Don't Ask, Don't Tell

[liberalogic]

I was just curious as to how others feel on this policy. I was reading a newspaper article about a lesbian who served for 10 years (honorably) and was recently discharged after saying that she was gay. It also said that about 10,000 soliders have been discharged for this reason since the bill's conception.

Does this really make any sense? Especially considering that participation in the armed services has decreased. Don't we need all the help that we can get? Besides, I don't foresee many "girly" gay guys joining and most of the lesbians are probably manly anyway.

 

[Hobbit]

It's not that the army doesn't want gays, it's that the issue makes people in the military uncomfortable. That's something that will mess them up in combat. The reason for the bill is so gays can still be in the Army, and so long as they just keep it to themselves, it doesn't make anybody uncomfortable. It's kinda odd, but I can't really think of a better way.

 

[CSM]

I was just curious as to how others feel on this policy. I was reading a newspaper article about a lesbian who served for 10 years (honorably) and was recently discharged after saying that she was gay. It also said that about 10,000 soliders have been discharged for this reason since the bill's conception.

Does this really make any sense? Especially considering that participation in the armed services has decreased. Don't we need all the help that we can get? Besides, I don't foresee many "girly" gay guys joining and most of the lesbians are probably manly anyway.

The don't ask don't tell policy works pretty well. It prevents the military from running someone out of the service simply because of suspicions of being gay and at the same time pretty much offers an easy out for those who are gay and get do not wish to complete their obligation.

The bottom line is, if those 10,000 had not openly stated they were gay, they could have stayed.

 

[5stringJeff]

I agree with CSM, and will add that homosexuals in the ranks would significantly decrease morale, as you are fighting and working alongside these people for weeks and months on end while in combat. The last thing a soldier needs to think about is whether the guy next to you is fantasizing about you.

 

[liberalogic]

I think that it's a bit outdated considering that we have women in combat. I can understand the policy when men were only allowed to serve-- sexual tensions would be a distraction. But what if the guy is fantasizing about the woman or vice verca? Isn't that a distraction from battle?

If we keep Don't Ask Don't Tell then women shouldn't be allowed to serve.

 

[CSM]

I think that it's a bit outdated considering that we have women in combat. I can understand the policy when men were only allowed to serve-- sexual tensions would be a distraction. But what if the guy is fantasizing about the woman or vice verca? Isn't that a distraction from battle?

If we keep Don't Ask Don't Tell then women shouldn't be allowed to serve.

Well, in theory, women are still not allowed to fill combat roles. That fact however has not kept them from being killed in combat. Of course, with the way things are now, it would be pretty hard to define a role that is not "combat".

Just my personal opinion which means absolutely nothing, but I dont think it much matters if one is gay, female, etc. The sexual harrassment regs cover it. What does matter is making special rules and qualifications for women or gays. I f they are going to compete for promotions etc, then the criteria and qualifications need to be the same for both. If gays start asking for special criteria (perhaps to fill some kind of quota) then it would indeed be wrong.

 

[Annie]

I agree with CSM, and will add that homosexuals in the ranks would significantly decrease morale, as you are fighting and working alongside these people for weeks and months on end while in combat. The last thing a soldier needs to think about is whether the guy next to you is fantasizing about you.

I look at it this way, someone serving must make a choice of where their priorities lie; declaring openly their sexuality or serving. Seems to me a no brainer. I teach, if I were gay and made that explicit, I'd be out of a job. Same deal.

I'm quite sure we have had a long time staff member, who's gay. I'm not sure, I'd never ask. She's never told.

 

[Annie]

I think that it's a bit outdated considering that we have women in combat. I can understand the policy when men were only allowed to serve-- sexual tensions would be a distraction. But what if the guy is fantasizing about the woman or vice verca? Isn't that a distraction from battle?

If we keep Don't Ask Don't Tell then women shouldn't be allowed to serve.

Do you think women don't fantasize? Probably more than men, we don't need pics. Mind over visuals! :teeth: Although I doubt either would, under combat conditions! :duh3:

 

[liberalogic]

Well, in theory, women are still not allowed to fill combat roles. That fact however has not kept them from being killed in combat. Of course, with the way things are now, it would be pretty hard to define a role that is not "combat".

Just my personal opinion which means absolutely nothing, but I dont think it much matters if one is gay, female, etc. The sexual harrassment regs cover it. What does matter is making special rules and qualifications for women or gays. I f they are going to compete for promotions etc, then the criteria and qualifications need to be the same for both. If gays start asking for special criteria (perhaps to fill some kind of quota) then it would indeed be wrong.

I couldn't agree more. I just don't think that social criticisms should be embedded in military admission/refusal-- we need all the sufficient support that we can get. And promotion should be based ONLY on merit. If you are fit enough to do the job, then grab a gun and go kill some people.

 

[Mr. P]

I look at it this way, someone serving must make a choice of where their priorities lie; declaring openly their sexuality or serving. Seems to me a no brainer. I teach, if I were gay and made that explicit, I'd be out of a job. Same deal.

I'm quite sure we have had a long time staff member, who's gay. I'm not sure, I'd never ask. She's never told.

Sheewwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!
I had ta read that twice, I thought you were outing Bonnie!:rotflmao:

 

[Annie]

Sheewwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!
I had ta read that twice, I thought you were outing Bonnie!:rotflmao:

LOL! I meant at school.

 

[Mr. P]

LOL! I meant at school.

I know...

 

[Mr. P]

LOL! I meant at school.

I worked with a guy for 10 years that was gay. I knew, I'm sure everyone else knew it. He never admitted it to me until 8 months ago. He always did a great job; his lifestyle had no effect on his competence as a pilot. As a matter of fact, he has now become the assistant chief pilot of that fortune 50 company. You can bet they know, he did come out, finally.

 

[Annie]

I worked with a guy for 10 years that was gay. I knew, I'm sure everyone else knew it. He never admitted it to me until 8 months ago. He always did a great job; his lifestyle had no effect on his competence as a pilot. As a matter of fact, he has now become the assistant chief pilot of that fortune 50 company. You can bet they know, he did come out, finally.

And many can, which doesn't bother me, other than I'm pretty uncomfortable around lesbians that I know are.

There's differences though if you are dealing with children or living with people in close quarters like in the military. For now, that is how I see things.

As I've stated before, I see no need for any adult to be discussing their sex lives with anyone they aren't intimate with. I have never done so with my friends, much less professionaly.

 

[Mr. P]

And many can, which doesn't bother me, other than I'm pretty uncomfortable around lesbians that I know are.

There's differences though if you are dealing with children or living with people in close quarters like in the military. For now, that is how I see things.

As I've stated before, I see no need for any adult to be discussing their sex lives with anyone they aren't intimate with. I have never done so with my friends, much less professionaly.

There ya go..what would be the point anyway?
I'm uncomfortable around lesbians as well, but not gay men. Donno why, cept I'll punch them if they get outta line.
As far as " or living with people in close quarters". I flew hours on end with this guy only a few feet from me. It was never a problem, even though I knew he was gay.

We are friends to this day.

 

[Annie]

There ya go..what would be the point anyway?
I'm uncomfortable around lesbians as well, but not gay men. Donno why, cept I'll punch them if they get outta line.
As far as " or living with people in close quarters". I flew hours on end with this guy only a few feet from me. It was never a problem, even though I knew he was gay.

We are friends to this day.

I hear you. I understand adults 'overlooking' or perhaps 'ignoring', I do that. Like I said, this staff member of which I'm pretty sure is lesbian, well we are friends. One sorta uncomfortable encounter, but I could have mistaken. Still, going to be out with her and others Saturday. She's a wonderful teacher, person, and friend. Since that one incident, I couldn't say for sure one way or the other.

 

[Gunny]

I was just curious as to how others feel on this policy. I was reading a newspaper article about a lesbian who served for 10 years (honorably) and was recently discharged after saying that she was gay. It also said that about 10,000 soliders have been discharged for this reason since the bill's conception.

Does this really make any sense? Especially considering that participation in the armed services has decreased. Don't we need all the help that we can get? Besides, I don't foresee many "girly" gay guys joining and most of the lesbians are probably manly anyway.

The whole argument is bogus, is how I feel about it. "Don't ask don't tell" basically says someone's sex life is not a part of their professional life. The only people who want this removed are the ones who want to flaunt their homosexuality.

Plain and simple, rules or no, homosexuals who are found out in the Marine Corps get their asses kicked if they aren't put into protective custody until they are processed out.

The presence of a known homosexual in a unit destroys that unit's integrity. A unit is a team, and like it or not, bullshit trying to legislate morality when you cannot or not, a known homosexual is the same as depositing a white wolf into a pack of grays. Like it or not, knowing someone is a homosexual DOES make a difference; especially, to a bunch of alpha-males.

 

[Mr. P]

I hear you. I understand adults 'overlooking' or perhaps 'ignoring', I do that. Like I said, this staff member of which I'm pretty sure is lesbian, well we are friends. One sorta uncomfortable encounter, but I could have mistaken. Still, going to be out with her and others Saturday. She's a wonderful teacher, person, and friend. Since that one incident, I couldn't say for sure one way or the other.

But it wasn't "overlooking or ignoring", it was simply a non-issue.
I'm sure he knew, I knew, and I knew he knew I knew too.

 

[Annie]

But it wasn't "overlooking or ignoring", it was simply a non-issue.
I'm sure he knew, I knew, and I knew he knew I knew too.

Then again, he didn't try to bunk with you or even hint he wanted to. That's civilian life, I'm guessing. You have experiences that I do not. I'm looking at this I hope with logic. Airman x is strait. Airman y is not. Neither state a preference, though x assumes y is. No problem.

Y comes out and says, "I'm gay." That changes the dynamics. Even though he never hits on X.

 

[Gunny]

Then again, he didn't try to bunk with you or even hint he wanted to. That's civilian life, I'm guessing. You have experiences that I do not. I'm looking at this I hope with logic. Airman x is strait. Airman y is not. Neither state a preference, though x assumes y is. No problem.

Y comes out and says, "I'm gay." That changes the dynamics. Even though he never hits on X.

That's about as simple as it gets. It's also different for each service. No knock on the USAF, but they hardly have to face the same proximity living that the Navy and Marines do while deployed aboard ship. You can reach out and touch at least two, usually three people from your rack on US warship.

Then there's the two-man fighting hole (foxhole in Army terminology) and/or the two man tent. Can't say as I'd want to be stuck in either with a gay.