Obama and the Gay Military...

[Undesired Walrus]

I see I left out part of the story. He would look over his should occasionally at various individuals in the shower.

So? If you are secure in your sexuality, I just still can't see why you'd give a ****. You're fighting on the front lines for God's sake.

 

[zooterkin]

"Ask a group of women how they would feel if a guy was staring into their shower room and getting an erection. I can bet you they would feel about the same way I did."

Do you think you'd get the same answer if you asked a group of men how they would feel about a woman staring into their shower and getting sexually aroused?

 

[Fishstick]

This whole shower argument is retarded because you are in all likelyhood already showering with gay guys, they just can't let it show they're gay. It's no different than co-ed showers.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I see I left out part of the story. He would look over his should occasionally at various individuals in the shower.

Ah so you kept a close eye on him and his genitals it seems.

 

[cwalner]

I see I left out part of the story. He would look over his should occasionally at various individuals in the shower.

Do you know for a fact that this kid is gay? It sounds like you are assuming that he was checking other guys out. The corner and the over the shoulder looks suggest to me another possibility.

Being a teenager, full of new and interesting hormones, he got an unintentional erection in an embarrasing situation (kinda like the the old saw about a boy not wanting to go to the blackboard, because standing up will reveal his embarrasment - but in a much more delicate and embarrasing situation). He moved to the corner to try to hide this fact. and his periodic looks over the shoulder were to see if anybody noticed.

Anyway, my original point was that for over 200 years the US military has had gay soldiers showering with straight soldiers. If this were an issue and caused problems with unit cohesion, I know that we would have heard about those incidents by now. Since we haven't I must assume that this is not happening, and your concern about homosexuality causing problems in military communal showers is either a product of your fears of gays and not based in reality.

 

[Bill Thompson]

GreyIce,

The only time I got close to getting in a real physical altercation in the military was when the subject matter was the attention of a girl. Sure there are “fights” in the world but I would imagine the majority of barroom brawls between two straight men are also over a woman. The same would be true for roommates fighting. What is more important? Someone did not pay their share of the phone bill? Likewise, the only times I have heard of or seen two women fight it was over a man except or one time. And that one time it was two lesbians fighting over a third woman.

Also in every homicide case, the first suspect by default is always the spouse or boyfriend.

These are the facts. You believe otherwise because your ideology blinds you. You don’t live in the real world. Knock, Knock GreyIce. The Matrix has you.

 

[GreyICE]

GreyIce,

The only time I got close to getting in a real physical altercation in the military was when the subject matter was the attention of a girl. Sure there are “fights” in the world but I would imagine the majority of barroom brawls between two straight men are also over a woman. The same would be true for roommates fighting. What is more important? Someone did not pay their share of the phone bill? Likewise, the only times I have heard of or seen two women fight it was over a man except or one time. And that one time it was two lesbians fighting over a third woman.

Also in every homicide case, the first suspect by default is always the spouse or boyfriend.

These are the facts. You believe otherwise because your ideology blinds you. You don’t live in the real world. Knock, Knock GreyIce. The Matrix has you.

Does it hurt to be this wrong? I seriously must ask. I literally have no idea what you are going on about.

If any sane people on these boards can please enlighten me how he got from everything posted above to anything I have written on these threads, please help me, because this chain of logic is too stygian for me.

Oh right, it's because I'm 'The One' trapped in the Matrix with evil computer programs after me. Can I have a 'vomiting rolleyes' smiley?

 

[ponderingturtle]

GreyIce,

The only time I got close to getting in a real physical altercation in the military was when the subject matter was the attention of a girl. Sure there are “fights” in the world but I would imagine the majority of barroom brawls between two straight men are also over a woman. The same would be true for roommates fighting. What is more important? Someone did not pay their share of the phone bill? Likewise, the only times I have heard of or seen two women fight it was over a man except or one time. And that one time it was two lesbians fighting over a third woman.

Also in every homicide case, the first suspect by default is always the spouse or boyfriend.

These are the facts. You believe otherwise because your ideology blinds you. You don’t live in the real world. Knock, Knock GreyIce. The Matrix has you.

See all of this is good evidence that DADT needs to be expanded to straits, and we can have a celibate army.

 

[quarky]

I wouldn't mind showering with gay guys. I wouldn't even care if they got erections.

But the products! That would bug the hell out of me! Exfoilating lotions, hair moose, skin softners, yowza!

 

[Nosi]

Quad4 72,
The gay/guy on your track team sound unusual.
I have only seen a guy hard in the showers once, and that was in 7.th grade.

People tend to get used to the situation, that is, showering with their preferred sex, without showing a reaction.
If you look at nudist beaches a hard-on is out of context as it is not a sexual situation and they rarely appear.

Don't you think almost all gays would be used to naked men in the showers without reacting like a teenager at his first sight of boobs?

(Hint: consider the percentage of gays and frequency of hard-ons in showers)

A hard on can be caused by stimuli other than the sexual.

A guy can be terrified out of his wits, sudden change of temperature or sensation can cause hard ons. A cold shower can do it, after a sweaty afternoon. Some men are more sensitive than others, and chubbies happen. It can be as unconscious as the 'morning wake up sheet tent'. Remember the embarrassment of discovering one in front of the class when a pubescent making a speech?

Women have the same reaction, but their bits aren't as easily seen, even stark naked.

 

[Phrost]

I'm pretty sure that once our culture full gets past our idiotic, medieval, religion-derived, backwards concepts of sexuality that the human body will no longer be seen as something shameful and perverse, to be covered at all times.

At that point, nobody will give a crap about integrated showers; or in other words, grow up. A naked body is as much of an invitation to sexual advances as a swimsuit; it's the cultural immaturity that causes the unhealthy, an unproductive fixation.

 

[funk de fino]

A hard on can be caused by stimuli other than the sexual.

School bus penis!

 

[Dancing David]

I'm pretty sure that once our culture full gets past our idiotic, medieval, religion-derived, backwards concepts of sexuality that the human body will no longer be seen as something shameful and perverse, to be covered at all times.

At that point, nobody will give a crap about integrated showers; or in other words, grow up. A naked body is as much of an invitation to sexual advances as a swimsuit; it's the cultural immaturity that causes the unhealthy, an unproductive fixation.

Hear here!

 

[Bill Thompson]

In a sense, sure, it would be SUPER if open gays were in the military. It would mean that the world was a better place and everything was more fair and human beings are rational and kind and good.

But we are not. If human beings were rational and kind and good we would not have a need for a military.

So the arguement for open gays in the military is flawed.


The policy of "Don't Ask /Don't Tell" is an unwritten rule in many work places. Open discussions of sex, sexuality, sexual orientation and religion are grounds for reprimand and dismissal where I work. And I work in a civilian organization that is not connected directly to the military.

It is impolite at best to discuss anything about sex, sexuality, and sexual orientation. It is no one's business. It does not belong in the work place. It has nothing to do with our job or the company.

If "Don't Ask /Don't Tell" is an unwritten and unofficial rule in the civilian workplace, then it is not unacceptable to hold the military up to a higher standard.

So the arguement for open gays in the military is flawed.

It is not the same sort of thing as the military being racially integrated or allowing women to serve in their current capacity. It is good for the military to be integrated. It helps the military do a better job. It helps with enrollment and enlistment. It is good for the military to accept women. There are just as many women as men. It helps with enlistment. The came argument and case can be made for open gays serving in the military.

So the arguement for open gays in the military is flawed.

 

[Alt+F4]

The policy of "Don't Ask /Don't Tell" is an unwritten rule in many work places. Open discussions of sex, sexuality, sexual orientation and religion are grounds for reprimand and dismissal where I work.

Because of DADT a gay person can be removed from service simply for saying, "I went out to dinner with my wife last night". Is that the case at your work place?

 

[linusrichard]

Because of DADT a gay person can be removed from service simply for saying, "I went out to dinner with my wife last night". Is that the case at your work place?

Most or all of Bill's argument depends on misrepresenting what DADT really is, either through ignorance or dishonesty. At some point it really stops being worth even responding.

 

[zooterkin]

In a sense, sure, it would be SUPER if open gays were in the military. It would mean that the world was a better place and everything was more fair and human beings are rational and kind and good.

Well, as has already been pointed out, the world is a better place, at least some parts of it.

 

[Bill Thompson]

There was a protest here in Seattle last year where some peaceniks came out and blocked some tanks on their return trup back from Iraq. That is right, they were RETURNING. And protesters were stopping their movement back to the base. They were too stupid to know that they were going in the right direction if they wanted peace and the war to end.

It is the same sort of thing thing with Don't Ask / Don't Tell. It is a step in the right direction. To remove the policy is to go back to the old days when you could openly ask someone what their sexual preference is.

Something else is this. Don't Ask/Don't Tell should be the policy in every work place. Noone has the right at work to know what your sexual preference is, no matter what it is.

It is basically the unwritten policy where I work now where noone really talks about there personal life. It is noone's business. It is considered at least bad practice to discuss sex, sexuality, religion and politics here.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Because of DADT a gay person can be removed from service simply for saying, "I went out to dinner with my wife last night". Is that the case at your work place?

That is simple. Straight people should just say "my partner" and if someone asks, "you mean, your wife" it should be perfectly acceptable to not clarify out of respect for our homosexual brothers and sisters.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It is basically the unwritten policy where I work now where noone really talks about there personal life. It is noone's business. It is considered at least bad practice to discuss sex, sexuality, religion and politics here.

So you have no idea which of your coworkers are married or not then. I am sure you would never mention anything like that. Especialy to the HR department or something.