• 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!

"Don't ask, don't tell" cost tops $50,000 per expulsion, study finds

You're making a great case why gays shouldn't be allowed to serve openly.

Actually I'm proposing that gays living in secrecy already erodes unit cohesion. Gays being allowed to serve openly in the long term would allow for fuller understanding and less homophobia/bigotry among the ranks.
 
Not a lot of disagreement here. I don't know a lot about this subject, but I'm curious to know about the social dynamics and unit cohesion in coed units of the IDF (of which there are A LOT). EDIT: Correction, the only unisex infantry unit in the IDF seems to be the Caracal Battalion. My question about unit cohesion still stands though.



The difference is culture. Out of necessity, man, woman, and child defended the re-birth of Israel. Culturally, this society began coed. However, Israelis also understand that women simply cannot exist in certain senarios. We do not live in a "Starship Trooper" world where we can all shower together and no one notices the differences. Nor can women conduct themselves generally inthe physical manner which is demanded in our fighting units. Someone may produce the exception, but she would be the exception.


Is this the fault of the gay Marine? Or his unprofessional teammates? It seems NCOs and officers should be enforcing discipline among the ranks in order to prevent such a scenario?

Of course it's not the gay fellas fault. And professionalism is always a Marine's duty. However, this doesn't change the reality. I had to of heard at least 10 gay jokes today amongst a group of Marines that were raised in a culture that ridicules gays. Even today, Hollywood uses them as the butt of a joke and Californians refuse them gay rights to marry. But the military (Marines) are supposed to behave as if they emerged from a different culture? This will take time and most gays (if not all) in the Marine Corps will remain private. The problems will be more severe in the other branches due to the lesser degree of discipline, but the Marine Corps will have it's issues as well.

Could it not be argued that because a Gay Marine can't be honest with his brothers-in-arms (the issue of him hiding his own identity is always in the back of his mind), a psycho-social wall is built up between him and his teammates because of this, and that this secrecy results in an erosion of unit cohesion? In which case perhaps allowing gays to open themselves up would enable other Marines to eventually be more accepting?

This will all come into play. Part of the Pentagon study was on how to impliment this change with as little effect to mission as possible. The Marine Corps has spent decades reflecting on female Marines as our sisters (which would invoke protection issues in combat if they were in the infantry). The same will eventually have to be applied towards gays. But in the mean time, most of them will remain "in the closet," especially in tighter units. I am a Chief in a team of 17 that gets embedded in the Afghani forces. This makes us pretty tight. I would think that even after some have been fond of gay jokes, that after all this time together if one were to present his truth to us, then we would accept it. But we are all senior in ranks and ridicule and harshness is usually in the youth (lower ranks and Lts). I'm not sure what it would do to that Fire team of 4 or squad of 13 who all age between 18 and 25.
 
You are making a judgment that they outed themselves just to be discharged. That is an asinine statement. You have no proof that this is what any gay or lesbian did.

No..there is proof. A great number of even non-gays used DADT to get out of obligation. This is why after 9/11 the Army and Marine Corps started telling them that they could be gay after the deployment. They generally stopped being gay when units got back.
 
Yes they are or a bigot. One of the two. Why else would there be a problem with gays and lesbians in service? This is all about bigotry.

It's about culture. You seem to be wanting the military to be the bad guy here. Are we not a reflection of you civilians? Are we not all cut from the society that is America? When civilians allow them to marry and stop applauding at the gay ridicule they see on television or on silver screen...come back and talk about the biggoted military. At least in the military, gays will be protected under the UCMJ. Good Marines and soldiers will beprosecuted and lose careers just to satisfy the gay sensitivity issue. What do you self righteous civilians get for your bigotries?
 
Actually I'm proposing that gays living in secrecy already erodes unit cohesion. Gays being allowed to serve openly in the long term would allow for fuller understanding and less homophobia/bigotry among the ranks.

I don't think so. There are so few of them in uniform that their hurt feelings don't matter to unit cohesion. It will all work out in the end somehow. Today, Marines are fond of making racial jokes towards each other and then going out for beers. Gays seem to already be OK with taking a joke. This transition won't be as bad as some imply and more trouble than some admit. This is because people that oppose it are traditional in their thinking and those that voice for it are more concerned with "gay rights" than they are about practical application. It will come down to what it always comesdown to - the military setting the example for the rest of the country. Maybe after gays have been patrolling openly next to non-gays in foriegn lands civilians will decide to give them "rights" in the country.
 
Last edited:
The difference is culture. Out of necessity, man, woman, and child defended the re-birth of Israel. Culturally, this society began coed. However, Israelis also understand that women simply cannot exist in certain senarios. We do not live in a "Starship Trooper" world where we can all shower together and no one notices the differences. Nor can women conduct themselves generally inthe physical manner which is demanded in our fighting units. Someone may produce the exception, but she would be the exception.




Of course it's not the gay fellas fault. And professionalism is always a Marine's duty. However, this doesn't change the reality. I had to of heard at least 10 gay jokes today amongst a group of Marines that were raised in a culture that ridicules gays. Even today, Hollywood uses them as the butt of a joke and Californians refuse them gay rights to marry. But the military (Marines) are supposed to behave as if they emerged from a different culture? This will take time and most gays (if not all) in the Marine Corps will remain private. The problems will be more severe in the other branches due to the lesser degree of discipline, but the Marine Corps will have it's issues as well.



This will all come into play. Part of the Pentagon study was on how to impliment this change with as little effect to mission as possible. The Marine Corps has spent decades reflecting on female Marines as our sisters (which would invoke protection issues in combat if they were in the infantry). The same will eventually have to be applied towards gays. But in the mean time, most of them will remain "in the closet," especially in tighter units. I am a Chief in a team of 17 that gets embedded in the Afghani forces. This makes us pretty tight. I would think that even after some have been fond of gay jokes, that after all this time together if one were to present his truth to us, then we would accept it. But we are all senior in ranks and ridicule and harshness is usually in the youth (lower ranks and Lts). I'm not sure what it would do to that Fire team of 4 or squad of 13 who all age between 18 and 25.

I disagree with much of this. I'm a liberal but I wish to join the 03 Infantry after college and I guess I have an unreasonably idealistic sense of just how professional Marines are supposed to be. But thanks for the honest and reasoned response, Master Sergeant. As an aside, do you think Recon/Force Recon and MARSOC operators are in general more mature and professional than their infantry counterparts?
 
Last edited:
I disagree with much of this. I'm a liberal but I wish to join the 03 Infantry after college and I guess I have an unreasonably idealistic sense of just how professional Marines are supposed to be. But thanks for the honest and reasoned response, Master Sergeant. As an aside, do you think Recon/Force Recon and MARSOC operators are in general more mature and professional than their infantry counterparts?

Well, "liberal" has nothing to do with it. We are a Conservative military, but that's largely because the Vietnam protestors have made it so. The descendents of that hippie era raised children who now lead our country and assume to know what's best for the military despite the attitude that they would never disgrace themselves with such a lower man's profession. You'll agree with more of what I write once you emerge in the military culture and see it up close.

MARSOC operators and such all come from the same culture that the rest do. We all tend to reflect our upbringing, but they are typically tighter than most. But gays will have it easier in the Marine Corps because of the enforced sense of individual discipline. But sometimes boys will be boys. Remember, we aren't the ones that bring the American people their Mai Lais, Abu-Ghraibs, Jessica Lynchs, Black Hawk Downs, Tali Hooks, etc. We are the dummies that get caught hazing each other on 60 minutes (pinning ceremony for a Recon unit). In the end, that gay will be protected because he is our gay.
 
Last edited:
Then why the snide comment about their being immature kids?

Because they are! That's why for every 4-6 privates, there's an NCO to keep watch on them.
 
Actually I'm proposing that gays living in secrecy already erodes unit cohesion. Gays being allowed to serve openly in the long term would allow for fuller understanding and less homophobia/bigotry among the ranks.

That hasn't been the case, so far. You're welcome to prove me wrong, but I'm thinking you would be wasting your time.
 
Hiding my own homophobia. That is a laugh. I am a married lesbian. It would be best to know someone before you make stupid statements like that.

I spent 12 years in the infantry. So, I think I can speak with authority--more authority than an opinion poll--about the inner-workings, attitudes and mentalities of an alpha male dominated environment.

Folks like MSGT, cpwill, Oscar and myself can be considered experts on this issue. But, time and again, we're told that we're wrong and the only evidence that's been presented, to date, is an opinion poll.
 
I spent 12 years in the infantry. So, I think I can speak with authority--more authority than an opinion poll--about the inner-workings, attitudes and mentalities of an alpha male dominated environment.

Folks like MSGT, cpwill, Oscar and myself can be considered experts on this issue. But, time and again, we're told that we're wrong and the only evidence that's been presented, to date, is an opinion poll.

For the last time, it WASN'T SOME CIVILIAN OPINION POLL. It was a SURVEY commissioned by the DoD itself. And yes, I value a comprehensive survey more than the evidence of a couple of guys who say they've been there, done that. But I guess we're not just going to agree on this.

In fact, it is not the only evidence. How do you suppose the Israelis and Brits are doing just fine? The Brits even go to gay pride parades:
In U.K. Military, Gay Pride Shines - World Watch - CBS News
 
Last edited:
For the last time, it WASN'T SOME CIVILIAN OPINION POLL. It was a SURVEY commissioned by the DoD itself. And yes, I value a comprehensive survey more than the evidence of a couple of guys who say they've been there, done tha. But I guess we're not just going to agree on this.

In fact, it is not the only evidence. How do you suppose the Israelis and Brits are doing just fine? The Brits even go to gay pride parades:
In U.K. Military, Gay Pride Shines - World Watch - CBS News

I don't give a **** who did it. And all the British army links that you post don't mean **** to me.

Go jine the Marines, as an 0300 grunt, then come back and tell us what you know about it. If you don't wash out.
 
edited and edited again, so I can post ten characters
 
I don't give a **** who did it. And all the British army links that you post don't mean **** to me.

Go jine the Marines, as an 0300 grunt, then come back and tell us what you know about it. If you don't wash out.

No, they might not mean **** to you but it's still relevant to the discussion. So the Brits can do fine, be openly gay, be just as professional, and still maintain unit cohesion. But Americans can't cuz they're ****in immature?
 
Last edited:
No, they might not mean **** to you but it's still relevant to the discussion. So the Brits can do fine, be openly gay, be just as professional, and still maintain unit cohesion. But Americans can't cuz they're ****in immature?

Show all us dumbass combat arms vet how many battles the Brits have been in since they lifted the ban on gays.
 
That's it? No, seriously, that's all of them?

The Brits have barely been engaged in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, that's all you have?

When the Brits have the same amount of combat power engaged as the US, get back with us.

The Brits have a smaller military than the US. You expect them to commit the same level of involvement? The size of the British Army is about as large as the Corps. What is this supposed to be, a pissing match? We were talking about unit cohesion.
 
Last edited:
The Brits have a smaller military than the US. You expect them to commit the same level of involvement? The size of the British Army is about as large as the Corps. What is this supposed to be, a pissing match? We were talking about unit cohesion.

Ooooooh, so they have a smaller army? I see, so the comparison isn't the same. Yes? They have a much different demographic, too. I mean, there aren't a whole lotta Brits in the US military. Is there?
 
Ooooooh, so they have a smaller army? I see, so the comparison isn't the same. Yes? They have a much different demographic, too. I mean, there aren't a whole lotta Brits in the US military. Is there?

No, but there seem to be a lot more mature 18-25 year olds who don't seem to have a problem with their fellow fire-team members being openly gay.
 
No, but there seem to be a lot more mature 18-25 year olds who don't seem to have a problem with their fellow fire-team members being openly gay.

As has been pointed out, by others: their's is a different culture. What works for the Brits may not work for the Americans.

Look at Rock-n-Roll. We invented and the Brits had to copy it. Where did the Brits come to make it big on the Rock-n-Roll scene? America! Duh!!
 
As has been pointed out, by others: their's is a different culture. What works for the Brits may not work for the Americans.

Look at Rock-n-Roll. We invented and the Brits had to copy it. Where did the Brits come to make it big on the Rock-n-Roll scene? America! Duh!!

But it has worked for the Israelis, the Spanish, the French, the Finns, the Swedes, the Danes, the Norwegians, the Canadians, even the militarily conservative Germans. Are you suggesting that all of those liberal-ass weak European countries are capable of doing something that American can't (being professional, mature, and open-minded)? Maybe you're right. Maybe we ARE different. Maybe our culture is different. But if it really is, and we really can't do better than all of these other countries, then something is really ****ed up about our culture.

Why do you have such low expectations for those who are supposed to be our finest? Why is it that reality and identities have to be concealed for people to fight effectively? I mean, that sure as hell sounds ****ed up to me. I'd want my fellow Marines to be better men than that.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand the problem with gays in the military. Can they hold a gun? Can they shoot? So let them serve.
 
Back
Top Bottom