Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

  1. #21
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    No, but where is your proof that the other countries' navys don't go out to sea for extended periods of time? I showed you the Royal Navy specifically because the article I quoted from the earlier post was dealing with specifically the UK's Navy and the reaction to allowing gays to serve openly. The same post which drew this comment from you:



    Those quotes that I posted were directly from the article about how the argument from the British military was pretty much the same as the arguments made by people like you in our military who are against allowing gays to serve openly, and all of their arguments proved to be unfounded.

    First of all, this 2010, not 1991. And I know that on both my actual cruises, 2000 and 2002, with a ship's crew of around 3000 and an airwing each time from 2500-3000, and 10-15% of that crew was females, we had less than 33 pregnancies between both cruises together that actually occurred during the cruise. We might have reached this number in those girls who got pregnant before a deployment, if you include all my deployments, including the "surge deployment" in 2004. I didn't know of any girl getting pregnant during the 2004 deployment, but I did fly off the ship prior to that one actually ending, however, I can't imagine too many doing much since a few days after I flew off the ship, the tsunami hit the area and the ship was providing relief aid until they left the area to go home.

    You know I was going to answer your question on male/female joint berthing, but realized that it is so far out of the realm of possibilities at this time, that it is a stupid comparison. There are so many reasons that the military could not and would not combine male and female living spaces. You really need to stop using this argument. Women and men cannot share spaces where they would be frequently naked for several reasons, most of which I have already listed somewhere on this forum, but I can think of several more. If you would like a full rundown of why this is a horrible argument, please start another thread, because I don't have enough room in this one to go off on this tangent. Straight men living with gay men is not the same as trying to make men and women live together, especially when some of those men and women are married. Straight men in the military already have to live with gay men, and because everyone is aware that DADT is in place in the military, that means that everyone who joins the military knows that there is at least a possibility that they will be living with someone who may find them attractive.

    Also, as I mentioned earlier, there might be many people who would simply try to use an offer to get out with compensation, who do not have a problem living with gays at all, they simply don't want to be in the military anymore. I knew several guys who would have taken an offered opportunity to get out of the military, without compensation, simply because they weren't happy in the Navy. So, how exactly would you suggest they determine who truly has a problem living with those who are openly gay and who is just trying to get out of the military with an honorable discharge and a lot of money?

    The straight guys in the military do not have a right to not have rules change while they are in the military. They are in the military. Nowhere in any military contract does it say that these guys have a right to not serve with openly gay men. And, no, DADT and the rules against homosexual acts are not a part of the military contract, because if they or any other laws of the UCMJ were considered unchangeable, then the military would have no right to propose a law that will make it against the rules for a servicemember to hire a prostitute even in countries/places where prostitution is legal or for them to propose a military drinking age of 21, even in countries where it is legal to drink at younger ages. And, no, the US drinking age of 21 is not a federal law, it is only that age in every state because the federal government will only give highway funds to states that have a drinking age of 21. And there is no actual right for anyone to not have to share living spaces with someone that may be attracted to them. If the military wanted to make the men and women serving share living spaces, they have every right to do so, they simply won't because of the multiple problems that such an act would cause, not to mention the loss of personnel from both those problems and the disapproval of such a policy by spouses.
    We are just bumping heads here but I will mention a couple of things......You say they could never make ships coed......well I can remember when I was on a destroyer in Norfolk where the waves barracks was like a fortress...........there were big wall all around in and a guard at the gate......No male was allowed in the barracks after 1700 hours......I'll bet the women serving then would never believe the way it is today........

    I don't think its unrealistic to say there will never be coed ships so don't dodge the question....If that happened would you want out and how would your husband feel about that? That is a major change and so is gays serving opening..Both are social experiments.....If gay can control themselves then so should straights be able to........

    As far as gays go I can remember when that word use to mean happy until it was stolen away......All gays were in the closet........I bet you gays would have accepted DADT in a New York Heart beat..........


    Here is what I say if the majority of Enlisted people (at least 60% and that is is lenient) go along with the change then I will go along with it.......I think you will be surprised when they survey the people it actually affects....
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  2. #22
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    05-13-11 @ 09:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,075
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Immaterial whether your 60% will accept what will happen, they will have no choice but to accept.

  3. #23
    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 faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    We are just bumping heads here but I will mention a couple of things......You say they could never make ships coed......well I can remember when I was on a destroyer in Norfolk where the waves barracks was like a fortress...........there were big wall all around in and a guard at the gate......No male was allowed in the barracks after 1700 hours......I'll bet the women serving then would never believe the way it is today........

    I don't think its unrealistic to say there will never be coed ships so don't dodge the question....If that happened would you want out and how would your husband feel about that? That is a major change and so is gays serving opening..Both are social experiments.....If gay can control themselves then so should straights be able to........

    As far as gays go I can remember when that word use to mean happy until it was stolen away......All gays were in the closet........I bet you gays would have accepted DADT in a New York Heart beat..........


    Here is what I say if the majority of Enlisted people (at least 60% and that is is lenient) go along with the change then I will go along with it.......I think you will be surprised when they survey the people it actually affects....
    Actually, NP, I didn't say they never would make males and females live together and share facilities. I said they won't at this time. Society does not generally accept that it is okay for men and women to share facilities, which is the reason for male and female restrooms in pretty much every business, school, and other public places around the US, and pretty much around the world. We separate males and females, we do not separate gay men from straight men or gay women from straight women. So what is your explanation for this? How come there are not gay and straight bathrooms? Why not gay and straight changing rooms in gyms, schools, police stations, or firehouses? Do you think that heterosexuals or homosexuals have a right to have such public, non-military facilities separated by gender and sexuality? And what exactly gives them such a right?

    And truthfully, considering that the most likely boat(s) to be coed are subs, then actually, not only would I be okay about sharing facilities with men, I would be willing to volunteer for it, if it were the only way for me to be on a sub. If the plan to put women on subs would have came out 2 or 3 years earlier, I would have stayed in the Navy. And as for my husband, although he would definitely have objections, he is willing to support me because we have trust. He knows that I wanted to serve on a submarine, and he realizes that it might have meant that I might have had to share personal space and/or a head with men. My husband is well aware that I changed in the same space with the men that I worked with, and that, due to my job, it was not inconceivable that I might have had to get naked in front of men. He is also aware that the only roommates that I ever shared an apartment with, besides my family, were men. All of my roommates were able to control themselves, as was I.

    The thing is, most enlisted could truly care less whether gays are allowed to serve openly or not. They just want to do their job and get as much free time as they can, at least in the Navy. Besides, as I stated earlier, some may actually believe that it will be a detriment to good order and discipline, without knowing why, only because they have been told that so much that they actually just believe it without question. I do not trust that all branches would actually know whether or not allowing gays to serve openly would affect them or if they would just believe it will because that is what they have been told.

    What is needed is for the military to set a date to repeal DADT and those UCMJ laws, and then do massive training on tolerance, discrimination, and sexual harassment, along with a huge refresher on being professional, up to the repeal. Then after it is repealed, work that training into the annual training the military already requires.
    "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. #24
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by jujuman13 View Post
    Immaterial whether your 60% will accept what will happen, they will have no choice but to accept.
    When you join it might...........
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  5. #25
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    When you join it might...........
    His joining the service is entirely irrelevant Navy. So is your 60 %. The military does not, and should not poll the troops about changes in policy.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Actually, NP, I didn't say they never would make males and females live together and share facilities. I said they won't at this time. Society does not generally accept that it is okay for men and women to share facilities, which is the reason for male and female restrooms in pretty much every business, school, and other public places around the US, and pretty much around the world. We separate males and females, we do not separate gay men from straight men or gay women from straight women. So what is your explanation for this? How come there are not gay and straight bathrooms? Why not gay and straight changing rooms in gyms, schools, police stations, or firehouses? Do you think that heterosexuals or homosexuals have a right to have such public, non-military facilities separated by gender and sexuality? And what exactly gives them such a right?

    And truthfully, considering that the most likely boat(s) to be coed are subs, then actually, not only would I be okay about sharing facilities with men, I would be willing to volunteer for it, if it were the only way for me to be on a sub. If the plan to put women on subs would have came out 2 or 3 years earlier, I would have stayed in the Navy. And as for my husband, although he would definitely have objections, he is willing to support me because we have trust. He knows that I wanted to serve on a submarine, and he realizes that it might have meant that I might have had to share personal space and/or a head with men. My husband is well aware that I changed in the same space with the men that I worked with, and that, due to my job, it was not inconceivable that I might have had to get naked in front of men. He is also aware that the only roommates that I ever shared an apartment with, besides my family, were men. All of my roommates were able to control themselves, as was I.

    The thing is, most enlisted could truly care less whether gays are allowed to serve openly or not. They just want to do their job and get as much free time as they can, at least in the Navy. Besides, as I stated earlier, some may actually believe that it will be a detriment to good order and discipline, without knowing why, only because they have been told that so much that they actually just believe it without question. I do not trust that all branches would actually know whether or not allowing gays to serve openly would affect them or if they would just believe it will because that is what they have been told.

    What is needed is for the military to set a date to repeal DADT and those UCMJ laws, and then do massive training on tolerance, discrimination, and sexual harassment, along with a huge refresher on being professional, up to the repeal. Then after it is repealed, work that training into the annual training the military already requires.
    I don't know how you know what enlisted people think today...........Don't you wonder why their active duty leaders are risking their career and speaking up against it............I have given you my terms on how I feel on the issue so I will not do it again.......I believe gays serving openly is the same as straight males and females serving coed.........

    I thnk the change you already saw will take place......That is a thrid party can not just say someone is gay........

    In closing you "feel good liberals" will lose this one unless some of terms I mentioned earlier like Straights having a chance to resign and be paid a bonus for being lied to on their contract in that they would have to serve with gays openly, sleeping dressing and showering with them. I love the Navy but I can tell you I would have never enlisted under those conditions.....

    We have beat this thing around enough so this will be my last post on this thread..........

    We shall see who is right in the coming years..........
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  7. #27
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    His joining the service is entirely irrelevant Navy. So is your 60 %. The military does not, and should not poll the troops about changes in policy.
    Please see # 26 redress........
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  8. #28
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I don't know how you know what enlisted people think today...........Don't you wonder why their active duty leaders are risking their career and speaking up against it............I have given you my terms on how I feel on the issue so I will not do it again.......I believe gays serving openly is the same as straight males and females serving coed.........
    This makes no sense. It would make a vague kind of sense if you left it at just gays, but what difference does serving openly have to do with it? Teh gays are not going to hit on their bunkmates unless they are serving openly? Somehow I don't buy into that.

    I thnk the change you already saw will take place......That is a thrid party can not just say someone is gay........
    It's not that way now Navy. 3 criterion for discharge under DADT, statements, acts, marriage.

    In closing you "feel good liberals" will lose this one unless some of terms I mentioned earlier like Straights having a chance to resign and be paid a bonus for being lied to on their contract in that they would have to serve with gays openly, sleeping dressing and showering with them. I love the Navy but I can tell you I would have never enlisted under those conditions.....
    I don't use this much, but .

    Can you show me where on their contract it says they will not have to serve with openly gay servicemembers? It's not there. This is simply a stupid stupid stupid comment.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #29
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Pentagon faces hurdles in 'don't ask, don't tell' study

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    No, but where is your proof that the other countries' navys don't go out to sea for extended periods of time? I showed you the Royal Navy specifically because the article I quoted from the earlier post was dealing with specifically the UK's Navy and the reaction to allowing gays to serve openly. The same post which drew this comment from you:



    Those quotes that I posted were directly from the article about how the argument from the British military was pretty much the same as the arguments made by people like you in our military who are against allowing gays to serve openly, and all of their arguments proved to be unfounded.

    First of all, this 2010, not 1991. And I know that on both my actual cruises, 2000 and 2002, with a ship's crew of around 3000 and an airwing each time from 2500-3000, and 10-15% of that crew was females, we had less than 33 pregnancies between both cruises together that actually occurred during the cruise. We might have reached this number in those girls who got pregnant before a deployment, if you include all my deployments, including the "surge deployment" in 2004. I didn't know of any girl getting pregnant during the 2004 deployment, but I did fly off the ship prior to that one actually ending, however, I can't imagine too many doing much since a few days after I flew off the ship, the tsunami hit the area and the ship was providing relief aid until they left the area to go home.

    You know I was going to answer your question on male/female joint berthing, but realized that it is so far out of the realm of possibilities at this time, that it is a stupid comparison. There are so many reasons that the military could not and would not combine male and female living spaces. You really need to stop using this argument. Women and men cannot share spaces where they would be frequently naked for several reasons, most of which I have already listed somewhere on this forum, but I can think of several more. If you would like a full rundown of why this is a horrible argument, please start another thread, because I don't have enough room in this one to go off on this tangent. Straight men living with gay men is not the same as trying to make men and women live together, especially when some of those men and women are married. Straight men in the military already have to live with gay men, and because everyone is aware that DADT is in place in the military, that means that everyone who joins the military knows that there is at least a possibility that they will be living with someone who may find them attractive.

    Also, as I mentioned earlier, there might be many people who would simply try to use an offer to get out with compensation, who do not have a problem living with gays at all, they simply don't want to be in the military anymore. I knew several guys who would have taken an offered opportunity to get out of the military, without compensation, simply because they weren't happy in the Navy. So, how exactly would you suggest they determine who truly has a problem living with those who are openly gay and who is just trying to get out of the military with an honorable discharge and a lot of money?

    The straight guys in the military do not have a right to not have rules change while they are in the military. They are in the military. Nowhere in any military contract does it say that these guys have a right to not serve with openly gay men. And, no, DADT and the rules against homosexual acts are not a part of the military contract, because if they or any other laws of the UCMJ were considered unchangeable, then the military would have no right to propose a law that will make it against the rules for a servicemember to hire a prostitute even in countries/places where prostitution is legal or for them to propose a military drinking age of 21, even in countries where it is legal to drink at younger ages. And, no, the US drinking age of 21 is not a federal law, it is only that age in every state because the federal government will only give highway funds to states that have a drinking age of 21. And there is no actual right for anyone to not have to share living spaces with someone that may be attracted to them. If the military wanted to make the men and women serving share living spaces, they have every right to do so, they simply won't because of the multiple problems that such an act would cause, not to mention the loss of personnel from both those problems and the disapproval of such a policy by spouses.
    This just might be the start of something that you said would never happen..COED living.........


    Updated April 09, 2010
    Maine Commission Moves to Ban Gender Specific Bathrooms, Sports Teams in Schools

    FOXNews.com - Maine Commission Moves to Ban Gender Specific Bathrooms, Sports Teams in Schools

    The little girls' room won't be just for little girls anymore, if the Maine Human Rights Commission has its way.

    The commission is taking heat over a controversial proposal to ban schools from enforcing gender divisions in sports teams, school organizations, bathrooms and locker rooms. It says forcing a student into a particular room or group because of his or her biological gender amounts to discrimination.

    The issue came to light last year when the commission ruled that, under the Maine Human Rights Act, a school had discriminated against a 12-year-old transgender boy by denying him access to the girls' bathroom.

    Now the commission aims to issue guidelines on how schools should deal with similar situations in the future. It would make Maine the first state to implement such guidelines for schools as young as preschool and nursery -- and even some private schools.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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