Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Without going into details, I have contact with a whole bunch of those frontline troops - and their commanders
They don't want it - their commanders do not want it. Within the last 2 weeks, I spoke with a 2 Star - the conversation included this very issue. The phrase he used is "over my dead body" - and "it will ruin the military"
It doesn't seem to have ruined any other country's military. There are bigots everywhere, why should we wait for them to stop being bigots to do what is right? If it were up to them, blacks, women, and American Indians wouldn't be able to vote.
In my experience the Navy has a unique situation, whereas the confined quarters are not as much of a problem in the Army and Air Force,
While supportive of gays in the military, I can understand a reluctance to include the Navy in this policy discussion. Subs are pretty tight, the hot berthing issue is just an indication as to how tight the living conditions are (frankly, I don't know how those folks manage to stay on the subs).
It doesn't seem to have ruined any other country's military. There are bigots everywhere, why should we wait for them to stop being bigots to do what is right? If it were up to them, blacks, women, and American Indians wouldn't be able to vote.
No other country's military is our country's military. What part of that is so difficult to understand? Each country has its own social and cultural dynamic and advantages and disadvantages.
Aside from that, the military is not about bigotry or any other social ill. It's about killing the enemy and defending our country by committing acts that are brutal and cruel. Having said that, it is important to keep in mind that the U.S. Army outlawed racial segregation long before the rest of American society did so, and has offered merit-based opportunities on an equal and non-discriminatory basis for alomst sixty years. It did these things to preserve morale and unit discipline -- in other words, for pragmatic reasons.
I had no idea you had such admiration for the IDF. Or is that admiration limited to their policy on gays? I think so, given the steady drumfire of loathing you express for them in all other contexts on this board.
Regardless, the situation of Israel's military is very different from the United States, wouldn't you say? In a slightly more precarious strategic position? Need every body they can get? A more homogenous population, racially, culturally, and spritually? A more recent tradition of citizen-as-soldier? Universal service requirement?
I must adimt, though, that the "World Congress of Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Jewish Organizations" is probably an unbiased group, with no particular agenda other than the defense of Israel...
This was a while back but interesting nonetheless...
Quote:
Thirty-six crew members of the supply ship Acadia were pregnant and had to be transferred during the ship's deployment to the Persian Gulf, naval officials say.
More than half became pregnant after the ship was under way, but a Navy spokesman, Lieut. Comdr. Jeff Smallwood, said there were no indications of improper fraternization between men and women on the ship.
A little off -topic... but actually I was pretty familiar with this story when it actually happened.
A lot of women were getting pregnant on purpose... so they could avoid being deployed or so they could get sent home early.
This would not be an issue with acknowledging the gay and lesbian sailors already onboard these ships. It's not like they are not onboard right now... and not like people don't know who a lot of them are.
I would think "shy" people would like to know exactly who all their gay/lesbian counterparts are so they can try to shower on a different schedule or cover up a bit. Imagine the vicarious thrills people are getting today at their expense, unbeknownst to them!
The fact that a quarter of American troops including combat troops in Iraq surveyed know a gay/lesbian person in their squad, and that half at least have some strong suspicions about a gay/lesbian individual in their squad....and they are "ok" with it, along with the fact Israel has no gay restrictions and gets along just fine in their combat operations... shows that the "unit cohesion" argument no longer holds water.
This was a while back but interesting nonetheless...
Quote:
Thirty-six crew members of the supply ship Acadia were pregnant and had to be transferred during the ship's deployment to the Persian Gulf, naval officials say.
More than half became pregnant after the ship was under way, but a Navy spokesman, Lieut. Comdr. Jeff Smallwood, said there were no indications of improper fraternization between men and women on the ship.
A little off -topic... but actually I was pretty familiar with this story when it actually happened.
A lot of women were getting pregnant on purpose... so they could avoid being deployed or so they could get sent home early.
This would not be an issue with acknowledging the gay and lesbian sailors already onboard these ships. It's not like they are not onboard right now... and not like people don't know who a lot of them are.
I would think "shy" people would like to know exactly who all their gay/lesbian counterparts are so they can try to shower on a different schedule or cover up a bit. Imagine the vicarious thrills people are getting today at their expense, unbeknownst to them!
The fact that a quarter of American troops including combat troops in Iraq surveyed know a gay/lesbian person in their squad, and that half at least have some strong suspicions about a gay/lesbian individual in their squad....and they are "ok" with it, along with the fact Israel has no gay restrictions and gets along just fine in their combat operations... shows that the "unit cohesion" argument no longer holds water.
So "suspicions" about members of one's squad are "okay" in combat units?
So "suspicions" about members of one's squad are "okay" in combat units?
Maybe you're right. Maybe times have changed.
Apparently, not for the better, though.
LOL. Nice play on words. "Suspicion" in the sense they are pretty sure the guy is gay, and while the guy is "not telling" and they are "not asking", they work together just fine. Bottom line - they are functioning and as cohesive as they need to be.
You don't want to use Israel as an example. How about England? They have had an open policy since 2000 and it has been successful.
Apparently there are 24 countries around the world that have open gay military policies and they are as cohesive as you would like.
At one point, his squad was working with a British Army unit. “I wouldn’t go into a briefing room and face them and say, ‘By the way, I’m gay,’ ” he said of his British Army counterparts. “Frankly, I don’t think they were worried, because we were all focused on doing a very, very hard job.”
He recalled something his commander had said, when advising him to come out to his squad:
“The boss said, ‘I think you will be surprised that in this day and age it will be a complete anticlimax, because as far as I’m concerned, homosexuals in the military are yesterday’s news.’ ”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
