Don't Ask Don't Tell

[Snipe]

I was wondering if anyone involved in the armed forces or any vets out there has any opinion on Don't Ask Don't Tell and the potential repeal of the law.

From a personal aspect I am not sure if I would want to room with a gay male. Do they still have group showers at boot camp? I am not sure I would want to shower with a gay male either. Granted, it already happens in boot camp, but you don't know the guy is gay. You aren't supposed to ask, he isn't supposed to tell.

There is a reason why men shower together and women show together in high school gym. If you put them in coed showers you would have some problems on your hands. That is pretty obvious. I don't know why this would be any different.

I know a girl that quit sports because of some lesbians in the locker room. Not everyone is hip to getting undressed in front of someone that is sexually interested in them or their sex.

As a taxpayer I am concerned about a new wave of same sex sexual harrassment suits. If men and women were forced to shower together you would bet their would be some people that found the experience and their treatment demeaning to the point of harrassment. I can't see why this would be different.

We let women in the Navy and they started getting pregnant. Some 20 year old guy might have higher rank than some 18 year old new enlistment and the Navy started getting hit with sexual harrasment lawsuits. These new rules always come with a price. People often don't see that coming.

Maybe they don't have group showers anymore. Maybe the barracks have changing rooms now. I think that is the way they will have to go in the future, because lord knows the trannies are going to demand the right to enlist next. I say a family bathroom for every man, woman and freak of nature that wants to join! I don't know what the cost to retrofit everything would be, but I do know we don't have the money. That goes without saying though.

Another question would be: Could this hamper morale and make the United States Armed Forces a less effective fighting force? I don't know how you go about determining that. I think that women can hamper morale because they are physically inferior. If you are out in combat they might not be able to carry their own weight. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest length, and if she can't keep up or carry her weight it is a problem. Most people don't look at the question of what makes the most effective fighting force though, they look at it through the lens of what is "right". Others would argue that when it comes to defending the flag, whatever makes the most effective fighting force is the right way to go.

[xu95]

Having grown up in a military family and having served myself I am not particularly fond of gays in the military. I know I will get bashed for it and called a homophobe, etc.

I could go through a bunch of reasons why I don't like it, but I am sure it would be just a waste of my time.

xu95

[ATL Muskie]

I'm sure before Truman integrated the Army people gave all sorts of reasons why it's a bad idea. My simple thought is, if they can do the job then let them. Recruit the best of the best. If they can't, send them away to get a civilian job. I'm sure there were homosexuals storming the beaches at Normandy or crawling in the mud in Guam, it's just that no one knew. I don't need to know if you want my ass, I just need to know you'll cover it if we're under fire.

[Porkopolis]

I'm sure before Truman integrated the Army people gave all sorts of reasons why it's a bad idea. My simple thought is, if they can do the job then let them. Recruit the best of the best. If they can't, send them away to get a civilian job. I'm sure there were homosexuals storming the beaches at Normandy or crawling in the mud in Guam, it's just that no one knew. I don't need to know if you want my ass, I just need to know you'll cover it if we're under fire.

My sentiments exactly--and those of everyone I know in the military. My grandfather was career military, fighting the duration of both Korea and Vietnam. He always expressed the opinion you did when the issue came up: as long as they had his back, he had theirs.

[xeus]

Having grown up in a military family and having served myself I am not particularly fond of gays in the military. I know I will get bashed for it and called a homophobe, etc.

I could go through a bunch of reasons why I don't like it, but I am sure it would be just a waste of my time.

xu95

I can't imagine it would be more of a waste of time than what I usually read from you. Go for it.

[danaandvictory]

My sentiments exactly--and those of everyone I know in the military. My grandfather was career military, fighting the duration of both Korea and Vietnam. He always expressed the opinion you did when the issue came up: as long as they had his back, he had theirs.

But it would make Snipe uncomfortable in the shower. Will no one think of Snipe's feelings?

[DC Muskie]

Snipe is almost always worried about where people shower and where they go to the bathroom.

[Xpectations]

I'm sure before Truman integrated the Army people gave all sorts of reasons why it's a bad idea. My simple thought is, if they can do the job then let them. Recruit the best of the best. If they can't, send them away to get a civilian job. I'm sure there were homosexuals storming the beaches at Normandy or crawling in the mud in Guam, it's just that no one knew. I don't need to know if you want my ass, I just need to know you'll cover it if we're under fire.

Bingo!

[Snipe]

But it would make Snipe uncomfortable in the shower. Will no one think of Snipe's feelings?

Do you want to shower with a gay man?


Snipe is almost always worried about where people shower and where they go to the bathroom.

Do you want to shower with a gay man?

I don't mind them in the military, I just don't want them in my shower. I could care less about what they do in their private time, but I don't want my private time spent naked with them. I think it is quite simple.

[Snipe]

I'm sure before Truman integrated the Army people gave all sorts of reasons why it's a bad idea. My simple thought is, if they can do the job then let them. Recruit the best of the best. If they can't, send them away to get a civilian job. I'm sure there were homosexuals storming the beaches at Normandy or crawling in the mud in Guam, it's just that no one knew. I don't need to know if you want my ass, I just need to know you'll cover it if we're under fire.

I thought about the racial angle too, but you can't choose your race. You do choose to be an open homosexual or not. I am not against homosexuals serving in the armed forces, they will just have to change the way they do things.

[smileyy]

Do you want to shower with a gay man?

Sure. I've done it before. Somehow he managed to not have sex with me. I've used group showers with women, and managed to not have sex with them.

Believe it or not, showers and changing areas and whatnot don't turn into massive orgies at the drop of a hat.


You do choose to be an open homosexual or not.

This article is a good description for why DADT is bad for the military:
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2010/05/25/dadt_serving_in_silence/index.html

Basically, the military is all about complete trust in your fellow soldiers. If your fellow soldiers can't be trusted with one of the fundamental truths about your identity, there's something very wrong.

[danaandvictory]

Do you want to shower with a gay man?


I don't want to shower with anyone. However, having played high school sports and worked out at gyms in the past, I feel relatively confident that I have showered with a gay man. And unbelievably, whoever that gay man was did not rape me.

Seriously, do you rape every woman you see? Are you so overwhelmed with lust by the sight of a pair of breasts that you have to run across the street and motorboat?

[Interestingly, there is a problem with rape in the military currently -- of female servicemen by their male counterparts. But that doesn't fit your hysterical right wing agenda, so who cares?]

[LadyMuskie]

[Interestingly, there is a problem with rape in the military currently -- of female servicemen by their male counterparts. But that doesn't fit your hysterical right wing agenda, so who cares?]

Well, there are some who believe that women shouldn't be serving either because they create uncontrollable lust in their male counterparts and so on. Basically, what it comes down to is that there is an entire group of people who think that other people (straight and/or gay) are incapable of controlling their sexual urges. But rape (whether it be perpetrated against a male by a male or by a male against a female) has nothing whatsoever to do with sexual desire - its about anger and control. So, the question is - why do some think that no one has any self control and why do they think that everyone is so angry that they want to rape another human being, and do that realize that the two don't necessarily go together? Either way, the sexual desire angle isn't a valid reason to keep men and women who are willing to lay down their lives for their country (and those of us like me too scared to do it ourselves) from being who they truly are. It isn't fair or just to ask them to die for a country that doesn't recognize who they are.

[DC Muskie]

Do you want to shower with a gay man?

Trust me when I say this Snipe. If women don't find me attractive, I don't think gay dudes will either. So showering with people who aren't sexually attracted to fat dudes is sort of not a big deal.

I don't want to shower with women who weigh 300 lbs actually. I'm glad they keep 300 lbs women out of the military.


You do choose to be an open homosexual or not.

Interesting comment. It implies that being an open homosexual is a bad thing. I certainly hope homosexuals in the army stay in the closest and smell awful because they choose not to shower.

[GuyFawkes38]

Come on now Snipe. Even your man Ron Paul voted to repeal DADT.

Great Britain has an open homosexual policy. I havn't heard about major problems there.

Of course, homosexuals will always make up a small % of the army. So I would expect them to try extra hard to not be disruptive due to their sexual preference to earn the respect of other officers, especially if DADT is repealed.

[Snipe]

Sure. I've done it before. Somehow he managed to not have sex with me. I've used group showers with women, and managed to not have sex with them.

Believe it or not, showers and changing areas and whatnot don't turn into massive orgies at the drop of a hat.



Interesting on the group showers with women. I have never really heard of them in the United States. Where was this? I can't see that going over well in our military or our high schools.

As far as massive orgies in showers, I didn't claim that. I thought it increased the probability of sexual harassment. I think it does. You can feel free to disagree with that. As far as massive orgies in showers or bathhouses, I think the gay community actually has a corner on that market.

[Snipe]

I don't want to shower with anyone. However, having played high school sports and worked out at gyms in the past, I feel relatively confident that I have showered with a gay man. And unbelievably, whoever that gay man was did not rape me.

I don't see that as being the same. If gay people consist of 3-4% of the population that probably everyone of us has hit the showers with someone that is gay. That is different than knowing someone who is openly gay and showering with them. I say that because it is different to me. I think they should do away with the group showers. If I was building a building today I would do away with group bathrooms altogether. A growing number of men like to call themselves women or transexual and they want to use the women's bathrooms. Some women have a problem with that. I understand that and I don't think those women are bigoted. We just need our separate space.


Seriously, do you rape every woman you see? Are you so overwhelmed with lust by the sight of a pair of breasts that you have to run across the street and motorboat?


Yes, I rape every woman I see. That includes your mother. I don't see your point and I didn't even bring up rape. Sexual harrassment happens when people have their clothes on all the time. Women complain of men that oggle them. Could that happen in a group shower situation? Sure.


[Interestingly, there is a problem with rape in the military currently -- of female servicemen by their male counterparts. But that doesn't fit your hysterical right wing agenda, so who cares?]

What is my hysterical right wing agenda? I think gays should be allowed to serve. Is allowing gays to serve a hysterical right wing agenda? I also don't want to shower with a gay man. That is a personal preference. It is probably shared by more than a few people. Is not wanting to shower with a gay man a hysterical right wing agenda?

As to your point on "female servicemen" (servicepeople?) raped by the male couterparts, I will take your argument as fact without any dispute. I think the military could have thought a little harder before integrating the sexes in the military. When some 20 year old has military rank over some hot 18 year old blonde it was just trouble waiting to happen given our military culture. I could have predicted the pregnancies in the navy, the people sleeping with their commanding officers, the sexual harrassment lawsuits and the rape cases that you brought up. It isn't hard to imagine all of what ended up happening.

That is one reason I would like to make it easy on the gay and the straight people by eliminating the group showers. I think it would make it easier on everyone.

Where did you get this "hysterical right wing agenda"?

[nuts4xu]

I would so bang a hot blonde in the military. She could even be a lesbian, and I would still do her every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

http://djchaos.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/hot-army-girl.jpg

[Snipe]

It appears that they have done away with group showers sometime in the past 20 years in American high schools.

Students Still Sweat, They Just Don't Shower (http://www.nytimes.com/1996/04/22/us/students-still-sweat-they-just-don-t-shower.html?pagewanted=all) That is a 1996 article in the New York Times.


It also seems that a heightened awareness of sexuality, including the more open discussion in high schools today about homosexuality, has left many students fretting. Concern about the presence of gay students was mentioned several times as a reason not to shower.

"You never know who's looking at you," said Vicki Johnson, an 18-year-old from Algonquin, Ill.

Is Vicki Johnson a bigot? Does she have an "extreme right-wing agenda"? Is she homophobic? Maybe she is just uncomfortable taking a shower with other people, including gay people. I don't even know if they still have group showers at boot camp. That was part of my original question.

They may not. If high schools don't have group showers for a few decades maybe they don't have them anymore in the army. When I went to school it was some guys job to be in the locker room to make sure you would shower. What a creepy job that is. Imagine that at a government school. Somebody gets paid by the government to inspect your child naked for "hygiene". It is no wonder that it has gone away.

If the Army still does in fact do this, they need to step away from it when they embrace Don't Ask Don't Tell. But then again I am a right wing fanatic.

[danaandvictory]

Where did you get this "hysterical right wing agenda"?

I don't know, Snipe. Maybe every thread you've ever started that even tangentially touched on politics?

[GuyFawkes38]

It appears that they have done away with group showers sometime in the past 20 years in American high schools.

Students Still Sweat, They Just Don't Shower (http://www.nytimes.com/1996/04/22/us/students-still-sweat-they-just-don-t-shower.html?pagewanted=all) That is a 1996 article in the New York Times.



Is Vicki Johnson a bigot? Does she have an "extreme right-wing agenda"? Is she homophobic? Maybe she is just uncomfortable taking a shower with other people, including gay people. I don't even know if they still have group showers at boot camp. That was part of my original question.

They may not. If high schools don't have group showers for a few decades maybe they don't have them anymore in the army. When I went to school it was some guys job to be in the locker room to make sure you would shower. What a creepy job that is. Imagine that at a government school. Somebody gets paid by the government to inspect your child naked for "hygiene". It is no wonder that it has gone away.

If the Army still does in fact do this, they need to step away from it when they embrace Don't Ask Don't Tell. But then again I am a right wing fanatic.

That was an interesting article.

I remember in high school no one showered due to privacy concerns. I highly doubt it had anything to due with sexual orientation. It just was the last thing anyone wanted to do.

[MuskieCinci]

I graduated from high school in 2007 and we were definitely still taking group showers then. I would assume most other GCL schools still do it too. I can't speak for everyone or tell you if there was a gay person in the group shower but without a doubt it was the gayest experience ever and no one had a problem with it. If what the seniors did to the freshman every year wasn't sexual harassment then I don't know what is. The thing is everyone was pretty much OK with it. I guarantee if someone found out someone was gay it would have been a completely different story and totally awkward, its just the way it is for some reason.

As far as I'm concerned a person's sexual preference has little to no impact on me. I am a straight male but I'm comfortable with myself and other people. I have gay friends that have expressed to me that they are attracted to me and I just take it as a compliment and let them know that I am straight. I don't see how the few people in the military who are gay would pose a giant threat to others. Do you not think in the military where people tend to have more macho attitudes that the few gay people would just be sexually harassing people with no repercussions?

Also, I cannot imagine how being a homosexual is a choice. People with this attitude are the ones that end up having gay children who develop serious depression and suicidal thoughts.

[Snipe]

I don't know, Snipe. Maybe every thread you've ever started that even tangentially touched on politics?

I was wondering where on this thread you saw some sort of radical right wing agenda. It appears you just posted to call me names though without making a point. I don't mind being called names, but I wish you added more interesting critical thinking to the argument.

If they made men and women shower together, maybe some guys would see when the hotties like to bathe and time their showers accordingly. Maybe some guys would hang out in the showers until some ladies came along. Maybe some would get woodies. If a man was oggling a woman in a shower with a boner, I bet that would be sexual harrassment. Likewise if a man was doing the same to another man, I bet that would be harrassment too. I think the showers are a bad idea.

Your point about the mistreatment of females in our military goes hand in hand with my points. If you can see the problems coming do something to better structrue the system. I think gays should be allowed to serve, but I think they need to do away with traditions that involve everyone getting naked together.

[Snipe]

Come on now Snipe. Even your man Ron Paul voted to repeal DADT.

Great Britain has an open homosexual policy. I havn't heard about major problems there.

Of course, homosexuals will always make up a small % of the army. So I would expect them to try extra hard to not be disruptive due to their sexual preference to earn the respect of other officers, especially if DADT is repealed.


I didn't say that DADT is a good law or that I support it. I think gays should be allowed to serve. I was questioning some of the practices that could lead to problems.

[Snipe]

Well, there are some who believe that women shouldn't be serving either because they create uncontrollable lust in their male counterparts and so on. Basically, what it comes down to is that there is an entire group of people who think that other people (straight and/or gay) are incapable of controlling their sexual urges. But rape (whether it be perpetrated against a male by a male or by a male against a female) has nothing whatsoever to do with sexual desire - its about anger and control. So, the question is - why do some think that no one has any self control and why do they think that everyone is so angry that they want to rape another human being, and do that realize that the two don't necessarily go together? Either way, the sexual desire angle isn't a valid reason to keep men and women who are willing to lay down their lives for their country (and those of us like me too scared to do it ourselves) from being who they truly are. It isn't fair or just to ask them to die for a country that doesn't recognize who they are.



Rape is about sex, not violence, power or control. So claim these two American sociobiologists. Feminists have got it all wrong, they say. The definitive proof, the authors claim, lies in one universal observation: rapists use erect penises. "If rape isn't sexual, one would find that rape is not accompanied by penile erection," Thornhill argues.


Rape is certainly sexual. The feminist PC crowd likes to change definitions and labels but rape is sexual and has always been sexual.

[D-West & PO-Z]

Sure. I've done it before. Somehow he managed to not have sex with me. I've used group showers with women, and managed to not have sex with them.

Believe it or not, showers and changing areas and whatnot don't turn into massive orgies at the drop of a hat.




Well said.

[D-West & PO-Z]

I don't want to shower with anyone. However, having played high school sports and worked out at gyms in the past, I feel relatively confident that I have showered with a gay man. And unbelievably, whoever that gay man was did not rape me.

Seriously, do you rape every woman you see? Are you so overwhelmed with lust by the sight of a pair of breasts that you have to run across the street and motorboat?



Also well said.

[D-West & PO-Z]

As far as I'm concerned a person's sexual preference has little to no impact on me. I am a straight male but I'm comfortable with myself and other people. I have gay friends that have expressed to me that they are attracted to me and I just take it as a compliment and let them know that I am straight. I don't see how the few people in the military who are gay would pose a giant threat to others. Do you not think in the military where people tend to have more macho attitudes that the few gay people would just be sexually harassing people with no repercussions?

Also, I cannot imagine how being a homosexual is a choice.

I agree and I dont know how anyone with a homosexual friend or family member who has discussed the issue with them would disagree. Thats why I think you should have put "orientation" and not "preference".

[Cincypunk.org]

Do you want to shower with a gay man?



Do you want to shower with a gay man?

I don't mind them in the military, I just don't want them in my shower. I could care less about what they do in their private time, but I don't want my private time spent naked with them. I think it is quite simple.

I'd rather shower by myself or withmy fiance, not 30 dudes.

[X-band '01]

It appears that they have done away with group showers sometime in the past 20 years in American high schools.


Back when I was in high school (an all-boys HS), the only time showers were mandatory in PE was during swimming class - it wouldn't surprise me if people had to swim naked several years ago.

[XU 87]

The issue isn't whether someone is going to get raped in the shower by a another guy nor some of the other anecdotal arguments presented above. The issue is, "What effect would repeal of DADT have on the military, and particularly whether people would join, or not re-enlist, if DADT is repealed?"

According to a survey last year from the Military Times (which I am told is a left leaning publication which supports repeal of DADT), the majority of respondents (59%) did not want repeal of DADT. If DADT were repealed, about 10% of those surveyed said they would not re-enlist and 14% said they would consider not re-enlisteng. Those are big numbers of potential troops we could or would lose if DADT were repealed.

[THRILLHOUSE]

The issue isn't whether someone is going to get raped in the shower by a another guy nor some of the other anecdotal arguments presented above. The issue is, "What effect would repeal of DADT have on the military, and particularly whether people would join, or not re-enlist, if DADT is repealed?"

According to a survey last year from the Military Times (which I am told is a left leaning publication which supports repeal of DADT), the majority of respondents (59%) did not want repeal of DADT. If DADT were repealed, about 10% of those surveyed said they would not re-enlist and 14% said they would consider not re-enlisteng. Those are big numbers of potential troops we could or would lose if DADT were repealed.

It would be highly unlikely that there would be some sort of mass exodus of troops if DADT were repealed.

http://www.palmcenter.org/publications/dadt/military+times+poll+flawed+analysis

[D-West & PO-Z]

It would be highly unlikely that there would be some sort of mass exodus of troops if DADT were repealed.

http://www.palmcenter.org/publications/dadt/military+times+poll+flawed+analysis

Ya, I was thinking there is probably a difference between the attitudes (what people say they would do) and the behaviors (what they actually will do) as this article mentions.

I liked the last paragraph:

"Perhaps most importantly, it is troubling to see those who claim to care about national security argue that we should base military personnel policy exclusively on opinion polls. The same survey that asked about gays in the military also found that only 42% supported the war in Iraq, leaving 58% opposed, neutral, or not answering—the very same percentage who say they oppose openly gay service. Should the U.S. military decide when to invade a country based on whether the troops feel it’s a good idea? That would be absurd, but when it comes to gays, this is just what opponents of repeal argue."

[smileyy]

Don't make me have to pick between repealing DADT and withdrawal from Iraq.

I realize they're not related, but if I only had the choice of one...

Actually, I'd pick not repealing DADT. It'll happen eventually, and the ongoing damage the occupation does to the US, its military, and Iraq is far worse than DADT.

[SixFig]

If straight soldiers want to leave the military if they repeal DADT, well then let them. I'd rather have an army that represents America's openness to everyone regardless of sexual preference or orientation. I'm sure a few soldiers left after they started letting African Americans in...we still turned out fine.

True soldiers will realize the success of the mission is the most important thing, not what they do in their spare time.

Racism, sexism, hatred of gays etc. is so 20th century. Grow up.

[BandAid]

I realize you guys are having a serious conversation here. And in case you were wondering: yes, I am immature. So here are my two cents!


Do you want to shower with a gay man?


What type of gay man are we talking about? This type of gay man?

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/images/gallery/neil-patrick.jpg

Or this type?

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/1566/peterstandlargemd9.jpg

This will sound silly, and I am sure I will be ridiculed: I would not mind being in a public shower with Neil Patrick Harris, but I would be creeped out if I was in a public shower with Peter Pan...