• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gays in the military (its anonymous)

Openly gay personnel in the army?

  • Yes - im cool with that

    Votes: 54 79.4%
  • No - never again will i pick up the soap

    Votes: 9 13.2%
  • Other - explain

    Votes: 5 7.4%

  • Total voters
    68
266299962_9f1435153f.jpg


This will surely put the fear of Allah into the hearts of our enemies.

Americas forces are coming!

Dont drop the soap Omar!
 
Sorry dear, they're quite comparable.
There's nothing you should be sorry about, you're simply making a false statement.
I claim I am of better caliber than someone who is supposed to be doing a job but can't because they're too distracted about sex.
And I laugh at that fictional belief.
You are the one making the claim that our soldiers are those very immature, easily distracted, shallow, and under-trained individuals who cannot do a job because they are too distracted about 'teh sexxors'.
As usual, you've just made a wrong statement.
I have never claimed that the soldiers are not able(As stated quite clearly in my previous post, and as expected from anyone who is not brainless to be able to comprehend), but that this is a military policy.
Personally, I hold our soldiers in higher regard than that. Actually, I hold most PEOPLE in higher regard than that. It's sad that you and others like you... don't.
It is only saddening that such people like you have such repulsive opinions about our military, and it only earns you disrespect in return.
If, in fact, our military is made up of the poor caliber of people you claim it is, then I hope we can get rid of all of them and start recruiting better ones.
Then continue to hope, that's all you'll be able to do.

Point is, the military policy has nothing to do about you "hard-working" civilians, but about military personnel, and I'm sorry but it's none of your business.
 
Last edited:
I know, right? Sometimes I take a shower with a girl I am very attracted to in the morning and then head to the airport to fly complex multiengine aircraft. Its just amazing that I was able to get an IFR clearance when all I could think about was the boobies I saw in the shower that morning.

Incredibly, I am not allowed to consume alcohol less than 8 hours before a flight, but I am allowed to shower with a girl. It's like the FAA isn't taking this threat of "sexual distraction" seriously.:doh
The military policy is not shared with air-line companies, and I don't see why should it be.

Ridiculous comparisons are counter-productive.
 
You got raped in the wings of a theatre while performing a quickchange during a show? Or does your arse still burn from the world imploding?

Id rather not discuss it.........









:(
 
Gays & straights should share showers and gays should discipline themselves in not sturring up any emotions when showering with guys. The reason males/females dont shower with each other isnt just the sexual distraction alone...its dominantly a cultural thing. Same sex schools dont do it because of the "sexual attraction" between the kids. It doesnt make a difference either way, in or out of the shower, i wouldnt hesistate to check out our lady commander in her tight military trousers.
I think you lot are trying to advocate uneccessary segregation and make out you have a valid point by comparing gays in the military with men/women and the status quo.
Atm there ARE Gays in the military. Find me statistics that there efficiency is considerably lowered because they shower with guys and come back to me.

OK? ;)
 
Gays & straights should share showers and gays should discipline themselves in not sturring up any emotions when showering with guys. The reason males/females dont shower with each other isnt just the sexual distraction alone...its dominantly a cultural thing. Same sex schools dont do it because of the "sexual attraction" between the kids. It doesnt make a difference either way, in or out of the shower, i wouldnt hesistate to check out our lady commander in her tight military trousers.
I think you lot are trying to advocate uneccessary segregation and make out you have a valid point by comparing gays in the military with men/women and the status quo.
Atm there ARE Gays in the military. Find me statistics that there efficiency is considerably lowered because they shower with guys and come back to me.

OK? ;)
The situation between gay males and straight males is the same as the situation between straight females and straight males or gay females and straight females.
That you try and separate the sexualities claiming that one is cultural and one is not is absolutely wrong.

There should be no problem to house both gay males and straight males in one room, it is ridiculous to argue against it, just as it is ridiculous to argue for shared showers between gay males and straight males or straight females and gay females or straight females and straight males.

It does not match the Military's needs and interests and would be easily dismissed and turned down.
 
No what i think is wrong is that your making claims about indivisual efficiency and sexual distraction of homosexual men when you havent got anything to back that assertion up with. There are gays in the military right now. Where are the statistics, where are these claims you make? It doesnt go away because they dont say anything. Its still there and has been since the dawn of armies and since the bible or whatever book was first. Gay soldiers and straight soldiers are showering together now as we speak. Whats the problem? Where is the decreased ability of a gay man to hold a gun, where is the rape, where are the straight men complaining? Or does the problem materialise when they become "open"?

Women and men are segregated due to the sexual attraction, yes, but thats because such a seperation has evidence to back it up with. Add to the fact women are far more phsyically vulnerable than a man, sticking women in showers with a bunch of men wouldnt be the best idea.

It isnt ridiculous to argue for such a thing because your comparing sexual preference with gender. If we segregate gay men, shall we put the lesbians with the straight guys?

The militaries interests are to kill the Muslim guy with the big black beard not who gets a hard on in the showers.
 
Last edited:
No what i think is wrong is that your making claims about indivisual efficiency and sexual attraction of homosexual men when you havent got anything to back that assertion up with.
I don't get it.
Are you saying that sexual distraction is not a distraction, or that homesexual men are not attracted to straight men?
And why is it only about homosexual men, what about homosexual women?
There are gays in the military right now. Where are the statistics, where are these claims you make?
I'd like to update you that homosexuality openness is not allowed yet in the US military, and hence there are no such statistics.
It doesnt go away because they dont say anything. Its still there and has been since the dawn of armies and since the bible.
Women and men are segregated due to the sexual attraction, yes
That's where your argument is over.
Unless you believe that the sexual attraction of homosexual men/women to straight men/women is somewhat different than the sexual attraction of straight men/women to straight women/men, you have no point.
And if that is the case, you are inherently and absolutely wrong.
but thats because such a seperation has evidence to back it up with.
Evidence that you don't believe would exist with homosexuality, can I hear your reasoning for that or do you simply label homosexuality as a fake sexuality?
Add to the fact women are far more phsyically vulnerable than a man, sticking women in showers with a bunch of men wouldnt be the best idea.
What does that has to do with anything?
Was that an argument you've tried to make?
How is that a legitimate reasoning? How is that holding any essence of rationalism at all?
It isnt ridiculous to argue for such a thing because your comparing sexual preference with gender.
Absolutely false, I am comparing one sexuality with another.
Do you feel it's wrong?
If we segregate gay men, shall we put the lesbians with the straight guys?
You mean house them together?
I don't see why not, it is the showers that are the forbidden-to-mix zone in the military, and nothing else.
The militaries interests are to kill the Muslim guy with the big black beard.
Riiiiiiiiiight.
 
I don't get it.
Are you saying that sexual distraction is not a distraction, or that homesexual men are not attracted to straight men?

Im saying you dont have **** to proove homosexual men are any less efficient because they shower with straights.


And why is it only about homosexual men, what about homosexual women?
I'd like to update you that homosexuality openness is not allowed yet in the US military, and hence there are no such statistics.
:rofl

Do you not see the inherent flaw in your argument?
Your advocating seperating straight guys from gay guys to avoid sexual distraction, right?
How will they be any less distracted in a shower full of GAY GUYS. :laughat:



That's where your argument is over.
Unless you believe that the sexual attraction of homosexual men/women to straight men/women is somewhat different than the sexual attraction of straight men/women to straight women/men, you have no point.

Evidence that you don't believe would exist with homosexuality, can I hear your reasoning for that or do you simply label homosexuality as a fake sexuality?

:doh
Im saying you have no proof to tell me that gays in the army currently are less efficient or distracted to any certain degree which is causing problems within the army. Im OK with separating men and women because of the physical differences between the two and the fact that many women are not comfortable showering with men and the fact that it tends to be the norm in our society, even in school during P.E classes.

What your saying is flawed. You wish to seperate sexualities so as to lessen sexual distraction. That means we cannot place homosexuals with straight guys or each other. So we would have to put each and every individual homosexual in a shower full of women. I dont have evidence that doesnt account for homosexuality either but what you are advocating is impracticle. Simple as. What harm does it do to you as a straight man if a homosexual has a little crush on you?

What does that has to do with anything?
Was that an argument you've tried to make?
How is that a legitimate reasoning? How is that holding any essence of rationalism at all?

Its a fact. Women are far more vulnerable to sexual abuse in these circumstances.


Absolutely false, I am comparing one sexuality with another.

Do you feel it's wrong?

Not at all. I just find it amusing how you are creating reason to hide behind your own homophobia. Of course, you only care about the individual efficiency of our soldiers right? So you believe sexual distractions are not good, right? So you propose separating men based on sexuality and putting them in a shower together so as to "lessen sexual distraction", because putting a gay in a shower full of gays would do exactly that, right?
Exactly.
It just boils down to the fact you cant bear to think about another guy checking your arse out in the shower.
Either way they will be distracted. Why the uneccessary discrimination?

You mean house them together?
I don't see why not, it is the showers that are the forbidden-to-mix zone in the military, and nothing else.

I mean shower together.
 
To be honest, men who can control themselves and exercise a bit of maturity could shower with women and not get distracted too. I actually have no problem with men and women mixing together in the showers but evidently most straight men cannot be trusted to exercise such control, and i can wager most female personnel would be uncomfortable with the prospect hence why the two are separated. Now you could say "how about straight men who are uncomfortable showering with gays?"
Well WHAT THE HELL are you doing in the army then??? I didnt know who was gay amongst my friends but i can assure you there was more than a couple i showered with.
 
Im saying you dont have **** to proove homosexual men are any less efficient because they shower with straights.
That is far from the statement you've made earlier.
But then again, I am not arguing about homosexuals alone, I am arguing about any two groups of people where at least one has a sexual attraction for the other.
:rofl

Do you not see the inherent flaw in your argument?
Your advocating seperating straight guys from gay guys to avoid sexual distraction, right?
How will they be any less distracted in a shower full of GAY GUYS. :laughat:
Your point is valid (finally), however there are not that many gay people in the military and it would minimize the unnecessary distraction to separate them. As I said many times already before, the military's policy is to avoid distractions when possible, with an emphasis on when possible.
Im saying you have no proof to tell me that gays in the army currently are less efficient or distracted to any certain degree which is causing problems within the army.
So you're saying that I have no proof that, specifically homosexuals are less efficient (and not generally everyone), and because of that you believe that my reasoning is wrong.
Well that's just a weird decision, to separate between what is already known about straight females to straight males sexual attractions and what you believe you know on homosexuals-straights sexual attractions.
Im OK with separating men and women because of the physical differences between the two and the fact that many women are not comfortable showering with men and the fact that it tends to be the norm in our society, even in school during P.E classes.
I'm sorry but that has to be the most ridiculous claim made so far in this thread.
How is their physical difference got more to do with separating the showers than the sexual attraction between the two sexes?
Don't you see how far from reality the argument you make here is? Don't you see how ridiculously irrational it is?

In P.E classes, there is a separation because of their abilities.
Everyone, however, even the handicapped, are capable of taking a shower or sleeping in a bed.
What your saying is flawed. You wish to seperate sexualities so as to lessen sexual distraction.
Thank you, that's exactly it.
That means we cannot place homosexuals with straight guys or each other. So we would have to put each and every individual homosexual in a shower full of women.
Already answered that above.
It is a problem that would be allowed to occur, seeing that the options are few.
I dont have evidence that doesnt account for homosexuality either but what you are advocating is impracticle.
I am not advocating anything, I am speaking from the military point of view and how would they minimize the caused distraction.
Simple as. What harm does it do to you as a straight man if a homosexual has a little crush on you?
I have no problem with that, I wouldn't have problem with taking a shower with a homosexual too.
It's not my personal "can or cannot", it is the military's policy, and so far it is has been working.
Its a fact. Women are far more vulnerable to sexual abuse in these circumstances.
Give me a break.
Not at all. I just find it amusing how you are creating reason to hide behind your own homophobia.
Woah, hold it buddy.
Nothing that I said in this thread can rationally paint me as Homophobic, but actually the opposite.
You should watch what you're typing or you'll have to deal with the consequences of your own words, turd.
Of course, you only care about the individual efficiency of our soldiers right? So you believe sexual distractions are not good, right?
I believe that it's not right for the military, even if its harm is minimal.
So you propose separating men based on sexuality and putting them in a shower together so as to "lessen sexual distraction", because putting a gay in a shower full of gays would do exactly that, right?
Avoid repeating yourself, I have already answered that one above.
Exactly.
It just boils down to the fact you cant bear to think about another guy checking your arse out in the shower.
Either way they will be distracted. Why the uneccessary discrimination?
Again, watch your words.
Since this was in the same post, I'll refuse to report on it.
But the next time you'll decide to accuse me or anyone else in something that we're not, you will, as I said, suffer from the consequences.
 
Last edited:
That is far from the statement you've made earlier.
But then again, I am not arguing about homosexuals alone, I am arguing about any two groups of people where at least one has a sexual attraction for the other.

So you think lesbians should be grouped with men?

Your point is valid (finally), however there are not that many gay people in the military and it would minimize the unnecessary distraction to separate them. As I said many times already before, the military's policy is to avoid distractions when possible, with an emphasis on when possible.

This was my point all along.
How many gays serve in the military, then?

So you're saying that I have no proof that, specifically homosexuals are less efficient (and not generally everyone), and because of that you believe that my reasoning is wrong.
Well that's just a weird decision, to separate between what is already known about straight females to straight males sexual attractions and what you believe you know on homosexuals-straights sexual attractions.

Ok, so do you have evidence to show that straight male/female attractions in the shower cause distractions to ones military service?


I'm sorry but that has to be the most ridiculous claim made so far in this thread.
How is their physical difference got more to do with separating the showers than the sexual attraction between the two sexes?
Don't you see how far from reality the argument you make here is? Don't you see how ridiculously irrational it is?

In P.E classes, there is a separation because of their abilities.
Everyone, however, even the handicapped, are capable of taking a shower or sleeping in a bed.

How is it irrational? When i say physical differences, i mean differences in strength, etc as you have stated in this last sentence.Thats why i believe women and men should be seperated because they may be open to paticular abuse by men.
This last part actually goes to show you are wrong.
All males and females, regardless of abilities, can also get dressed.


Thank you, that's exactly it.
Already answered that above.
It is a problem that would be allowed to occur, seeing that the options are few.

So sticking gay men with gay men will lessen distractions...how? :rofl
Your homophobic nature is really peeling through.
This is one of those situations you need to bite your lip in and take.

I am not advocating anything, I am speaking from the military point of view and how would they minimize the caused distraction.

:doh
It doesnt minimize ****. Infact it exagerrates the problem. Do you KNOW what happens when you stick gay men together in a shower? A whole lot more than what happens when you mix them with straights.
You just cant bear the thought of sharing the same shower with them. Simple as.


I have no problem with that, I wouldn't have problem with taking a shower with a homosexual too.
It's not my personal "can or cannot", it is the military's policy, and so far it is
has been working.

Has it? Are gays separate? Are they paticularly distracted as of this moment?

Give me a break.

Fact.

Woah, hold it buddy.
Nothing that I said in this thread can rationally paint me as Homophobic, but actually the opposite.
You should watch what you're typing or you'll have to deal with the consequences of your own words, turd.

Is that a threat? Id like to see you try.
Your clearly advocating discrimination.
Perhaps if separating gays and sticking them together did lessen sexual attractions, you'd have a point. But you dont.

I believe that it's not right for the military, even if its harm is minimal.
Avoid repeating yourself, I have already answered that one above.

Actually you skipped around it.

Again, watch your words.
Since this was in the same post, I'll refuse to report on it.
But the next time you'll decide to accuse me or anyone else in something that we're not, you will, as I said, suffer from the consequences.

Offended? :lol:
 
So you think lesbians should be grouped with men?
Do I think they should? No.
Would I have a problem with that? No.
This was my point all along.
Then you've naturally succeeded in hiding it.
How many gays serve in the military, then?
Yeah why won't you give me a moment and I'll count for you.
Ok, so do you have evidence to show that straight male/female attractions in the shower cause distractions to ones military service?
I don't need to prove that sexual distraction is considered a distraction, it's right there in the name of the term. :screwy
How is it irrational? When i say physical differences, i mean differences in strength, etc as you have stated in this last sentence.Thats why i believe women and men should be seperated because they may be open to paticular abuse by men.
This last part actually goes to show you are wrong.
All males and females, regardless of abilities, can also get dressed.
Oh so let me see if I understand, you claim that because women and men have a natural difference in strength, it means that women cannot shower with men together.

But only a moment ago you've stated that it shouldn't be a problem to have two opposing sexualities showering together, right?
Seems to me like you're suffering from a malfunction, perhaps I could advice on reprogramming?
So sticking gay men with gay men will lessen distractions...how?
Your homophobic nature is really peeling through.
This is one of those situations you need to bite your lip in and take.
You know, I've really given you a chance, but if you choose to be one of those internet retarded trolls who aren't capable of forming an argument, relying on baseless accusations and usually end up in the debate politics' recycling-bin, then so be it.
It doesnt minimize ****. Infact it exagerrates the problem. Do you KNOW what happens when you stick gay men together in a shower?
You've tried to point out to the only valid point in this debate that you have brought up, but when you've done this you've only strengthen the opposing position that sexual distraction is indeed a possibility when you've said: "Do you KNOW what happens when you stick gay men together in a shower?"
A whole lot more than what happens when you mix them with straights.
And you base that on?
You just cant bear the thought of sharing the same shower with them. Simple as.
And you just can't bear a thought.
Has it? Are gays separate? Are they paticularly distracted as of this moment?
Are they allowed to be open about their homosexuality? Are they showing up in military statistics?
Is that a threat? Id like to see you try.
Your clearly advocating discrimination.
No more than you're advocating homophobia when you refer to female to male relations as different than male to male or female to female relations.
And yet one of us has violated the forum's rules and would suffer from the consequences.
Perhaps if separating gays and sticking them together did lessen sexual attractions, you'd have a point. But you dont.
That's not the sole factor for "my point"'s validation.
Actually you skipped around it.
You have apparently missed a whole paragraph.
Offended?
Reported? :2razz:
 
Last edited:
To be honest, men who can control themselves and exercise a bit of maturity could shower with women and not get distracted too. I actually have no problem with men and women mixing together in the showers but evidently most straight men cannot be trusted to exercise such control, and i can wager most female personnel would be uncomfortable with the prospect hence why the two are separated. Now you could say "how about straight men who are uncomfortable showering with gays?"
Well WHAT THE HELL are you doing in the army then??? I didnt know who was gay amongst my friends but i can assure you there was more than a couple i showered with.
So straignt men can't control themselves, but gay men can. CHECK
 
Voice your true thoughts here. This poll is anonymous so you can vote no if you choose so, obviously, as you are entitled to but please try and post an explanation too and why you think its important such a law is or isn't allowed.

Lastly, wouldn't people who dislike gays want them in the army? Its the best way to kill them off.

Vote!

I don't have a problem with gays in the military.
 
So straignt men can't control themselves, but gay men can. CHECK

Where did i say the same doesnt apply to homosexuals?

Check mate. ;)

EDIT: Will reply to you Apoco ASAP.
Where are the 10 who said NO to homo's in the army?
 
Last edited:
The military policy is not shared with air-line companies, and I don't see why should it be.

Ridiculous comparisons are counter-productive.

If the soldiers don't need a nanny, then policies designed to nanny them are a waste of my money.

If soldiers do need a nanny (which I highly doubt) then as riverrat so astutely observed, we need soldiers that can act like adults.

Which is it?
 
Where did i say the same doesnt apply to homosexuals?

Check mate. ;)

EDIT: Will reply to you Apoco ASAP.
Where are the 10 who said NO to homo's in the army?
You checkmated nothing.

Well WHAT THE HELL are you doing in the army then??? I didnt know who was gay amongst my friends but i can assure you there was more than a couple i showered with.
Here you ridicule those who aren't tough enough to get over it. Your implication is quite clear.
 
Women and men are segregated due to the sexual attraction, yes, but thats because such a seperation has evidence to back it up with.

It does? If you could just point to this evidence, I will sadly retract my stance that gays and straights should share showers and my opinion of our military personnel will on the whole be drastically lowered.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Stop the personal attacks.
 
If the soldiers don't need a nanny, then policies designed to nanny them are a waste of my money.

If soldiers do need a nanny (which I highly doubt) then as riverrat so astutely observed, we need soldiers that can act like adults.

Which is it?
Refer yourself to my response to rivrrat when she has claimed that she is of a better caliber than those who protect her life.

As to your current post, obviously it is the first, only that such policies do not waste your money. (How did you come to that conclusion is beyond me)

Also, there's nothing "nanny" in the separation of showers between males and females.
 
Last edited:
It does? If you could just point to this evidence, I will sadly retract my stance that gays and straights should share showers and my opinion of our military personnel will on the whole be drastically lowered.
What is, in your opinion, the reason for the separation of showers between male and female soldiers in the military bases, then?
 
Refer yourself to my response to rivrrat when she has claimed that she is of a better caliber than those who protect her life.

As to your current post, obviously it is the first, only that such policies do not waste your money. (How did you come to that conclusion is beyond me)

Well, presumably my tax dollars are paying for an extra set of showers, and paying for policy makers to waste time discussing these policies, and paying for these policies to be enforced, etc...

Also, there's nothing "nanny" in the separation of showers between males and females.

Sure there is. Have to keep the children separated for their own good. That's about as nanny as it gets.
 
What is, in your opinion, the reason for the separation of showers between male and female soldiers in the military bases, then?

Dumb assumptions by policy makers.
 
Well, presumably my tax dollars are paying for an extra set of showers, and paying for policy makers to waste time discussing these policies, and paying for these policies to be enforced, etc...
You do realize how insignificant the money that goes to showers is when compared with the rest of the military expanses, like, say, a predator UAV?
Sure there is. Have to keep the children separated for their own good. That's about as nanny as it gets.
Wrong - for the military's interests - and that's why there's nothing nanny about it.
 
Back
Top Bottom