TexasCHLforum.com

So, if there are more Gays and Lesbians in Military service, will this not lead to more sexual harassment claims against straight service members? What do you think the US enemies will look at the lowering of standards to serve in the military?
Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

A bill repealing "don't ask, don't tell,"passed the Senate 65 to 31 on Saturday.


http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/18 ... 3%7C190789" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Beiruty wrote:So, if there are more Gays and Lesbians in Military service, will this not lead to more sexual harassment claims against straight service members? What do you think the US enemies will look at the lowering of standards to serve in the military?
Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I dunno' know. What do you think? Who are the US enemies of whom you speak? Are these the same people who promote stoning of women based on hearsay?

Oldgringo wrote:

Beiruty wrote:So, if there are more Gays and Lesbians in Military service, will this not lead to more sexual harassment claims against straight service members? What do you think the US enemies will look at the lowering of standards to serve in the military?
Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I dunno' know. What do you think? Who are the US enemies of whom you speak? Are these the same people who promote stoning of women based on hearsay?

The enemy will only look at it as sign of weakness eventhough there are so many gays who are very smart and can help the militarry.

I"m not really pro or con on the issue but I had a gay friend who after the hugging/ wrestling team in high school joined the military.

I wanted to send him an Xmas present.

I've searched and searched for camouflage clothing made out of rainbows, but can only find ladies pink ones, so if anyone runs across any, please Private Message me where I can buy him some.

Beiruty wrote: Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I doubt it...the more common word choice would be "I am gay."

Personally, I am also inclined to doubt that anyone who joins the Military is going to feel compelled to make such a statement. Gay or straight, military service is a huge, life-changing commitment, not to be taken lightly. We as Americans see our servicemembers fighting and dying, taken away from their families and sent to hostile environments, and giving up a certain degree of personal choice in order to pursue a life in the Military.

It's not so much a lark, or something to be taken lightly...and that is the impression today's youth are presented with...in movies, media, etc. I doubt that the actual numbers of gays in the Military will even change significantly...just the count will. It's not like the vaunted institution of marriage, which the heterosexuals of our society have shown is no real commitment at all.

Ropin wrote:

Beiruty wrote: Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I doubt it...the more common word choice would be "I am gay."

Personally, I am also inclined to doubt that anyone who joins the Military is going to feel compelled to make such a statement. Gay or straight, military service is a huge, life-changing commitment, not to be taken lightly. We as Americans see our servicemembers fighting and dying, taken away from their families and sent to hostile environments, and giving up a certain degree of personal choice in order to pursue a life in the Military.

It's not so much a lark, or something to be taken lightly...and that is the impression today's youth are presented with...in movies, media, etc. I doubt that the actual numbers of gays in the Military will even change significantly...just the count will. It's not like the vaunted institution of marriage, which the heterosexuals of our society have shown is no real commitment at all.

Well said, Ropin. It is very hard to tell whether some attempts at "humor" we see here are evidence of those prejudices which have tragically been in the background as this issue has been debated. Sometimes it is simply humor used to disparage a particular group, which to me, is not much different than prejudice, even though it might be unconscious. It may not be intended to produce discomfort in that group, but it is certainly predictable.

Elmo

Beiruty wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

Beiruty wrote:So, if there are more Gays and Lesbians in Military service, will this not lead to more sexual harassment claims against straight service members? What do you think the US enemies will look at the lowering of standards to serve in the military?
Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I dunno' know. What do you think? Who are the US enemies of whom you speak? Are these the same people who promote stoning of women based on hearsay?

The enemy will only look at it as sign of weakness eventhough there are so many gays who are very smart and can help the militarry.

Who cares what the enemy thinks?

Purplehood wrote:

Beiruty wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:

Beiruty wrote:So, if there are more Gays and Lesbians in Military service, will this not lead to more sexual harassment claims against straight service members? What do you think the US enemies will look at the lowering of standards to serve in the military?
Will someone ever hear: "Ah, do not touch me, I am super sensitive, I am a gay!"

I dunno' know. What do you think? Who are the US enemies of whom you speak? Are these the same people who promote stoning of women based on hearsay?

The enemy will only look at it as sign of weakness eventhough there are so many gays who are very smart and can help the militarry.

Who cares what the enemy thinks?

From a man who knows. Bravo, Purplehood.

I might go further and suggest that a military commander might like his enemy to think his forces are weak.

Elmo

The Military is still going to consist of the same Gay Men and Women that have always been there since the nation was founded. I just don't see any problem with it.
Sure there will be folks who are uncomfortable with it, but it will shake down just like when President Truman decided that there should no longer be discrimination against non-whites in the Military. From my own personal experience that worked out well.

Maybe things in the military will remain as is - with the exception of not being booted out for being gay, but it'll be interesting to see if a percentage of emboldened gays will push the gay behavior envelope, i.e., public displays of affection during off hours or feeling free to dress in drag, etc.

I'll be upfront here and admit that I have not served, but it seems to me that the Honor Code is the Honor Code. Conduct Unbecoming is Conduct Unbecoming. I'm sure there's a certain percentage of heterosexual servicemembers who cross lines and face consequences, just as any homosexuals would.

I believe I've said this before in this thread...all gays are not the over-the-top stereotype you see at a pride events sometimes, just like all white guys who don't live in metropolitan areas are not the "white-trash" stereotype you find emphasized at say, NASCAR events.

Ropin,

Right, but note, I did post "percentage of emboldened gays" - not all...

Just as there are militant gays in the private world who insist that non-gays accept their gay-centric agenda - there may now be a push by a percentage of gays in the military for acceptance of this type social agenda, where once it couldn't come about while don't ask/don't tell was in force.

Are such considerations outlandish?

We'll see...

Abraham wrote:Ropin,

Right, but note, I did post "percentage of emboldened gays" - not all...

Just as there are militant gays in the private world who insist that non-gays accept their gay-centric agenda - there may now be a push by a percentage of gays in the military for acceptance of this type social agenda, where once it couldn't come about while don't ask/don't tell was in force.

Are such considerations outlandish?

We'll see...

Personally I would doubt it. I didn't see Blacks in the Military make any attempt to push an ethnic agenda as a result of the sweeping changes in the Armed Forces regarding race.

Abraham wrote:Ropin,

Right, but note, I did post "percentage of emboldened gays" - not all...

Just as there are militant gays in the private world who insist that non-gays accept their gay-centric agenda - there may now be a push by a percentage of gays in the military for acceptance of this type social agenda, where once it couldn't come about while don't ask/don't tell was in force.

Are such considerations outlandish?

We'll see...

Of course it is not outlandish, Abraham. I saw many an outlandish action by servicemen during my time as one, and many of them saw the inside of a brig or stockade as a result. My duty required me to put quite a few of them there. Many were discharged with a type of discharge appropriate to the outlandish thing they had done. Recruits are just young men and women like their civilian counterparts -- the group causing most of our disciplinary problems, both military and civiian, but more is expected of those in the miitary. After all, once they put on that uniform, it is a crime to be late for work.

But Article 134 of the UCMJ, the general article, was not repealed by the repeal of DADT, nor was Art. 92, dealing with the violation of a lawful order, eliminated as a punitive article. Command retains its reasonable control over the "off-base" conduct of military members. The definition of "lawful," just above, will undoubtedly receive some attention by courts in this context, both military and civilian. We all know not only the little guy steps over the line, but sometimes command does, too. I think we will all remain proud of our military servicemen and women, just as I remain proud of having served.

Elmo