Why is it 'bad' for Gays to serve in the military?

[ck4829]

Here is what Sean Hannity said this morning about Gays and serving in the Pentagon:

"These people could become teachers and work with children"

Oh, OK, that is why it is bad.

But, it is OK for a straight man to serve in the military even if he were to believe that women (and girls) were little more than property.

I am not saying straight men in the military believe this, but would you want a man who believed this, straight or gay, to teach or work with children?

[Worst Username Ever]

1. most child molesters are straight men n/t

[MemphisTiger]

16. Why do people assume that just because someone is

gay they are pedophiles? Where does this logic come from?

[RPM]

66. pure ignorance...

... and fear - see scapegoatism.

Disgusting.

[xultar]

2. A guy did a joke about it that was cool and funny he said...

He didn't mind gays in the military because when it came time for someone to save his ass he wanted some one who 'REALLY' wanted to save his ass...something to that effect and he finished it up with a
GURRRLLLfriend, I've been havin'his back during this offensive cuz his ass is hott.

I think they don't want gays in the military because then they will have to allow them to get married.

Why not share the pain let everyone get married and depressed then send them out to fight.

[UdoKier]

3. Men (gay or not) working with kids is fine

and so is serving in the military.

There have always been tons of gays in the military.

The question isn't whether or not they can serve but whether they can do so openly.

I don't think there should be any prohibition of gays in the military, but there will always be social pressure to stay closeted in these units.

Is this a big issue currently?

[ck4829]

6. Yes. The RW is making an issue of it

Sean Hannity, Joe Farah and WND, etc. are getting mad about this.

Joe Farah even suggested destroying the ACLU because they were the ones who opposed the ban from the Pentagon.

[sui generis]

11. and matthew shepard deserved what he got

according to those idiots. For most of the rest if us however, it would be Hannity and Farah that would be found on the fence.

It's a shame that they have this preconceived notion that gay people, particularly ones who have served in the military or other law enforcement can be pushed around. A dog can only chase you if you run.

Well all the more joy when they are forced to face reality.

[fryguy]

4. b/c it makes repuke feel "icky" and uncomfortable

no other reason......

btw - the same pretexts they use now are what was said about blacks in the military....will disrupt unit cohesion; distract from mission; bring down morale, etc. etc....

[Kikosexy2]

5. Homophobic...

fear, stereotypes...afraid a gay guy might make a pass or seduce a "straight" soldier. But let's be honest straight men away from their wives, girlfriend in times of war can make them...well..downright horny. So a little blowjob or some booty from a willing "gay" soldier is no big deal to them as long as they get their rocks off. But of course they will still claim they're "straight"...uh right!

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

15. who cares about privacy

a body is a body is a body. There is an etiquette and I'll tell you one thing for 100% certainty: straight men check out dick (for other reasons) as much as any man.

We're always comparing ourselves, and so who cares. It's not a straight or gay thing, and it's certainly not a prelude to sex or there would be straight guys fucking each other at my gym.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

21. why is it that you think that humans

will completely lose control of themselves if they see a penis or vagina? that attitude is part of the problem. Plus, not all 35 year old male sergeants are rape artists, regardless of their orientation, and the few that are are criminals, regardless of their rank.

My 18 year old daughter (actually older) knows better and can take care of herself anyway.

Privacy as you suggest it is bad anyway, let me count the ways.

1. you have to identify yourself as "gay" or "straight".
Prove it. If I were a real lech, I'd just say I was straight and stare at your shiny ass anyway.

2. remember minority platoons in every American war. Do you really think that someone like me would let that happen to my men? Bad idea.

3. It's a straw man argument. Who gives a shit if there's interest or not? The point is, people check each other out. Interest is in your head unless you act on it. And then there are all kinds of rules governing fraternization that have nothing to do with sex but would apply equally, SO, get over it, get naked, get dressed, what's the big deal.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

26. how you gonna prove who's gay and who's straight?

routine testing?

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

32. yeah but

reality sez that you would still have different standards of service then just like you do today for women.

And if I thought it was more advantageous for any reason whatsoever to pretend to be straight, or rather, all the way straight, you can bet I would.

So if you're in the shower and a straight man glances at your willy, do you report him? does that make him gay? how do you know for sure that he's not interested, if only for one half of a second?

Hangups with nudity are just plain silly, plus you're only that way for long enough to get clean, it's not like you're playing poker with your balls swinging.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

22. Let me disabuse of a couple of notions....

1) Nakedness is not sexuality. Do you find every person of the opposite gender sexually attractive?

2) Homosexuals have already been more than socialized in sharing facilities with members of the gender to which they are attracted. If anything, gay people are even MORE circumspect about privacy in close quarters than heterosexuals. We've already been in those situations all our lives and in fact we ARE there right now without issue.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

30. well, I guess we're on opposite ends of the table

on this argument. I respect that. completely disagree with you based on reality and my experience, but I respect that.

[Liberal Veteran]

38. No, not correct.

Are you so out of control that you couldn't contain your "urges" if you were forced to be in close quarters with someone you found attractive?

And who really has the problem? The gay person who has spent his entire life sharing facilities with members of same gender (from high school locker rooms, to gym facilities, to doctors offices, to restrooms, to summer camp) OR you who is afraid of something that ALREADY exists.

I was in the military and I can assure you that no one ever had cause to feel uncomfortable sharing facilities with me. What you are basically saying is that if you can continue to pretend that gays and straights aren't currently sharing facilities when you know damn well in your head they are, then it's okay. That's what I call a psychological hangup.

You are creating an issue out of something that is already a non-issue because gays and straights already share facilities and close quarters without issues.

Why on earth would that need to change?

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

52. How do you know you aren't already?

You are arguing that ignorance is bliss. This game of "let's pretend everyone is straight" when you damn well it's not true is ludicrous and logically you know that. Where is your "discomfort" really coming from?

The answer seems pretty clear to me: it's rooted in homophobia. What do you think would logically change if you knew the guy in open shower was gay? You think he's never seen a cock before?

And I find the notion that you believe that gay men are attracted to everything with a penis insulting.

Your mileage may vary, but it takes more than just the right organs to turn me on, and I have never found myself in the position of being so desperate that I would go barking up the wrong tree with something I knew was heterosexual.

[KnowerOfLogic]

59. Should my co-worker be fired because i *think* he's sexually

attracted to me, and i'm not interested? Even if he hasn't *done* anything, but i just "think" he's thinking something about me? Please. Who's the "sissy" here?
Now, if you have a problem with an *individual* roomate, who maybe has made a pass at you, and you don't feel comfortable rooming with him, fine; but that really doen't have anything to do with gay vs. straight; it's a personal problem.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

45. You do realize that's the argument of a homophobe, don't you?

That's all this "discomfort" argument really is.

I was required to do lots of things that I found discomforting in the military.

Taking a shit in a restroom with no stall or privacy was one of them. No one made any accomodation for that.

I was a lot less comfortable having to do my necessary bodily functions in the front of other people than I was having to be naked or shower around other guys.

I didn't particularly care for pissing in a cup either with someone watching to make sure I wasn't try to undermine my urinalysis, but I did it.

This whole business of seperate berthing units for gays and straights because some people might feel uncomfortable having to acknowledge that something that ALREADY EXISTS (that gays and straights shower and share facilities) is an argument based on homophobia, pure and simple.

It is no different than the arguments that some had when they said some white people from the south would be uncomfortable sharing facilities with blacks. Are you REALLY going to take this to it's logical conclusion and argue that integrated berthing was a bad idea?

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

49. Do you really believe that if women were really allowed in combat....

...that it would not be expected from time to time that men and women would have to share close quarters? The fact is our society does pretty much keep men and women in separate facilities, thus heterosexuals tend to think of unisexual facilities in terms of sexual behavior and arrousal, whereas gay people have been sharing facilities with the same gender all their lives and know it is no big deal.

Again, you are the one injecting sexual connotations into the situation of gay men and straight men sharing the same facilities despite the fact that it already exists.

The fact that you are unwilling to make the emotional connection that as a veteran you very likely shared berthing and showers with many gay people throughout your experiences speaks volumes about where you are coming from.

Why should it make a difference? It makes a difference because somewhere deep down inside, whether you acknowledge it or not, you are responding to homophobia (thus your discomfort in this despite the fact that you know logically that you've already shared facilities with homosexuals without incident).

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

53. So where do we draw the line?

Is the white supremecist in the military entitled to demand separate berthing from blacks because he considers them to be less human than he is?

You are arguing from a position of a making accomodations for the prejudices of another. I find that illogical.

Your argument is in many respects no different from the person who balked when Truman integrated the military. "Some people will be uncomfortable" sharing berthing with blacks.

You don't address prejudice by making accomodations for it.

If a person in the military is so uncomfortable sharing berthing with a gay person that they can't overcome it, then perhaps he shouldn't be in the military to begin with.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal Veteran]

55. Pretty much. But you are the one arguing for separate facilities...

...not me.

You need to justify it on better terms than "Yeah, gays and straights are already sharing facilities without issue, but if we actually acknowledge that fact, the military cannot adapt!"

Why on earth should we make an accomodation for something that is already happening without incident? Gays and lesbians are sharing quarters, showers, and toilets with straight people at this very moment.

I served on a ship and it was pretty common knowledge that certain guys were gay. I don't recall anyone freaking out about it.

You are arguing from a ridiculous and homophobic position by setting up a straw man to know it down.

[KnowerOfLogic]

60. Repeat: men and women have different bodies. but seriously

our society is very obssessed with the "sinfulness" of the naked body. i'm sure if men and women were used to seeing each other naked, it wouldn't be any big deal. The real issue is *behavior,* which you continue to dismiss.

[Touchdown]

34. Get off of it.

These are soldiers. These are supposed to be the best and the bravest men we have. They are pumped up real heroes. Are you telling me that they are brave enough to have their heads blown off, or tortured as a POW, but scanning his weenie in the shower is just way TOO horrible and de-humanizing to subject them to? :eyes:

Look, gay men have showered, slept with, peed with straight men since we were all boys in Summer Camp on through High School football and gym class. The Army isn't going to change that fact. It's not us that has the problem, it's not straight boys who have the problem...unless they know another is gay, then it becomes a problem. Is it the gay man's fault, or is it the "issues" of the straight guy? Who really needs to be accomodating here?

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

42. I wasn't talking about soldiers, Pal. I was also one.

I was talking about how society evangelizes service to the point of sainthood for any who serve, whether deserved or not. Most of this "hero worship" is fantasy. Most soldiers I served with were just as scared of going to Lybia as I was, and we were all still just kids...good thing Khadafi backed down in 1986.

The military does what it's told. If Society says gays will serve openly, then the military does it. It's the fears of society that's keeping this issue alive. What the service members think about the issue is irrelevant.

Way to ignore my message and focus on the tangent.:eyes:

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

62. Ok, I see it now. Comprehension trouble.

Look again. I said ..."Good thing Khadafi backed down in 1986." We were on full alert after the US shot down two Lybian fighter jets after they opened fire on our planes. Tensions escalated, we bombed Tripoli, Khadafi's daughter was killed...and our post, in Germany was put on full alert, ready for deployment. It never happened.

Yes, the military does look upon itself as separate, but they are not in control of their rules and regulations, we the people are. Sodomy laws were struck down by the SCOTUS two summers ago.

[KnowerOfLogic]

58. Men and women have different bodies; gay men and straight

men don't. Besides, you can't stop said grizzled sergeant from lusting after said daughter; he could be lusting after her 24/7 for all you or she knows. The important thing is *behavior.* any and all inappropriate or harassing behavior should be prohibited and punishments strictly enforced. There should be no *thought police* i.e., so-and-so may be "thinking" something sexual about me, so i want them removed.

[erniesam]

70. would she prefer showering with a closeted lesbian?

[Liberal Veteran]

20. That's a ridiculously silly notion, because....

....people of ALL sexual orientations grew up in the same society that keeps the GENDERS seperate.

By the time you are old enough to join the military, if you are a gay person, you have already been socialised in sharing quarters/sanitation facilities, etc. with members of the same gender.

The titillation factor simply doesn't exist as it does with heterosexuals who have been shielded from the opposite gender's nakedness in our society.

[seaofcrisis]

31. same here

"I served with many gay airman. Almost all were excellent service members"

Same here, only I was in the Army. There are lots of homosexuals openly serving in the military. I don't think most people really care what you do behind closed doors. I think america is getting more open and liberal.

[American Tragedy]

65. I find that hard to believe

As a straight woman, I would sooner be celibate than have sex with another woman. The idea completely repulses me and erases any sexual desire I may have had. I don't begrudge others who favor the experience, but it has absolutely no appeal for me.

I would imagine that others feel the same toward the gender to whom they are not sexually oriented. In fact, I find that straight men are more likely to be homophobic than anyone.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fryguy]

8. isn't Hannity gay?

n/t

[Kikosexy2]

10. The hair..

his wardrobe--I'd say 'GAY'!!!! There goes my gaydar.

[erniesam]

71. that's what some people say.

[mseang]

9. It is a morale issue.

Military persons complain that morale would suffer, basically because a majority of the military are homophobic. They claim it is hard to be successful unit when the presence of a gay person causes such conflict. I say get over it!

I actually had this 40 something year old soldier say to me that he was worried they would attack him in the night or in the shower. I told him he was assuming that someone would be attracted to his fat ass, which was very unlikely.

[Walt Starr]

48. The "morale argument" was the same used against desegregating the service

IT didn't fly then and it doesn't fly now.

They broke it out for the second time when the issue of women in the military came up, too.

[KnowerOfLogic]

61. Excatly. It's circular anyway. The policy itself just reinforces

the "morale problem."

[jobycom]

12. Same reason it was bad for blacks, Hispanics, and women to serve

Hatred. Nothing but hatred based on ignorance and/or fear, and justified by pseudo-religious nonsense.

That's fine with me, though. Let all the damn straight males get blown away. Maybe this nation would make more sense, then.

[FlatJack]

14. Hanity is afraid...

of a gay man looking at his peepee.

Sorry I sound so immature, the whole anti-gay thing reminds me of a pre-school mentality so I'm soaking in it.

[jobycom]

18. I don't think it's anything so simple

I think there are a series of fears at work. I doubt Hannity would care if a gay man looked at his penis. He's an ambitious man at the top level of show business, I suspect he'd show anyone his penis if he could get advance his career by doing it.

There's the basic cultural fear of the "other." People define themselves in certain ways, and so they define who they aren't at the same time. Right now that definition has to do with sex. People who are "other" scare them, they threaten to break down their identity barriers.

Then there's the cultural brainwashing. People get told gays are bad as part of our religious inheritance. One can't question religion, so the less sense a religious rule makes, the more it must be mindlessly obeyed without question, and the angrier the denunciation of those who break the law must become. Since the law makes no sense, it can't be challenged.

Then there's the whole nature phenomena. Everyone is at least physically bisexual. Some try to claim that heterosexuals can't be physically turned on by those of the same gender. Obviously not true, since it would make masturbation impossible. Everyone is physically bi, it's the emotional map that decide which gender you fall in love with. Since we equate love and sex so often, people feel like they can only be attracted physically to the gender they are attracted to emotionally. Given the two other reasons people fear gays, they are also faced with the subconscious realization that they are attracted to people of their gender, and this multiplies the fears of the other, and fears of challenging their religions. People become afraid they will become the other, in other words. They react to this fear by hating what scares them, and in this case, that means hating those who are like what they are afraid they are.

There's no doubt about the claim that those most strongly homophobic are often tempted by their own gender. Science has tested and confirmed that. That's why they are afraid-- there is too much chance they are right. A homophobic boss of mine once slipped up in an argument and admitted that what he hated most about gays is that they were always trying to lure him into back seats and back rooms. He had no moral objection, really, he was just afraid of the temptation.

So is Hannity. So are most Republicans. Watch Republicans. They oppose most strongly what they are most likely to be at heart. That's why they shout so loudly about the rule of law-- because they know how little they respect it, and project that emotion on others. Same with homosexuality. It's a party based on self-loathing and fear.

So if Repubs allow gays any rights at all, there is just too much chance that they will be eventually tempted to become gay themselves. Ban them from the military, from marriage, from teaching, from movies, from anything they want to do. Blame it on religion, but it is really just their own fear.

[ProfessorPlum]

24. You beat me to it!

Damn.

[erniesam]

72. Probably, Hannity is afraid of getting caught looking at some man's peepee

[imax2268]

19. "These people could become teachers and work with children"

Oh Sean Sean Sean...

SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU FUCKING MORON...!

I had a teacher who was gay...and he was a great teacher...all the kids respected him and all the parents were happy to have a teacher who cared about actually teaching the kids...and guess what DIPSHIT...he was in the military at one time as well...you fucking retard...why don't you get with your "man" friend Ann Coulter and make some ugly babies...

[sui generis]

33. there's the problem imax

you see, we think of ourselves as many many many things before we think of ourselves as gay; the list is usually pretty long.

But people like Hannity can only think ONE thing about us after our name and sometimes before it: that guy is gay!!!!! Oh my god!! so if he's GAY, then he must think about GAYNESS all the time and he's going to teach GAYNESS to everyone and make the world GAY.

Yes, that's what goes through their little pea brains.

I guess you could replace the word gay with black; the attitude would still be the same.

[imax2268]

43. ok...

I hope my outburst didn't offend anyone...but I'm am sick to death with this moron going on and on and saying stupid things like this.

I myself am not gay...but I don't have any ill will to people who are...I have a friend who is gay...and he served in Viet Nam as well...he's a nice guy...we have had great conversations...

it's this type of thinking from the likes of Hannity that get my blood boiling...so quick to treat people that are not like him or think like him as second class citizens...it's pathetic...I try not to listen but I feel myself being drawn to his show on TV...I guess it's because I want to see what stupid thing he will say next...only to end up screaming at the television...heh heh heh...I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment...

[ProfessorPlum]

23. They might see a straight guy's pee pee

And then, who knows what could happen?

[superconnected]

37. It's the RW's internal necessity to demonize a group of people

When the gays finally have their right to not be discriminated against for sexual orientation upheld, the rightwing will find another group to create fear and panic with.

I've seen them use un-wed mothers, divorcees, the low income, children raised by one parent, Muslims, liberals, environmentalists etc.

They just don't know how to run campaigns or even daily affairs without including biggotry. It probably makes them feel better about themselves for some sick twisted reason like guilt from masterbating. ;)

[MadisonRush]

39. I think I remember...

Sometime in the 80's this started becoming a really big issue. I remember hearing arguments against gays in the military being about AIDS, and this is when they were still calling it the "gay" disease. Something to do with if they were bleeding it would give all the medics and doctors AIDS. I think they were working under the assumption that every gay man would be HIV positive. Just my two cents...

[newyawker99]

57. Hi MadisonRush!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[skippythwndrdog]

40. It isn't bad.

Yeah. Like guys are going to be poking each other in a foxhole in a warzone. The prohibition is absurd.

[DrWeird]

41. Homophobia. Literally.

They're afraid that when they take showers with gay people that the gay men will oogle them.

Funny that there's a policy in the armed forces based solely on cowardice.

[MsTryska]

50. because Gay men

have to take showers and sleep in the same racks as straight boys.


what if a straight boy accidentally drops his soap or maybe looks really suggestive while he's sleeping?


he'll catch "the gay" and be turned homo by the very guy that's supposed tob e protecting him in battle.

[gasolineboycottday]

56. STRAIGHT men are the biggest pervs on the planet, myths are misleading

The myths are misleading, STRAIGHT men are the biggest pervs on the planet.. not GAYS.


If there's about 10% of gays in the general pop., then there's 10% in our military (they're just doing their best to cover it up).

[NavyDem]

68. I am a straight man...

And I approve your post! I can't speak for the other straight guys, but I'm definitely perverted :p


Now on a serious note...I'm a sailor, 15 years in, and have heard just about every speculation that's been voiced in this thread voiced amongst my shipmates.

I've learned over time that most of us don't really care what the sexual orientation of a person we're serving with is. It seems that higher in the chain of command, there is a lot less tolerance.

I too have known several persons male and female that were gay and served. They know I knew, and none of us really cared.

I don't buy into the "logistic" problems, i.e. separate berthing, etc...It's pretty vain to think that someone might be lookin at your ass just cause that person is gay...

A good example of how slow the military is to adopt those things generally accepted in society, look no further than earings on men.

We've only been allowed to wear them (off duty, off base, out of uniform) for the last 3-5 years. How long have earings on men been an accepted norm in society now? I can recall they were pretty common in 1986 when I was a sophomore in HS.

I think in time the military will become more accepting of gays, provided that Bush doesn't make gay a felony.

[davis_islander]

63. An old carryover from the days of the "closet"?

Today, the claim is that it damages morale because the straight soldiers feel uncomfortable bonding with their gay counterparts, and bonding is supposed to be of huge import in the creation of a cohesive military unit. That's the excuse today... I have also heard, and I heard this a LONNNNNNNNNNNNG time ago when virtually nobody ever came out of the closet because it could ruin their lives. The thought was that if you have a gay officer who is discovered to be gay by the enemy, the enemy could use that information to blackmail the officer into revealing military secrets. This is mostly a non-issue these days thank God as gays are free to be "out", thus no worry of blackmail, but to the OP question, I do think this was one of the original reasons for the prohibition of gays in the military. I wonder what Alexander the Great would have to say...

[CatBoreal]

64. My Dad is ex-RCAF...

...and we had the discussion of gays in the military years ago.

His argument was that if you were gay you were more open to blackmail because you wanted to keep your sexual orientation a secret. Essentially they were a security risk.

Funny thing was, this discussion happened a few days before the Marines allowed KGB agents posing as prostitutes into the American embassy in Moscow.

Shut him up but quick.

[Kablooie]

67. The military are very serious people...

so they frown on gaity.

[Allenberg]

69. ...

For one, I'm glad to see fellow servicemen here. While I'm nearly as tenured as the gentelemen who posted previously been in, I've been in long enough to work with several gay/bi men/women. I work in a joint-service environment and from what I can tell, it's not really a problem. Of course, I work in a brain-powered office-setting, and not in a tank at close quarters, which may account for some of it. I've supervised a lesbian Airman, and believe me, she was one of the best performing troops I've had. She stated that she felt she had to outperform her straight counterparts if only to prove the irrationality of discharging highly trained/performing/qualified personnel based on who they hug and kiss at night.

[youngred]

73. it isn't eom