End of Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

I knew three gays when I was in the Army. Everyone knew; it’s no surprise that gays are already serving openly in the military. The only people that pretend to be surprised, are people that should the least care.

I can say from first hadn experience that no one really cares about who’s gay. We really don’t.

This is only a big deal to politicians that have third-railed it all their careers. NOW it’s a big deal? WHY? These fart-sniffers only make it a big deal when it’s politically convenient. Guess what? No one cares if you’re gay.

This is just stupid, more “Look at this, not at that” bullshit. eat it up if you want, but this is fucking dumb shit.

42

NO ONE IN THE MILITARY CARES IF YOU’RE GAY.

Yes, caps for emphasis.

I knew three gays in the Army, and the rest of my unit did too. Guess what? No one cared!

Big deal about nothing.

43

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
NO ONE IN THE MILITARY CARES IF YOU’RE GAY.

Yes, caps for emphasis.

I knew three gays in the Army, and the rest of my unit did too. Guess what? No one cared!

Big deal about nothing.[/quote]

well that is just not true. you used no one.

it says about 60% of actual combatants do. And from the people I know very well, I would say that is a little low.

Your statement is almost as absurd as saying everyone in the military supports obama’s policies.

44

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I donâ??t think itâ??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.

If per chance I wouldnâ??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?

Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military itâ??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.

Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I donâ??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]

Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.

45

EXECUTIVE ORDER 9981

Whereas it is essential that there be maintained in the armed services of the United States the highest standards of democracy, with equality of treatment and opportunity for all those who serve in our country’s defense:

Now, therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, and as Commander in Chief of the armed services, it is hereby ordered as follows:

  1. It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion or national origin. This policy shall be put into effect as rapidly as possible, having due regard to the time required to effectuate any necessary changes without impairing efficiency or morale.

  2. There shall be created in the National Military Establishment an advisory committee to be known as the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services, which shall be composed of seven members to be designated by the President.

  3. The Committee is authorized on behalf of the President to examine into the rules, procedures and practices of the armed services in order to determine in what respect such rules, procedures and practices may be altered or improved with a view to carrying out the policy of this order. The Committee shall confer and advise with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Secretary of the Air Force, and shall make such recommendations to the President and to said Secretaries as in the judgment of the Committee will effectuate the policy hereof.

  4. All executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government are authorized and directed to cooperate with the Committee in its work, and to furnish the Committee such information or the services of such persons as the Committee may require in the performance of its duties.

  5. When requested by the Committee to do so, persons in the armed services or in any of the executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government shall testify before the Committee and shall make available for the use of the Committee such documents and other information as the Committee may require.

  6. The Committee shall continue to exist until such time as the President shall terminate its existence by Executive Order.

HARRY S. TRUMAN
The White House
July 26, 1948

There was a lot of bitching and moaning about blacks serving in the military as well (at the time). Now no one bats an eye. Even with the executive order it still took well over five years to fully integrate, and there were still all black units well into the Korean War. Were there hate crimes? Yes. Was there still discrimination? Yes (and I’m sure there still is). Did it stop us from doing the right thing? NO.

Bigotry, discrimination and hate as a national policy is simply disgusting. The word for this is PROGRESS.

46

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]AllieD wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AllieD wrote:
Male and female soldiers are not allowed to hook up and will get in trouble if they are caught so I don’t understand why everyone thinks that suddenly if gay men can serve openly they are going to start trying to hit on straight men. It’s still not allowed. If a gay man makes an inappropriate pass at you in the shower snitch and he will get in trouble - same as if a female solider can tell a superior if a male solider makes an inappropriate pass at her.
I have tons of gay male friends and all I can say to all they scared straight men out there is THEY DON’T WANT YOU! They want OTHER gay men! [/quote]

Um…talk for yourself. I hear all the time at my job about gay men talking about other men that aren’t actually gay. Your last statement is incorrect.

That is like saying because I’m a heterosexual male, I don’t find lesbians attractive. Are they a woman? Are they attractive? They are attractive. [/quote]

Sure you may find them attractive but its prettttty pointless to genuinely pursue a lesbian because they don’t like dick! I have had lesbians hit on me plenty of times and I soon as I say I don’t swing that way problem is solved they don’t continue.[/quote]

Hmmm plenty of men make passes knowing I’m not interested in them. They just don’t care. I can’t imagine the dynamics change when it’s men who are the target.

But I agree with everything else you’ve posted.
[/quote]

This is what I’m talking about. Just because a man is gay doesn’t mean they don’t get that someone really isn’t interested in them.

47

[quote]firespinner93 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]firespinner93 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]firespinner93 wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Here here.

Now, then, what about the issues of sexual harrassment and improper fraternization? [/quote]

Oh, yes, because ONLY the gays are capable of that. /extreme biting sarcasm[/quote]

Please dont, for a second, try to even insinuate I’m homophobic. Few people on these boards are as pro gay as I am (forlife included :P)

However, it does open doors for certain issues which should be reasonably addressed.

If I, as a guy, were allowed to shower with the female soldiers, should they have the option to not shower with me, if they were uncomfortable with it? [/quote]

No. Everyone needs to get the fuck over it. If a guy has to administer first aid for a bullet wound I took to the chest, he might see my tits then, too. Nudity does not equal sexuality.

What’s proper in the shower? Uh, lather, rinse, repeat, and that’s about it.

Then they need to learn to grow up and handle their business lives separately from their personal lives. If they aren’t mature enough to handle that, they’re not mature enough to handle a rifle, either.

There are already gays in the military. There are already gays taking communal showers with straights. They are already living together. Gay people are not sexually deviant in any larger percentage than straight people are. Gays are not looking for any excuse out there to ogle or feel up a straight person. Homophobia and stereotypes about gays are the problem, not gay people.
[/quote]

So you’d be okay with combining male and female Living quarters and bathroom facilities?[/quote]

Yep.[/quote]

Starship Troopers, man

48

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]AllieD wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AllieD wrote:
Male and female soldiers are not allowed to hook up and will get in trouble if they are caught so I don’t understand why everyone thinks that suddenly if gay men can serve openly they are going to start trying to hit on straight men. It’s still not allowed. If a gay man makes an inappropriate pass at you in the shower snitch and he will get in trouble - same as if a female solider can tell a superior if a male solider makes an inappropriate pass at her.
I have tons of gay male friends and all I can say to all they scared straight men out there is THEY DON’T WANT YOU! They want OTHER gay men! [/quote]

Um…talk for yourself. I hear all the time at my job about gay men talking about other men that aren’t actually gay. Your last statement is incorrect.

That is like saying because I’m a heterosexual male, I don’t find lesbians attractive. Are they a woman? Are they attractive? They are attractive. [/quote]

Sure you may find them attractive but its prettttty pointless to genuinely pursue a lesbian because they don’t like dick! I have had lesbians hit on me plenty of times and I soon as I say I don’t swing that way problem is solved they don’t continue.[/quote]

Hmmm plenty of men make passes knowing I’m not interested in them. They just don’t care. I can’t imagine the dynamics change when it’s men who are the target.

But I agree with everything else you’ve posted.

[/quote]

Not to be nitpicky, but since when couldn’t male and female military personnel hook up? Yeah there are rules about rank, deployment status, martial status, etc… but it isn’t against the ucmj for military personnel to hook up.

I just can’t wait for the first time 72 marine recruits are showering together and one goes, “Hey guys I hope it’s cool I’m gay, see you in the rack!” or a recruit walks in on 2 openly gay recruits fuckin each other in the head.

[/quote]

Yep, fraternization between equivilent ranks is permited. I suspect that this will have to be discontinued.

49

[quote]goldengloves wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
While I think ending this policy is good. I don�¢??t think it�¢??s an answer. While gays should be able to be who they are and fight for their country, so should people uncomfortable with situations this will create.

If per chance I wouldn�¢??t want to shower with a gay man in the room or bunk with one, I should still be able to serve my country too, right?

Additionally, if homosexuality is now an acceptable topic for people serving in the military it�¢??s got to be acceptable from all sides. If they are allowing people to come out in support of being homosexual, you must also allow people to express their beliefs on the subject even if they disagree with it.

Like I said, ending the policy is good, banning gays is wrong. But some things still need to be addressed. I don�¢??t know what the answer is.
[/quote]

Well to be honest soldiers were already showering with gays soldiers, just not openly gay soldiers. A soldier being openly gay doesn’t mean that he’ll automatically try to have an intimate relationship with a heterosexual soldier or harass a heterosexual soldier either. If someone is bothered by the thought of interacting with a gay soldier then they’re under no obligations to join the military or remain in the military.
[/quote]

Never said that they did. I Just wouldn’t be comfortable with it. It’s just who I am. Shouldn’t I be allowed to both be myself and serve?

50

[quote]jre67t wrote:
In my opinion this is a gateway towards the legalization towards gay marriage.[/quote]

I sincerely hope so.

51

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]AllieD wrote:
Male and female soldiers are not allowed to hook up and will get in trouble if they are caught so I don’t understand why everyone thinks that suddenly if gay men can serve openly they are going to start trying to hit on straight men. It’s still not allowed. If a gay man makes an inappropriate pass at you in the shower snitch and he will get in trouble - same as if a female solider can tell a superior if a male solider makes an inappropriate pass at her.
I have tons of gay male friends and all I can say to all they scared straight men out there is THEY DON’T WANT YOU! They want OTHER gay men! [/quote]

Um…talk for yourself. I hear all the time at my job about gay men talking about other men that aren’t actually gay. Your last statement is incorrect.

That is like saying because I’m a heterosexual male, I don’t find lesbians attractive. Are they a woman? Are they attractive? They are attractive. [/quote]

All the more reason for the lesbian to be honest about who she is, instead of pretending to be straight. Would you be more likely to hit on her if she was straight, or if you knew she was a lesbian?

52

I think society and the military are ready for it. It wouldn’t have worked 20 years ago.

53

[quote]apbt55 wrote:

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
NO ONE IN THE MILITARY CARES IF YOU’RE GAY.

Yes, caps for emphasis.

I knew three gays in the Army, and the rest of my unit did too. Guess what? No one cared!

Big deal about nothing.[/quote]

well that is just not true. you used no one.

it says about 60% of actual combatants do. And from the people I know very well, I would say that is a little low.

Your statement is almost as absurd as saying everyone in the military supports obama’s policies. [/quote]

His statement isn’t absurd. I’ve been in five years, served with a couple of gay guys. No one gave a fuck.

Thuh end.

54

Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.

As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.

Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.

55

[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.

As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.

Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]

He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?

Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?

56

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.

As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.

Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]

He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?

Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?

[/quote]

Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.

57

For the record, the majority of combat troops supported repealing DADT. The only exception to this was Marine combat, where only 40% said it was discriminatory and should be repealed.

I agree with Swole that the answer to those concerned about mass male rape as a result of the repeal is to have clearly defined standards on appropriate conduct, and to strictly enforce those standards, regardless of a person’s sexuality.

On another note, one of the advantages of the repeal is that it was accomplished by Congress, and signed by the President. Those complaining about activist judges have no leg to stand on.

58

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.

As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.

Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]

He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?

Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?

[/quote]

Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.[/quote]

If she went to “defend freedom” which inlcudes being shot at occasionally, I would expect her not to be “traumatized”.

59

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]Jimmy6 wrote:
Damn, sure are a lot of people claiming NO ONE in the military cares about gays serving. I just got outta the Navy, and at a good time too, cuz this is a sad day for the armed forces. LOL @ anyone who opposes this being homophobic. Its the answer to everything. By that logic any straight male who doesn’t watch gay porn is homophobic. And any chick that doesn’t wanna fuck me MUST be a lesbo.

As far as the “mind your own business they’re not gonna bother you” argument, that’d be false again. Had a traumatized friend who was takin a leak on his way back to the ship in Hawaii and mid stream was propositioned by a gay dude who asked if he could give him a blowjob, telling him to “close your eyes and pretend its a girl”. Also several people I worked with had notes slipped under the stall (in an all male berthing) askin if they wanted to bone. That shit wouldnt freak u out? Guess they were homophobic. Try comin onto a girl aggressively as that, if she gets offended is she “heterophobic”? All this, of course, at a time when u could get easily kicked out for homosexual conduct. I can only imagine what’ll go on once its repealed. The lesbo mafia aboard the USS John C. Stennis is already frightening enough.

Like John Mccain said, at the end of the day its all about unit readiness, and the majority of combat troops oppose it. As do I. Thuh end.[/quote]

He was “traumatized” because a gay guy hit on him?

Seems to me the only bold and aggresive men in the Navy left already are gay?

[/quote]

Something tells me you wouldn’t be downplaying this as much as if it were some guy doing that to your wife.[/quote]

If she went to “defend freedom” which inlcudes being shot at occasionally, I would expect her not to be “traumatized”.

[/quote]

So homosexual men that are sexually harassed in the military should just get over it too, right?

Either sexual harassment is a big deal or it isn’t.

60

[quote]forlife wrote:
For the record, the majority of combat troops supported repealing DADT. The only exception to this was Marine combat, where only 40% said it was discriminatory and should be repealed.

I agree with Swole that the answer to those concerned about mass male rape as a result of the appeal is to have clearly defined standards on appropriate conduct, and to strictly enforce those standards, regardless of a person’s sexuality.

On another note, one of the advantages of the repeal is that it was accomplished by Congress, and signed by the President. Those complaining about activist judges have no leg to stand on.[/quote]

The 60% was also Army combat units as well as Marine.