Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Justin24]

For the record: Hippies aren't anti-American. They are pro-peace. And we all know there's nothing wrong with peace.

I don't like hippies (my personal opinion) There peaceful until some one comes after their pot. heheh

 

[yolland]

Can we drop the digression about 'labels', please--it really is beside the point.

How is it that forcing a heterosexual male to cuddle and shower with a homosexual male is not considered sexual harassment, when it would be considered sexual harassment if we forced a woman to do these things with a heterosexual man? That is the basis of my female/homosexual male comparison.

I think Irvine and MrsS have already answered this by pointing out that the analogy is false; the logical analogy would be forcing straight women to do these things with lesbians, which again, I haven't seen widespread evidence of straight female revulsion towards. Furthermore, I don't see expecting a female soldier to willingly huddle with a male soldier in order to stave off hypothermia as 'sexual harassment'; sexual harassment would be if the male soldier reacted to the situation by groping her or dropping a string of vulgar come-ons. And Irvine already explained the reason for having separate showers for men and women--it's simply a continutation of basic gender socialization practices in our society which people of both sexes have observed from childhood; a question of what's perceived as an appropriate audience for exposing one's nakedness. A member of the Shuri, Mursi or Me'en peoples of Ethiopia, who customarily wear no clothing at all, might see this as bizarre, but that's OK; we're not the Shuri, Mursi or Me'en so there's no logical need to change that particular custom, as it's not a major issue to supply separate barracks and showers for male and female servicepeople. Gay men and lesbians, on the other hand, have spent their lives sharing the bathroom, locker room, dorm bunks etc. with fully or partially naked members of their own sex, so there's no titillating shock factor provoked by sense of 'inappropriateness' there.

It's of course reasonable to expect that gay and lesbian servicepeople will refrain from molesting their bunkmates, just as it's reasonable to expect that straight servicemen will refrain from doing the same with female soldiers they work with at various points; it's not reasonable, however, to assume that any of the above are so innately inclined to do so as to make letting them serve unwise. That was exactly the argument often made in the 19th century for why women don't belong in the workplace: both men and women would be rendered incompetent by being continuously sexually distracted, thus the workplace would be 'degraded' and its efficient functioning made impossible. Instead, it turns out that men and women are eminently capable of working together in all kinds of arenas without transforming into incompetent libidinal beasts. The only reason that argument ever made sense to anyone to begin with was because of the irrational assumption that simply having both sexes together in the workplace would automatically make that environment a sexual one, and it does indeed resemble 'Islamic extremist' thinking. It seems to me that you're looking at the presence of gay and lesbian soldiers in their respective sex-segregated units in precisely the same way: you assume, without rational cause, that it would automatically make that environment sexual.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Justin it sounds like you are arguing for argument's sake.
Didn't you state at the very beginning of this thread that you were for gays openly serving in the military? Then why are expending your energy by defending this guy about a so-called label?

 

[Irvine511]

Do you believe Aeon has every right to his opinion and belief? Do you not like him now because of it?

of course AEON has the right to his beliefs, and there are obviously many people who agree with him.

i just wish he could base his arguments in something other than homophobia, unless he's saying that homophobia isn't as bad as racism and it's understandable and while it shouldn't be condoned, exactly, it shouldn't be condemned and people have the right to be free from homosexuals and that unit cohesion of the infantry is so important that it not only overrides the civil rights of gay Americans but it also more than makes up for the money the army spends discharging violations of "don't ask/don't tell" as well as the well-documented loss of Arabic translators and intelligence analysts.

 

[BVS]

Do you believe Aeon has every right to his opinion and belief? Do you not like him now because of it?

It's a free country he has every right to his opinion, but when his opinion gets in the way of other people's rights, is where I have a problem.

Like or dislike isn't really an issue. I don't know AEON outside of FYM, all I know is one aspect of him. Not enough for me to form an opinion if I would like him or not.

I do know enough that I wouldn't want him as my minister or infantry leader.

 

[Justin24]

Cause I am acting all ACLU like Ask BVS. LOL

I am still in favor but I just think that he is entitled to his beliefs and he should not be hounded like the hounds of baskerville.

 

[Irvine511]

oh, and for the record, i like AEON. i think he's got a sense of humor and i admire the willingness to take an unpopular stand on social issues, and it's usually done with good cheer.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I just think that he is entitled to his beliefs and he should not be hounded like the hounds of baskerville.

He's entitled to his beliefs, but all people are asking for (well I speak for myself) is that he provide a rational and logical defense for them. I have no desire to "hound him like the hounds of baskerville". I made posts to him several times that he just ignored, for whatever reason. He is entitled to his beliefs, but as a female I am offended by what some of those are as exhibited by some of his posts, as I am about what he seems to think of and about gay people. Sorry, I'm not going to pretend otherwise in the interest of niceties.

And you know what, I'd save his butt and his life in a foxhole just as I would anyone else's-but he problem is that he doesn't seem to believe that I'd have any right to be there (and I'm talking about fundamental human rights in the general sense, not that the military doesn't give me the right to be there.. I am speaking philosophically, not to that specific example). And that's the problem, in a nutshell.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Gee, thanks for stating the obvious. Yes, last time I checked, we're all entitled to state our beliefs.
Don't hurt your crotch straddling the fence.

Who came up with don't ask, don't tell anyway? Was it Clinton?

 

[BVS]

I am still in favor but I just think that he is entitled to his beliefs and he should not be hounded like the hounds of baskerville.

No one said he wasn't Justin. People are just asking him to qualify his opinions.

This is the point of FYM, otherwise it's a pointless forum.

 

[Justin24]

Gee, thanks for stating the obvious. Yes, last time I checked, we're all entitled to state our beliefs.
Don't hurt your crotch straddling the fence.

Who came up with don't ask, don't tell anyway? Was it Clinton?

I think so.

 

[yolland]

Gee, thanks for stating the obvious. Yes, last time I checked, we're all entitled to state our beliefs.
Don't hurt your crotch straddling the fence.

Again, no need to get vulgar about it.

 

[indra]

That was exactly the argument often made in the 19th century for why women don't belong in the workplace: both men and women would be rendered incompetent by being continuously sexually distracted, thus the workplace would be 'degraded' and its efficient functioning made impossible. Instead, it turns out that men and women are eminently capable of working together in all kinds of arenas without transforming into incompetent libidinal beasts.

Apparently you don't watch much porn.

 

[MrPryck2U]

With all due respect, I don't believe I was being vulgar. I'm sure you're familiar with term "straddling the fence". You know, not choosing a side. I was simply imploring him to not hurt himself in the groin area when he was straddling the metaphorical fence. I used the word crotch, which, last time I checked, wasn't a vulgar term. But, if it bothered you, Yolland, then I'm sorry.

 

[Irvine511]

Who came up with don't ask, don't tell anyway? Was it Clinton?

yes, it was a big bungle early in his presidency, sort of a way of being nice to the left-wing groups that helped get him elected while not freaking out too many in the military. before, my understanding was that if you were to enlist, or were drafted, they'd ask you if you were a homosexual, and if you said yes, you weren't able to serve (some people, including Chevy Chase, said they were gay in order to get out of going to Vietnam). now, it's not a question that anyone can ask you, but the flip side is that you can't give any indication that you might be gay. many people will use this to blackmail others, and sometimes a slip up happens. there was an interesting article in the WaPo a year or so ago about DC's LGBT liasion group where they responded to domestic violence call between two men and one of them couldn't press charges against the other because he was in the military, and would lose his job if he went ahead because it would out him at work.

 

[martha]

I was against the "don't ask, don't tell policy" then, and I am still against it. I don't want it "lifted" so that gays can serve openly - I don't want it in place at all because of the points I have already made.

I was watching Perry Mason while eating lunch, and an ad came on for the Army. I thought of a perfect solution: Have a crawl under recruiting ads stating something to this effect: Straights only need apply.

Then at recruiting offices, reiterate; post a sign over the door that says Straights Only. That'll keep things clear. I suspect that somewhere in the state storerooms of Alabama and Mississippi there are old signs just like it. They'll need some slight modifications, but it's just a little paint.

 

[MrPryck2U]

Good idea!

 

[BVS]

I was watching Perry Mason while eating lunch, and an ad came on for the Army. I thought of a perfect solution: Have a crawl under recruiting ads stating something to this effect: Straights only need apply.

Might as well make it 'Straight Male Christians Only' that way AEON can shower in peace and we won't have any terrorist in our army.

 

[Irvine511]

i wonder ... should we separate out Jews and Christians from showering together? after all, the Jews are circumsized, and what happens if a good, foreskinned Christian male is in the locker room, sees the naked head of a swinging penis, and is suddenly reminded of those that killed Christ? what would that to do troop morale? would you like to cuddle with the killers of Christ in the middle of a cold desert night?

think about it.

 

[redhotswami]

I was against the "don't ask, don't tell policy" then, and I am still against it. I don't want it "lifted" so that gays can serve openly - I don't want it in place at all because of the points I have already made.

thank you. that is closer, but it still does not address my point about your "sexual tension" factor. obviously if gays are serving now, and there isn't a problem with sexual tension as it stands...then what is the big deal?

 

[BVS]

think about it.

Well not only that but if you're cuddling and god decides to do some smiting at that exact moment you could get caught in the crossfire...

We might as well make it "God's Army".

 

[Irvine511]

you know, thinking about it, the US army hasn't been effective of late. can't win land wars in Asia, can't occupy an Arab country ... it must be the gays, they're killing morale.

 

[martha]

cuddling

huddling Get it right.

god decides to do some smiting

This made me laugh.

 

[AEON]

oh, and for the record, i like AEON. i think he's got a sense of humor and i admire the willingness to take an unpopular stand on social issues, and it's usually done with good cheer.

Irvine, I like you too. You have helped me understand quite a bit. I talk about you to my wife. My wife agrees with SOME of your posts (and sometimes I do too).

My wife is the unfortunate recipient of much of my social commentary. She agrees most of the time, but not all of it. And she has been known to say "What would Irvine say to that?"

I tend to seperate ideas from people. I am always searching for the "perfect" system or organization. While I am not a perfectionist, when it comes to theories - I enjoy discussing what would make something "Ideal" instead of "workable"or "fair."

I know that this can hurt people's feelings. However, I still think it is worth discussing.

Anyway, I'm off to drill for the weekend. It's sunny so there will be no "spooning" in the foxholes

Yolland, I don't have time to respond to your excellent post. I do understand what Irvine is saying, I just don't agree. I will explain in more detail after the weekend if this thread doesn't get locked.

 

[AEON]

Might as well make it 'Straight Male Christians Only' that way AEON can shower in peace and we won't have any terrorist in our army.

That was funny.

 

[martha]

I enjoy discussing what would make something "Ideal" instead of ..."fair."

Ideal and fair are two different concepts for you. Nice.

 

[BVS]

I tend to seperate ideas from people. I am always searching for the "perfect" system or organization. While I am not a perfectionist, when it comes to theories - I enjoy discussing what would make something "Ideal" instead of "workable"or "fair."

In this case who is this ideal for? You, the country, homophobes?

What would seem ideal to me is having the best soldiers who are willing and able to do the job.

Some guy worried about sexual tension isn't the ideal soldier in my mind. Any person who doesn't know the time and place, isn't ideal. Period.

 

[indra]

Anyway, I'm off to drill for the weekend.

am I the only one with a dirty mind here?

 

[Vincent Vega]

I think, this don't ask, don't tell makes it more interesting, and exciting.

Think of it, if the gays were to be open about it, everyone would know who it is.
Now that no one tells you, everybody has to guess who in the unit might be the gay (at least the possibility of having a gay in the unit should be great enough).

And when they are due with their military time the gay one can admit it.
Might make for some great surprise at times


I think this reception for gays would change pretty soon when laws were changed. Now that no one really "knows" how it would be like many people can't think of having a gay in the rows. But soon after they opened up, it would become normal with most.
There are always people that would remain homophobe, or just intolerant, or just feel uncomfortable (I wouldn't condemn everybody right away for that). But the majority would see that there is nothing special.

 

[Diemen]

Thank you.

Some guy worried about sexual tension isn't the ideal soldier in my mind. Any person who doesn't know the time and place, isn't ideal. Period.

Bingo.