep with or get naked in front of would actually try anything. I honestly don't believe the military will ever get to this particular point though due to what I posted above.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #455
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    why are you engaging in negative stereotypes of homosexuals? do you think it makes your point rather than just making you look like a fool?

    all i need do is copy/paste earlier posts from others - professionalism and discipline and such things. young women obviously have no reason to feel uncomfortable about being forced to strip down in front of the males unless they are anti-man haters and bigots who feel that men have icky cooties.
    Satire
    –noun
    the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  6. #456
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,686

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Those same problems have the potential to exist with or without DADT in place. I have never said there will be no problems. The problems that come up will be due to people on either side believing that the repeal allows gays to act in an unprofessional manner.

    There will probably be a few gays who flaunt themselves or openly hit on the straight guys just because they feel they can. They will be wrong and should be punished for causing any disruption.

    There will also most likely be some straight guys who feel that they want to preempt any "flaunting" by those that do come out as gay (just saying they are or bringing a same sex date to a command function) or those they suspect are gay. They will be wrong and deserve to be punished.

    And I am almost positive that the first time something happens in a conflict area that involves a unit with an openly gay guy, whether it be a death or something else negative, it will be blamed on having an openly gay guy no matter what the details of the event really are. I hope and pray I am wrong or that there is enough counter evidence to prove the allegations wrong.
    Of COURSE it will be blamed on the openly gay person and the repeal of the policy. People better grow some thick-ass skin...that's what we are facing. Its going to be brutal for a while. There will be units where someone will make allegations of harassment, the accused soldiers buddies will then make several comments about '****ing faggots'...there will be divisions...there will be fighting. There will be court-martials. And if we are LUCKY they will occur at home station and not downrange. THIS is a healthy process...acknowledging there are problems currently and looming, and deal with it in advance. Intelligent people are working on this, identifying the concerns and working on solutions in advance and even with THAT there will still be problems. Dumb-asses are hiding their heads in the sand, calling people homophobes for speaking truth and recognizing those problems, and will HOPEFULLY just be responsible for people getting their ass beat, losing careers, and NOT getting people killed.

  7. #457
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    You do realize that some policemen and firemen have to shower and/or bunk together too, right?
    it's not surprising at all - though they at least get beds and get to sleep indoors.

    Not only that, but the vast majority of the time, we do not have to shower with another person.
    when deployed?

    And the vast majority of the time, you are not going to be sleeping naked with anyone else in your unit.
    this is true. so if we don't force our young females to sleep naked with a bunch of our males, say, but one day a week, or 5 months a year; you're cool with that?

    I cannot recall ever accusing anyone on this board of being hateful or bigoted. And I know I have never accused you of this. I do not consider such things to be particularly helpful in debate.
    i can't recall a specific instance of you saying that, no - that's been the province mostly of others here. but when our argument is turned into the strawmen of the "you just fear homosexuals because you think they're icky" variety, that is roughly the same thing.

    Women aren't in combat units, where such restraints as limited space to the point where separate accomodations are pretty much impossible are an issue.
    why should they have separate accommodations?

    So, actually, yes, the military can take such things into consideration.

    Just like the sexual attraction thing though, it is not the only issue that keeps men and women separated.
    it is absolutely because of sexuality.

    No, because if this were true they would not be in the military with DADT in place, because they would still be potentially subjecting others to that same temptation and there would be less of a chance to avoid tempting those people since they are less likely to know who they might be tempting
    not necessarily - under DADT we are all officially straight. but you asked for a religious objection and you got one - no fair complaining about it later

    No you don't. You have very little right to privacy in the military.
    precisely so why be upset that I order my female subordinate to strip naked so I can "check her for ticks"?

    Men and women live separately due to essentially an in place policy.
    and currently we have DADT due to essentially an in place policy.

    It won't change, unless we, as a society change our views enough on the issue or the military brass decides that they are willing to take the chance to allow potential problems to exist because they have found some advantage to allowing coed berthing that outweighs those potential problems.
    gosh you think that problems might arise if we begin to bunk people who may be sexually attracted to each other together?!? say it isn't so! why... why... no.... no.... no that could only happen if our military was made up (say) overwhelmingly of 18-22 year olds who are famous for their inability to control the urgings of their private parts.


    .... wait a minute ....



    I haven't said this. I said they should be. If they do not act this way, they then should be punished appropriately.
    oh. they should be. so you admit that what you are describing vis-a-vie how this process will go does not actually match reality.

    But it is foolish to change policy that benefits do not outweigh the potential problems.
    if the benefits outweigh the costs then I would agree - but I do not see any benefits that outweigh the costs.

    Because it is about how I viewed the situation not them.
    and how did you view that situation, that caused you to be embarrassed.

    I could have known that they were all gay guys, and I still would have been embarrassed. Just like I knew plenty of gay women on board the ship that I had no problem getting changed in front of or even getting naked in front of to climb into the shower. Women all have the same parts and I am not attracted to women, I am attracted to men.
    okay, but something about being naked in front of men who are going to find you sexually appealing is embarrassing, or easily could be for any young female irrespective of whether or not she is being professional and/or unbigoted?

    However, if I was ordered to get naked in front of or sleep with a man (as in the way you describe sleeping in a tent or bag together), I would do it if it were my job because it is what was required of me.
    and when ordered we will all do the same with gay guys. but that doesn't mean that it comes without costs in intimacy and unit cohesion.

    I wouldn't be comfortable doing it, but until the guy tried something, I wouldn't have any reason to believe that the particular guy I was assigned to sleep with or get naked in front of would actually try anything. I honestly don't believe the military will ever get to this particular point though due to what I posted above.
    i hope not. that would create far more issues than even what we are discussing.
    Last edited by cpwill; 06-14-11 at 10:55 AM.

  8. #458
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,114

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Satire
    –noun
    the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.

    ah. so your post, in fact, had no purpose.

    well that's not terribly surprising.

  9. #459
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    it's not surprising at all - though they at least get beds and get to sleep indoors.
    And so do our troops, most of the time. The vast majority of the time, troops are going to be sleeping in a base or FOB or some other place that is set up with cots or some sort of sleeping arrangements that would not require you to cuddle up naked next to your buddy.

    Line Of Site Photo Blog - Military Times

    Also, from what I have been told by several guys I know who have military experience, it doesn't sound like it is very common for when you guys do sleep in tents/sleeping bags that you actually strip down to naked or even just skivvies to sleep anyway.

    Plus, what about those times when women do go out on missions with guys that take longer than expected and the women are out there with them? I'm pretty sure there isn't a way to separate them effectively and they have to at least sleep in close vicinity to one another.

    Militaryo men and women in military sleep in the same space when overseas? - Yahoo! Answers


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    when deployed?
    They shower in open bay showers or separate shower stalls, or they bathe with a sponge, rag, or wet wipe.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    this is true. so if we don't force our young females to sleep naked with a bunch of our males, say, but one day a week, or 5 months a year; you're cool with that?
    No one is required to sleep naked with anyone, to the best of my knowledge. Seems a little bit off to sleep naked when you might have to get up quickly to fight or react to being attacked. Being naked might prove to be a disadvantage.

    But even if you are sleeping with someone in little to no clothing, how often would that be happening, honestly? Because what you are suggesting is not what others have indicated is reality. It is generally not 5 months a year or one day a week that a person would be forced to sleep naked or even cuddled up against a fellow soldier, of any sex or sexuality. It would be a very rare event.

    And yes, if a woman had to sleep next to a guy during that particular situation, it would be expected of her to do so. It is not realistic to believe that this would be a normal situation though, even if we are just talking about all-men units.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    why should they have separate accommodations?
    Because men and women do not share accommodations in our society. I have already explained this to you in detail.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    it is absolutely because of sexuality.
    No, it isn't. Keeping men and women separated most of the time to sleep or bathe is about a number of things, including our culture and the physical differences between men and women.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    not necessarily - under DADT we are all officially straight. but you asked for a religious objection and you got one - no fair complaining about it later
    That is wrong, and you know it. We are not all officially straight under DADT. A gay person just has to pretend they are straight officially. It is ignorant to believe that anyone entering the service with DADT in place could honestly claim religious objections to sleeping with/showering with someone who is gay. They would get laughed at or at the very least an eyeroll.

    Don't believe me, try it and tell me how that works out for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    precisely so why be upset that I order my female subordinate to strip naked so I can "check her for ticks"?
    I'm not upset about something like that. Heck, if it is actually what you are doing, go for it. It isn't hard to tell if that is what is going on, since everyone else should be involved in one way or another with those checks as well. It is necessary and, to me, no different than the girls in Radcon ordering the guys who got doused with contaminated water to strip down so that they could get washed down.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    and currently we have DADT due to essentially an in place policy.
    A policy that has been changed by the military because they weighed the positives and negatives of the change and came to the conclusion that DADT should be repealed. If the military or Congress feels that the policy on men and women being quartered together should be changed for the benefit of the military, then it will happen too. I don't think it will happen.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    gosh you think that problems might arise if we begin to bunk people who may be sexually attracted to each other together?!? say it isn't so! why... why... no.... no.... no that could only happen if our military was made up (say) overwhelmingly of 18-22 year olds who are famous for their inability to control the urgings of their private parts.
    Most of those guys can control themselves enough to not have consensual sex while in combat. But even if they couldn't do this, it isn't as if not sleeping or showering with those you are attracted to keep these things from occurring when either person wants it to happen. Not only that, but just separating the straight guys from the gay guys would not take out the aspect of consensual sex at all. The gay guys would be living with those guys that they might want to have sex with and there would likely be fewer people to stop them from doing so.

    And even more can control themselves enough to not rape or sexually assault someone else while in combat. There are differences between men and women physically though, including most men are bigger than most women. So the potential for sexual assault is much higher when you are talking about men on women sexual assault compared to man on man sexual assault because rape is mainly about power and control. Sex is usually secondary.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    oh. they should be. so you admit that what you are describing vis-a-vie how this process will go does not actually match reality.
    I haven't said there would not be problems. I do not believe that the problems will be bad enough to cause death. And I don't think that you should be saying that any unit cohesion lost from allowing homosexuals to openly serve should be blamed on that policy, rather than where it is actually coming from, which is the attitude that gay men are going to hit on and/or assault the straight men and the fear from that belief, or that gay men have a right to harass/ask out/not be treated the same as straight men. Those beliefs should be changed. And if that means getting rid of some soldiers who would believe such things because of their actions, so be it.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    if the benefits outweigh the costs then I would agree - but I do not see any benefits that outweigh the costs.
    Then obviously we disagree on this point.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    and how did you view that situation, that caused you to be embarrassed.

    okay, but something about being naked in front of men who are going to find you sexually appealing is embarrassing, or easily could be for any young female irrespective of whether or not she is being professional and/or unbigoted?
    You just don't get it. I was embarrassed because I was taught that it was wrong to be naked in public and in front of men especially, no matter how they might view my body. It isn't about whether or not they might find me attractive, it is the fact that I am a woman and they are men. I do not believe that my brothers would be attracted to me, but it still makes me uncomfortable to be naked in front of them. Just like it makes my sister uncomfortable to be naked or even just in underwear in front of anyone, male or female. It is not about sexual attraction, it is about levels of modesty and cultural norms.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    and when ordered we will all do the same with gay guys. but that doesn't mean that it comes without costs in intimacy and unit cohesion.
    I doubt that cost will be high, since many units already know who is or might be gay, so them being allowed to come out and say it won't make a huge difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    i hope not. that would create far more issues than even what we are discussing.
    And there you go, now you are admitting that having men and women share spaces would cause more issues than gays and straights sharing spaces, which is what I have been arguing the whole time.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  10. #460
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Ragnarök with Loki and Heimdall
    Last Seen
    06-17-11 @ 12:16 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    103

    Re: Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    nobody "in our society" shares private spaces unless they choose to do so. bunking gay males with other males is indeed the same sexually as forcing young females to bunk with males.

    .
    this will be like t o be in prison. when you are i n Navy will you be free from homosexuells when the ship go to the port? i will not want to be in this kind of militaire.

Page 46 of 48 FirstFirst ... 364445464748 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •