Page 34 of 34 FirstFirst ... 24323334
Results 331 to 339 of 339

Thread: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

  1. #331
    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: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesome! View Post
    The key issue here is that gay people are being given extra rights basically to be in their own fantasy land serving openly with the sex they are attracted too but yet straight men and women are kept separate from eachother. In all fairness, we need to mix men and women together to be equal here. It does matter that gay joe and jane are open now in the showers because it would make staight joe and jane uncomfortable the same way it would with our current social norms that keep the opposite sex separate from eachother. There is no difference.

    It makes more sense to just make all gay units. Problem solved. If you want to serve your country and are just as patriotic, lobby for that?
    There is no way to guarantee that anyone is ever in a unit without gays in it. With no more DADT, gay servicemembers will not be required to reveal their sexuality. And 'gay joe" or "gay jane" are not going to be any more attracted to a straight servicemember than they were before they could do so openly. It is stupid to think that true.

    And most straight servicemembers could care less about whether a gay person is actually checking them out in the shower. If they were really that concerned, they wouldn't be in the military now. Or, at least they shouldn't be, since we do have gays in the military now who very well could be looking at them in the shower or naked now. And, there are a whole lot more important things to be concerned with than who may be looking at them naked.

    I bet you that most people's discomfort at being naked in front of others comes from being uncomfortable about someone else judging them for imperfections, not from their looks possibly turning someone on. It would obviously depend on the person, but why be uncomfortable about someone else being turned on by the way you look naked? So what? Does that hurt you in some way, that they're turned on by your naked body? Does a person with obvious imperfections, that could cause other people to be uncomfortable be forced to sleep/shower somewhere else, because they may make people uncomfortable? What about a not-very-attractive person sleeping naked? That makes a lot of people uncomfortable. I say put them in a different berthing, it makes the rest of those the person works with uncomfortable, so why not?

    And all gay units won't work. There are not enough gays that would be openly gay in any one job to make a complete unit.
    "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. #332
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And all gay units won't work. There are not enough gays that would be openly gay in any one job to make a complete unit.
    Except submariners.

  3. #333
    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: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    Except submariners.
    You know, that only sounds funny because I was going to mention that one of the main reasons that we couldn't have an all female submarine crew was for the same reason that we couldn't have an all gay unit, there just wouldn't be a guarantee that there would be enough females or gays in all of the necessary jobs, for enough time to actually justify either. This is why, instead of the often made suggestion of making an all-female crew, the Navy is instead implementing its plan to slowly integrate women onto the bigger subs.

    There is also the question of who will train these soldiers/marines/sailors/airmen to actually do their jobs? If there is going to have to be some integration anyway, why bother segregating after? And besides that, gays are already integrated into the units they are currently in, no matter how many people want to keep their blinders on about it. Those guys have already been living and showering with all those guys who are claiming that they would be uncomfortable showering/living with a gay guy. (And, yes, I do believe that it is mostly guys who have a problem with gay guys. Most of the military women I know could care less.)
    "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.

  4. #334
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    You know, that only sounds funny because I was going to mention that one of the main reasons that we couldn't have an all female submarine crew was for the same reason that we couldn't have an all gay unit, there just wouldn't be a guarantee that there would be enough females or gays in all of the necessary jobs, for enough time to actually justify either. This is why, instead of the often made suggestion of making an all-female crew, the Navy is instead implementing its plan to slowly integrate women onto the bigger subs.

    There is also the question of who will train these soldiers/marines/sailors/airmen to actually do their jobs? If there is going to have to be some integration anyway, why bother segregating after? And besides that, gays are already integrated into the units they are currently in, no matter how many people want to keep their blinders on about it. Those guys have already been living and showering with all those guys who are claiming that they would be uncomfortable showering/living with a gay guy. (And, yes, I do believe that it is mostly guys who have a problem with gay guys. Most of the military women I know could care less.)
    I'm mainly joking here. My boyfriend and my bro are/were both nukes.

  5. #335
    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: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    I'm mainly joking here. My boyfriend and my bro are/were both nukes.
    I figured that. They probably make some of the same jokes we did, 120 sailors go down, 60 couples come up.
    "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.

  6. #336
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    01-04-17 @ 10:49 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,432

    Re: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There is no way to guarantee that anyone is ever in a unit without gays in it. With no more DADT, gay servicemembers will not be required to reveal their sexuality. And 'gay joe" or "gay jane" are not going to be any more attracted to a straight servicemember than they were before they could do so openly. It is stupid to think that true.

    And most straight servicemembers could care less about whether a gay person is actually checking them out in the shower. If they were really that concerned, they wouldn't be in the military now. Or, at least they shouldn't be, since we do have gays in the military now who very well could be looking at them in the shower or naked now. And, there are a whole lot more important things to be concerned with than who may be looking at them naked.

    I bet you that most people's discomfort at being naked in front of others comes from being uncomfortable about someone else judging them for imperfections, not from their looks possibly turning someone on. It would obviously depend on the person, but why be uncomfortable about someone else being turned on by the way you look naked? So what? Does that hurt you in some way, that they're turned on by your naked body? Does a person with obvious imperfections, that could cause other people to be uncomfortable be forced to sleep/shower somewhere else, because they may make people uncomfortable? What about a not-very-attractive person sleeping naked? That makes a lot of people uncomfortable. I say put them in a different berthing, it makes the rest of those the person works with uncomfortable, so why not?

    And all gay units won't work. There are not enough gays that would be openly gay in any one job to make a complete unit.
    If we repealed DADT by using all gay units, it's a safe assumption that more gays would enlist. I'm not stating that gay people would be more attracted to straights with their new open status if DADT was repealed, but am only asking for fairness to allow hetero men and women the same privilege that gays currently have and even more so without fear of being booted out of the military if DADT is repealed. A women shouldn't be uncomfortable using a tampon in front of me, or showering in front of me. Who cares if I'm checking her out in the shower right. Is that your logic. If so, fine, let's let everyone serve in the military side by side in the most private places with the sex they are attracted to if it's not such a major deal to you? If it's good enough for gays, it should be good enough for all...
    Caitlyn Strong...

  7. #337
    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: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by Awesome! View Post
    If we repealed DADT by using all gay units, it's a safe assumption that more gays would enlist. I'm not stating that gay people would be more attracted to straights with their new open status if DADT was repealed, but am only asking for fairness to allow hetero men and women the same privilege that gays currently have and even more so without fear of being booted out of the military if DADT is repealed. A women shouldn't be uncomfortable using a tampon in front of me, or showering in front of me. Who cares if I'm checking her out in the shower right. Is that your logic. If so, fine, let's let everyone serve in the military side by side in the most private places with the sex they are attracted to if it's not such a major deal to you? If it's good enough for gays, it should be good enough for all...
    I wouldn't have a problem with sharing shower spaces with men. I'd say go for it. But I know it won't happen. The military is not willing to deal with the headache and huge amount of problems that could come from putting men and women together. With the lack of widespread mutual attraction (the few gays may be attracted to some of the straight men, but the straight men most likely wouldn't be attracted to the gay men, while heterosexual men and women would quite possibly be attracted to each other), there would be a much higher chance of mass hookups on military ships and bases where it is prohibited. And, then there is the physical differences between men and women. There are also the problems with military spouses (who, despite what some may believe, do have at least some affect on military policies) who would not be comfortable with their spouse actually living and showering with others that he/she may be attracted to and who very well may be attracted to them. And then there is the pure fact that men and women living together, sharing living spaces with non-family members, going to the bathroom/head together, and showering together are not cultural norms in our society. Men and women do not do this normally in the US. There are separate bathrooms for men and women, in most public places, not gays and straights. There are separate showers in those jobs and places that need them in public/civilian life for men and women, not for gays and straights. And even now in the military, gays and straights occupy the same berthing spaces, men and women do not and never have in the US military.
    "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.

  8. #338
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    I wouldn't have a problem with sharing shower spaces with men. I'd say go for it. But I know it won't happen. The military is not willing to deal with the headache and huge amount of problems that could come from putting men and women together. With the lack of widespread mutual attraction (the few gays may be attracted to some of the straight men, but the straight men most likely wouldn't be attracted to the gay men, while heterosexual men and women would quite possibly be attracted to each other), there would be a much higher chance of mass hookups on military ships and bases where it is prohibited. And, then there is the physical differences between men and women. There are also the problems with military spouses (who, despite what some may believe, do have at least some affect on military policies) who would not be comfortable with their spouse actually living and showering with others that he/she may be attracted to and who very well may be attracted to them. And then there is the pure fact that men and women living together, sharing living spaces with non-family members, going to the bathroom/head together, and showering together are not cultural norms in our society. Men and women do not do this normally in the US. There are separate bathrooms for men and women, in most public places, not gays and straights. There are separate showers in those jobs and places that need them in public/civilian life for men and women, not for gays and straights. And even now in the military, gays and straights occupy the same berthing spaces, men and women do not and never have in the US military.
    I think the whole "shower issue" is BS. hetero/homo it doesn't matter. people are going to hook up no matter what. allowing males and females or gay guys and straight guys to shower together is not going to result in dramatic increase of sex.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  9. #339
    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: Pentagon: Letting openly gay troops serve won't hurt military

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    I think the whole "shower issue" is BS. hetero/homo it doesn't matter. people are going to hook up no matter what. allowing males and females or gay guys and straight guys to shower together is not going to result in dramatic increase of sex.
    I agree, since we had a couple of girls caught in male berthing. Actually, from what I observed on the ship, men didn't seem to mind (for the most part) women in their berthing, getting some from one of the guys, but the women wouldn't allow men in their berthing, no matter who was trying to get some (although we did joke about it). I do think that most straight men would be much more likely to actually report two men having sex in berthing, then a man and a woman having sex in the berthing.
    "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.

Page 34 of 34 FirstFirst ... 24323334

Posting Permissions

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