• 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!

Officials: Half of force trained on gay ban repeal

demonstrating a difference in body parts in no way answers the point. we don't seperate men and women because innies and outies can't mix, we separate them because of sexuality.

it's not different. though it is noteworthy that you would seek to protect women from the very thing that you are demanding of the men.

so? as you put it, who cares if they are comfortable - they need to just magically stop being 18-22 year old males and become more professional.

Men and women do not share private spaces in our society unless they choose to do so. Gays and straights do.

And the second part was a joke based on the fact that there are other reasons that men and women do not live together besides the attraction issue.

Even if it were just an issue of attraction though, the separation can be justified for the sheer statistical potential of causing problems. The numbers of gays that would be in the military could not justify such an expensive separation just to try to avoid a small number of potential problems.
 
Who or what do you mean by "one"? And what exactly is it it that one does have to do and the other doesn't have to do?

one does not have to be gay, one does. suspect is not know is not deals-with-as-such. this is a sliding scale, to be sure.

Because individual professionalism or lack of it is what will affect the team, not a stupid stereotype of how a group of people might act or what might happen if we allow gays to say they are gay.

I'm going to say this slowly, in small words; as apparently this is a difficult concept to comprehend:

I

Don't

Give

A

****

About

Any

Stereotype (if this is too big a concept, replace with "idea")

About

How

Gays

Will

Or

Will

Not

Act.

That

Is

Not

At

All

What

I

Am

Arguing

Despite

The

Need

For

Some

To

Pretend

It

Is.

You

Are

Engaging

In

A

Strawman

Argument.

If everyone on the team acts professionally and does their job to the best of their ability without allowing their own feelings to hamper their abilities, then the team will work well together.

sadly, this is incorrect. each individual doing their individual job to the best of their ability marks a step down in ability from the team being able to function as a seamless unit. Combat on the ground is a team sport, not a "bunch of individuals each doing their own thing" sport.
 
Men and women do not share private spaces in our society unless they choose to do so. Gays and straights do.

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.

And the second part was a joke based on the fact that there are other reasons that men and women do not live together besides the attraction issue.

then it was a foolish one - as it contradicted your chief argument on this thread (that ease and comfort with each other does not effect teamwork - as everyone knows, humans are actually robots), and as it continued to fail to address the point.

Even if it were just an issue of attraction though, the separation can be justified for the sheer statistical potential of causing problems. The numbers of gays that would be in the military could not justify such an expensive separation just to try to avoid a small number of potential problems.

gosh, that almost sounds like an argument for DADT.
 
Navy, I would love to see the two guys who could share a bunk onboard ship, let alone do something while in it. Maybe, in some places a top rack, but even that is unlikely for some one not a contortionist.

I doubt if 2 gays will share a rack but you can bet there will be incidents of unwanted sexual advances..........
 
:shrug: sure two can share a rack. one guy leans against the wall, the second guy leans against the first - and the first guy get's control of the air conditioning nozzle.
 
Many people aboard ships know who is gay and who isn't now. Anyone who believes the majority of the gays in the Navy aren't open about it, especially to most of those in their berthings are fooling themselves. Our department knew who was gay and who was straight and who was bi, for the most part. And most did not care. Not even the men. Those men who might have cared learned quickly that they were going to get ribbed by every other guy in their division for expressing anything stupid about someone else's sexuality.

Heck, I knew straight guys who would hump each other's legs and pretend kiss other guys and climb into occupied racks just to **** with each other.

I doubt if that is so...I don't think the Navy has fallen that far........Most men in the Navy are still God Fearing and want nothing to do with living with gay 24/7...
 
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.

Except that women have a legitimate reason to fear rape from testosterone hyped soldiers. Are you suggesting that those effeminate queers are so much tougher than the proud, straight, American soldiers they serve with that there will be a large amount of rapes going on?

Also, if that were true, why wouldn't it have happened already? Simply knowing that someone else is gay can't possibly make them more likely to rape you.

Oh yeah, and those same soldiers are ALREADY bunking together... and nothing seems to be happening.

Please try to understand, very VERY few gays actually pursue heterosexuals. And to suggest that gay soldiers, with full knowledge that fraternization is against the rules, will disregard those rules is downright insulting. Have a little more respect for people who are willing to risk and sacrifice their lives for their country.
 
I doubt if 2 gays will share a rack but you can bet there will be incidents of unwanted sexual advances..........

There are such incidents now, I don't see that changing.
 
I doubt if that is so...I don't think the Navy has fallen that far........Most men in the Navy are still God Fearing and want nothing to do with living with gay 24/7...

We're all around you NP, we're all around you :2razz:
 
:shrug: sure two can share a rack. one guy leans against the wall, the second guy leans against the first - and the first guy get's control of the air conditioning nozzle.

Small guys, maybe.

And how come I never got a rack with an air conditioning nozzle?
 
I doubt if that is so...I don't think the Navy has fallen that far........Most men in the Navy are still God Fearing and want nothing to do with living with gay 24/7...

We're all around you NP, we're all around you :2razz:
 
My sentiments exactly. Wait, no I have one:

When in Rome...

I remember two details from Italy. ****ty drivers and he/she hookers. Thankfully I managed to getting too close to both.
 
Small guys, maybe.

true. 6'2 215lb'ers need not apply. but most of us were pretty average size.

And how come I never got a rack with an air conditioning nozzle?

they air conditioned your entire living space? that sucks - that little curtain just cut you off from cool air. though to be fair, when the "little nozzle" system broke it sucked. guys were going out topside in the middle of the persian gulf to get cool.
 
Except that women have a legitimate reason to fear rape from testosterone hyped soldiers. Are you suggesting that those effeminate queers are so much tougher than the proud, straight, American soldiers they serve with that there will be a large amount of rapes going on?

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.
 
Because that isn't the only reason that men and women do not live together in the military. The bigger reason that we don't live together is it is not part of our culture to house/berth/shower men and women together. We still have a very modest mindset concerning these things. The civilian world still has separate restrooms for men and women.

It does not work that way for straights and gays. We do allow straights and gays of the same sex to share bathrooms/locker rooms.

And you can see of course the potential for problems...correct?
 
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.

Really? So men don't share bathrooms with other men anywhere? Women don't share locker rooms with other women anywhere?

And, btw, the military is a part of society. Everyone in the military today chose to be in. They volunteer to serve with everyone else in the military, which means putting aside their own comforts and personal fears to do their job. Even under DADT, they would still be sharing those same living/getting naked spaces with gays, whether they know they are there or not.

It isn't required that anyone actually use a public locker room or a public restroom, but it is required that if they do, they cannot prevent other people of the same sex from coming into that space. And they don't have any control over what sexuality those people of the same sex are.



then it was a foolish one - as it contradicted your chief argument on this thread (that ease and comfort with each other does not effect teamwork - as everyone knows, humans are actually robots), and as it continued to fail to address the point.

Some people need to grow a sense of humor.

For one thing, my joke pointed out that there are other issues involved with men and women not sharing living spaces. The principal thing is our own society's views on it. In fact, it is against some people's religion to share such spaces with members of the opposite sex they are not married or related to, Mormons for example.

Can you name a religion where it would be some sin or violation to share spaces with people of a different sexuality than you? Some scriptural support to back this up would be good.

And, no, believing that they are committing sin does not count because then it would have to stand to reason that you could not share a space with anyone who committed a sin.

gosh, that almost sounds like an argument for DADT.

The difference being that it is a lot more likely to cause issues, including pregnancy, which would not be an issue with gays living with straights of the same sex, if you have men and women living together, especially in the numbers of potential partners based off their sexuality than having men of different sexualities living together.

Spouses are another issue with this. If you talk to most spouses, they are much more concerned with their husbands/wives living with a member of the opposite sex than they are with them living with someone who is gay because there is the chance of a mutual attraction.

On top of this, I could care less if the military ordered tomorrow that men and women would have to share berthing spaces, even if I got deployed, because I know I can act professionally and anyone who touched me would not only be answering to the Navy but most likely my husband as well. I know it will not happen during my time in the military though because our culture can't even handle men using women's bathrooms when they are crossdressers/transsexuals. As I have said multiple times, I have changed in front of men while in the military. It wasn't a big deal. I have showed my breasts (by accident, when they fell out of my bathing suit doing my PFA) to men in the military. It was embarassing, but it wasn't exactly something to get worked up over. And I have had women who couldn't handle another woman being naked in front of them (some of those older ladies at the gym really are funny when they look so disgusted that someone in a locker room is getting naked in front of them to put on a bathing suit or even just to change into gym clothes). My mother taught me that the human body is just a body. Everyone has one.
 
And you can see of course the potential for problems...correct?

I see that there is the same potential for problems with or without DADT in place, so we might as well not have DADT and be able to treat everyone fairly and better allow for those problems to be solved by the command rather than continue or be solved in a bad way.
 
I see that there is the same potential for problems with or without DADT in place, so we might as well not have DADT and be able to treat everyone fairly and better allow for those problems to be solved by the command rather than continue or be solved in a bad way.

DADT WILL be repealed. Pretending there aren't and wont be problems will only ensure that there will be.
 
Except that women have a legitimate reason to fear rape from testosterone hyped soldiers. Are you suggesting that those effeminate queers are so much tougher than the proud, straight, American soldiers they serve with that there will be a large amount of rapes going on?

Also, if that were true, why wouldn't it have happened already? Simply knowing that someone else is gay can't possibly make them more likely to rape you.

Oh yeah, and those same soldiers are ALREADY bunking together... and nothing seems to be happening.

Please try to understand, very VERY few gays actually pursue heterosexuals. And to suggest that gay soldiers, with full knowledge that fraternization is against the rules, will disregard those rules is downright insulting. Have a little more respect for people who are willing to risk and sacrifice their lives for their country.

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.
 
Really? So men don't share bathrooms with other men anywhere? Women don't share locker rooms with other women anywhere?

in general society? not unless they choose to.

And, btw, the military is a part of society.

no. our rights are constrained, our freedoms severely hampered, we are apart. there is a reason we call it "getting in" or "getting out".

It isn't required that anyone actually use a public locker room or a public restroom, but it is required that if they do, they cannot prevent other people of the same sex from coming into that space. And they don't have any control over what sexuality those people of the same sex are.

no, but it is required of people in the military that they shower together, bunk together, and all manner of things thereunto pertaining.

Some people need to grow a sense of humor.

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.

For one thing, my joke pointed out that there are other issues involved with men and women not sharing living spaces. The principal thing is our own society's views on it. In fact, it is against some people's religion to share such spaces with members of the opposite sex they are not married or related to, Mormons for example.

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?

Can you name a religion where it would be some sin or violation to share spaces with people of a different sexuality than you? Some scriptural support to back this up would be good.

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.

And, no, believing that they are committing sin does not count because then it would have to stand to reason that you could not share a space with anyone who committed a sin.

sure it does - if you are wrong in tempting them into the sin, then you are wrong for doing so.

The difference being that it is a lot more likely to cause issues, including pregnancy, which would not be an issue with gays living with straights of the same sex, if you have men and women living together, especially in the numbers of potential partners based off their sexuality than having men of different sexualities living together.

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.

Spouses are another issue with this. If you talk to most spouses, they are much more concerned with their husbands/wives living with a member of the opposite sex than they are with them living with someone who is gay because there is the chance of a mutual attraction.

why? all members of the military are perfectly professional and disciplined, and hence there is no need for worry, remember?

On top of this, I could care less if the military ordered tomorrow that men and women would have to share berthing spaces, even if I got deployed, because I know I can act professionally and anyone who touched me would not only be answering to the Navy but most likely my husband as well.

which doesn't mean for one second that this policy will not create severe issues within the units that it effects.

I know it will not happen during my time in the military though because our culture can't even handle men using women's bathrooms when they are crossdressers/transsexuals. As I have said multiple times, I have changed in front of men while in the military. It wasn't a big deal. I have showed my breasts (by accident, when they fell out of my bathing suit doing my PFA) to men in the military. It was embarassing, but it wasn't exactly something to get worked up over.

why embarrassed? is being naked and exposed in front of people who will look at you sexually something that generally invades your privacy?
 
Back
Top Bottom