what does everyone think about this military policy that allows queer people the chance to serve their country,...at the cost of hiding their lifestyle from everyone? (in hopes not to be booted from the military by any leak of information)

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Last edited by PsychoSnowman on 01-07-2004 at 03:17 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

The purpose of separating the sexes in the military, is to prevent sexual distractions. Having openly homosexual people in the military kind of defeats that purpose, especially when you consider the naturally promiscuous nature of men as a gender.

__________________

Tank: 220/220

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

if they let them get some ass now and then they wouldnt be goin after the guys muehehe but i think this is directed to alreasy gay people joining the military .. iono...it should be their allowed to be gay but no sleepin wit the other men ahaha

__________________
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v48/xxkpopxx/bhgft.bmp"><br><br>
its better to lose a lover, than to love a loser

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by MasWusHot
if they let them get some ass now and then they wouldnt be goin after the guys muehehe but i think this is directed to alreasy gay people joining the military .. iono...it should be their allowed to be gay but no sleepin wit the other men ahaha

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by kryogenix
i disagree. c4 black powder is right. i'd feel uneasy if a gay guy had to share the same quarters as me. it takes the mind off fighting and puts it on avoiding being analy raped

---

__________________

xanga.com/an1_mixtape

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by kryogenix
i disagree. c4 black powder is right. i'd feel uneasy if a gay guy had to share the same quarters as me. it takes the mind off fighting and puts it on avoiding being analy raped

---

__________________
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v48/xxkpopxx/bhgft.bmp"><br><br>
its better to lose a lover, than to love a loser

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

from what little information and studies there are, once a person is known to be gay, performance does not drop. I cannot source it for you. It was on an mtv news special about the reason why a boyfriend of someone on real world: new orleans had to have his face blurred, etc. Some military person said performance did not drop, as he did not like the policy.

What about their social life implications though? It is not just that they cannot be open in the military, they cannot be open anywhere. If someone finds out, and the military finds out somehow because of it, they are kicked out. It is not just the military or a temporary service for all people, for some people it is their life, and they cannot afford to take that chance. For others it is how they are paying for college, and etc. Living in complete secrecy does not sound good at all. Having to hide that from everyone, taxi drivers, and anyone at all...hmm the consequence is never good, whether it be beaten to death, or just taken out of hte military, it all just seems like a lose-lose situation. Sure, people do not want sexual situations in a military environment, but as KenVsRyu said, that does not make them a rapist. I would think these people would be aware of the situation and not force themselves on anyone or try to do anything that would inhibit performance by anyone.

I still find it terrible that even today a common military chant (whatever they are called, you know the "i don't nkow what i've been told" like anthems they sing as they run, etc.) is something along the lines of

"faggot faggot running down the street, shoot him shoot him 'til he retreats"

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Last edited by PsychoSnowman on 01-08-2004 at 04:05 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

They're called cadences, I did not know they had one like that, that's terrible.

C4 does seem to have a point, if they are going to let homosexuals in the military with each other, why not have men and women together?

The military doesn't want any display of affection right? They don’t want sexual activity taking place there at all either.

Well here's a possible reason for this policy regarding homosexuals: They've effectively eliminated the possibility of heterosexuals engaging in heterosexual activities by separating men and women, by having homosexuals hide their orientation they won’t have sexual activities and they wouldn’t be able to engage in secret sexual activities as they don’t know who the others are and they won’t come on to heterosexuals so they wouldn't come on to anyone then. That is my guess to the reason they have this policy.

Last edited by Alchemist on 01-09-2004 at 02:38 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I think another reason why women and men are not intermixed in the military is because, not just due to sexual interaction, but because of how it would cause an unequal balance in it. Men would probably do more rash things in order to protect the females because they are not as physically strong. A big reason why men are with men is because of comradery, and equal strength, and being able to count on one another. I think that would be lost if women and men would be interchanged, but if gays were allowed in the military i do not see how this would change. it is not just sexual interaction, it is the brotherhood and keeping equally strong people within their own groups so as to stray from encouraging the formation of "heroes" and rash behavior. Heroes, i mean, what i said earlier about how men might make rash moves to protect the females, and vice versa.

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
I think another reason why women and men are not intermixed in the military is because, not just due to sexual interaction, but because of how it would cause an unequal balance in it. Men would probably do more rash things in order to protect the females because they are not as physically strong. A big reason why men are with men is because of comradery, and equal strength, and being able to count on one another. I think that would be lost if women and men would be interchanged, but if gays were allowed in the military i do not see how this would change. it is not just sexual interaction, it is the brotherhood and keeping equally strong people within their own groups so as to stray from encouraging the formation of "heroes" and rash behavior. Heroes, i mean, what i said earlier about how men might make rash moves to protect the females, and vice versa.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by kryogenix
but couldn't it be possible there be a lack of trust between a straight guy and a gay guy because of the fact the guy is gay? could it be possible that this would cause division between the gay guys and straight guys?

---

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

i remember about hearing instances of this in much earlier times. of course, it doesnt relate very well to this discussion, since these times are dead. But still, interesting. It shows a historical view of affection in battle...

http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsa...le/leuctra.html

quote:

---

Thebes also started to rebuild its army after the Spartan government had been liquidated, and the Spartan garrisson had been defeated. Remarkable was that the Theban army only consisted of citizens at the first stage of the Theban hegemony, while the rest of the ancient world became more and more dependant of mercenaries. This was also the time that the famous elite corps of Thebes was founded by Gorgidas: the devoted brothers in arms. Traditionally this corps consisted of 150 homosexual male couples. You should realise that there was nothing perverse about homosexuality in the Greek world, unlike as in many other ancient civilizations. Homer had already mentioned in the Illiad that such a unit could be very useful, and Plato mentions it also as the men would try to compete with their partners in bravery, but they would also be determined to protect their partners.

---

Last edited by huby40 on 01-16-2004 at 03:51 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged