Gay Soldiers never leave their buddies' behind
- Thread starter welsh
- Start date
Might as well ban females from the military. Or better yet, everyone who goes to bed before nine o'clock in the evening, has green eyes or dislike mushrooms.
Soldiers should be judged on performance and ability. Not sexual preference, sex, race or some othr irrelevant attribute.
If a "Girly-Man" or, indeed, a girl, can perform as effectively as a Macho-Man then it makes no difference. If any soldier is letting their personality or opinion interfere with their, or their unit's, performance then they are not fit to be a soldier. Simple as that.
As for the gay stereotypoe of the limp wristed man, there are plenty of straight guys like that and plenty of uber-macho gays.
If a "Girly-Man" or, indeed, a girl, can perform as effectively as a Macho-Man then it makes no difference. If any soldier is letting their personality or opinion interfere with their, or their unit's, performance then they are not fit to be a soldier. Simple as that.
As for the gay stereotypoe of the limp wristed man, there are plenty of straight guys like that and plenty of uber-macho gays.
Hm... I guess you're right. If they decide to become soldiers, they most likely know what that means and thus should be able to become good soldiers, girly or not.
I also think girly people wouldn't want to go to the army in the first place.
I also think girly people wouldn't want to go to the army in the first place.
Carib FMJ
Nuka-Cola Chaser
Everyone has a right to defend his nation, because if war ever gets out of control, everyone, gay, jew, black or white will have to lean on the other for support, and sometimes it takes tragedy to unite a nation.
Everyone is different, and everyone has tendenciies. But like I said before, the military should be seen as a uniform and rank.
Don't salute the man, salute the rank and uniform. Nothing more is asked of you, and this blindness to sex and other features should keep everyone in line.
Everyone is different, and everyone has tendenciies. But like I said before, the military should be seen as a uniform and rank.
Don't salute the man, salute the rank and uniform. Nothing more is asked of you, and this blindness to sex and other features should keep everyone in line.
SimpleMinded
Vault Fossil
Hrm... I don't much see the trouble with gays in the military. I mean, I don't know many gay guys that prance around shouting "I'm gay!" and chasing after guys behinds. I mean, if you don't include the shows on tv that try and highlight stereotyped homosexual characteristics, I'd be at a loss to say there is any difference. And to people on the receiving end of the military, I doubt they would become less intimidated by their enemy if they by some miracle, were able to discern he was gay.
I think the government just has some sort of paranoia that the gays are crawling the streets, waiting to pounce on the first guys ass that they find.
I think the government just has some sort of paranoia that the gays are crawling the streets, waiting to pounce on the first guys ass that they find.
bob_the_rambler
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
I think its been said in here already but i imagine that it would be hard to perform your duties as a straight soldier when you just found a gay porno mag. underneath Private Simmons bunk.............
A) Why were you looking under his bunk if not for porn?bob_the_rambler said:
B) He is gay.
C) In conclusion: You are secretly hoping to find said magazines under his bunk.
Why should that bother you?
Would it bother you more or less if they were BBW or scat mags? (Or more generally: If they were other magazines which differed from your sexual preferences.)
SimpleMinded
Vault Fossil
Big T said:
Agreed, it seems that their "straight soldiers" are almost HOPING the gay soldiers are just eagerly waiting to pounce on their asses. But sorry, in much the same way that women aren't always sitting their fantasizing about you, I'm guessing gays aren't doing it either.
I don't know how much you have all dealt with gay people, but they don't just walk around flirting with everything that has a penis. Straight men only think about sex. It's sad...
Women and gay men can actually control themselves and not try to hit on anything. Hard concept.
The stereotypical gay male doesn't exist everywhere. You only see that in the movies and such. I've met a ton of gay people in my life, and only a few actually acted like that.
By the way, do you see wuzzy boys joining the army and making it through boot camp? The flamboyant type of gay guy can be just as strong and willing as any other guy, and if you have a bullet wizz by your head, you care about surviving, not having sex.
Same goes for women... I don't think men would want to have sex in a foxhole when they can die in any second.
Women and gay men can actually control themselves and not try to hit on anything. Hard concept.
The stereotypical gay male doesn't exist everywhere. You only see that in the movies and such. I've met a ton of gay people in my life, and only a few actually acted like that.
By the way, do you see wuzzy boys joining the army and making it through boot camp? The flamboyant type of gay guy can be just as strong and willing as any other guy, and if you have a bullet wizz by your head, you care about surviving, not having sex.
Same goes for women... I don't think men would want to have sex in a foxhole when they can die in any second.
What MadDog just said. Not all of us gays are Jack from Will & Grace, just like not all straight guys are football-loving, beer-drinking hooligans. Stereotypes = teh suck.
So yes, let gays be in the military. If a guy is willing to pick up a gun and defend my country, I don't care if he fucks monkeys on the weekend.
So yes, let gays be in the military. If a guy is willing to pick up a gun and defend my country, I don't care if he fucks monkeys on the weekend.
What? Are you stereotyping me Mad Doggity-Dog?MadDog -[TO said:
Pretty much the only time I thing about sex is when I am masturbating (duh, Gypsy) and when I am on the bus (what? It's boring, I can't stop my mind from wandering).
Hmm. I don't know about that. Last wish and all.
Here I am, honeys. Bend over.
Actually, I believe the only Polis actively encouraging gayness in it's regimes were the Thebans, whose Theban Sacred Bands (Phalanxes) were made out of gay couples.
The idea behind this was that one would rather die than turn and run in front of the one you love.
It didn't really work really well, though - as people who lost their loved one tended to become suicidal.
That said, it's very much possible that homosexuality was commonplace in the armies of other Polèi, but then again - homosexuality was pretty commonplace in the ancient Greek world in the first place.
Actually, the reasons women are not deployed on the battlefield has nothing to do with sexism. (in theory)
The Israeli army, at one time, did deploy females on the battlefied. They fought just as well as men, but the problem didn't lie there. The problem was that the medics tended to treat wounded females first, even when they couldn't be saved anymore, and they were wasting their time while they could be saving another - masculine - man's life. There is just something about a wounded, bleeding woman that makes guys want to take care of them, I think. To be honest, I think I would personally not be able to withstand that urge either.
So the problem does not really lie with the women - as I said, they fight just as well as men - but with men. Perhaps a reschooling of the entire masculine armed forces would be in order - but I guess there are basic intuitions a man can't fight. So as long as men have these intuitions, putting women on the battlefield might cost lives that could be saved. And that's not a good thing, I guess.
I wouldn't judge him too harshly.
I personally know an American family that has lived here in Belgium for two generations - yet they still retain their American citizenship and barely speak any Dutch.
French and Americans actually both have a strong tendency to be rediculous in that respect.
Frissy: you're a bit of an idiot.
That is all.
*SQUAWK*
Wooz said:
Actually, I believe the only Polis actively encouraging gayness in it's regimes were the Thebans, whose Theban Sacred Bands (Phalanxes) were made out of gay couples.
The idea behind this was that one would rather die than turn and run in front of the one you love.
It didn't really work really well, though - as people who lost their loved one tended to become suicidal.
That said, it's very much possible that homosexuality was commonplace in the armies of other Polèi, but then again - homosexuality was pretty commonplace in the ancient Greek world in the first place.
Watergirl said:
Actually, the reasons women are not deployed on the battlefield has nothing to do with sexism. (in theory)
The Israeli army, at one time, did deploy females on the battlefied. They fought just as well as men, but the problem didn't lie there. The problem was that the medics tended to treat wounded females first, even when they couldn't be saved anymore, and they were wasting their time while they could be saving another - masculine - man's life. There is just something about a wounded, bleeding woman that makes guys want to take care of them, I think. To be honest, I think I would personally not be able to withstand that urge either.
So the problem does not really lie with the women - as I said, they fight just as well as men - but with men. Perhaps a reschooling of the entire masculine armed forces would be in order - but I guess there are basic intuitions a man can't fight. So as long as men have these intuitions, putting women on the battlefield might cost lives that could be saved. And that's not a good thing, I guess.
methixparadox said:
I wouldn't judge him too harshly.
I personally know an American family that has lived here in Belgium for two generations - yet they still retain their American citizenship and barely speak any Dutch.
French and Americans actually both have a strong tendency to be rediculous in that respect.
Frissy: you're a bit of an idiot.
That is all.
*SQUAWK*
(Actually, the reason you state is due to sexism, but it's sexism from the troops/medics rather than the officers.)Jebus said:
Um, I wouldn't really know about his, but I believe there is an abstract idea known as discipline.
Whatever the soldier is being indoctrinated with, sex would not play a major role if both (ie. Male & Female, not counting any others) sexes were in the armed forces.
Jebus said:
That might have been another reason, but the one that I was told by many higher-ups in different branches of the military (I was heavily recruited for a long time, still am...) told me that the women aren't allowed on the battlefield is because men would rather risk the objective or their own lives to save the woman's life.
Or that.
Same problem, basically.
It's regrettable, in a way - but I guess it's programmed into a man's mind. As I said before, I'm fairly certain I too would have problems with that.
Same problem, basically.
It's regrettable, in a way - but I guess it's programmed into a man's mind. As I said before, I'm fairly certain I too would have problems with that.
Starseeker
Vault Senior Citizen
2 thoughts after reading this.
1. I seem to recall that (I could be wrong) there are some studies stating women are emotionally better adapted to handle high stressed situations. And yet the interesting thing about anxiety/fear studies is that they found a mixed group always performs better than a uni group. They put different groups of people into stressful situations and observe the reactions there of. Same age groups perform worse than different age groups. Same race groups perform worse than mix race groups. Same sex/sexual orientation groups perform worse than mixed ones.
2. The second thought sort of contradicts my first idea. What if we let gay men serve with female units and lesbian women serve with hetero men units? Would that be a solution? Since some of opinions here are about distractions, would the fact that the person(no matter what sex) serving next to you wouldn't be sexually interested in you help you serve better?
No idea, just 2 cents.
1. I seem to recall that (I could be wrong) there are some studies stating women are emotionally better adapted to handle high stressed situations. And yet the interesting thing about anxiety/fear studies is that they found a mixed group always performs better than a uni group. They put different groups of people into stressful situations and observe the reactions there of. Same age groups perform worse than different age groups. Same race groups perform worse than mix race groups. Same sex/sexual orientation groups perform worse than mixed ones.
2. The second thought sort of contradicts my first idea. What if we let gay men serve with female units and lesbian women serve with hetero men units? Would that be a solution? Since some of opinions here are about distractions, would the fact that the person(no matter what sex) serving next to you wouldn't be sexually interested in you help you serve better?
No idea, just 2 cents.