• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why allowing gays to serve openly in the military is special treatment

rudygetsplenty said:
Straight men in the military are prohibited from showering, dressing, or bunking with their female counterparts (and vice versa, of course). The reason for this is clearly that the men's sexual interest in the women would be a distraction to the men (yes, vice versa, but let's not pretend sexual desire affects women the same as it does men), and would prevent them from focusing on their jobs. Indeed, even with the separation, prostitution and rape have been a problem since introducing women to the military; but it is understandable and right that we work to overcome these issues, to allow women to serve.
If we allow gays to serve openly, we are allowing them to consort with the objects of their sexual attraction in a manner that heterosexuals are not allowed to. Why is it ok to let gay soldiers do this but not heterosexuals? Are we to believe that homosexuals are sexually evolved to the point where their sexual attraction does not affect their performance as a soldier? We clearly feel that heterosexual soldiers are not capable of such a separation. Frankly I don't, if I were showering with a bunch of women, it would affect my ability to perform (as a soldier, hehe).
So please, if somebody has a rational rebuttal, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

Couple of issues with this:

First, sexual attraction is not the only reason that men and women do not share living spaces. There are many men and women in the military who could easily share living spaces and be able to put their sexual desires aside and do their job. To assume that most couldn't is wrong.

There are other problems with putting men and women together, the main one is that women and men in our society are not accustomed to sharing sleeping/showering/bathroom spaces with each other outside of perhaps their private homes. Even civilian businesses/places have separate facilities for men and women. Very few, if any, have separate facilities for gays and straights.

Plus, there are the biological differences between men and women, including a woman's menstrual cycle. Most men would be uncomfortable living with/showering/sharing head space with women on their cycle, just like many women would be uncomfortable sharing such a private part of being a woman with men that they are not close to.

Second, there is nothing wrong with men and women getting together for sexual encounters while outside a warzone and off-duty as long as it is in a place where such activities are permitted, who are not violating fraternization policies or adultery policies. So, as long as homosexual men and women follow these same rules, then there shouldn't be a problem. If they are caught doing something in a place that they shouldn't be doing it, then they should receive the same punishment as a heterosexual caught in such an act.

Having been on an aircraft carrier, I have known of several situations where a woman was caught in bed with a man in his berthing and vice versa, while out to sea. They were punished for such behavior. I don't see why the same punishment cannot be used against homosexuals for this behavior. It is not like every homosexual soldier/sailor/marine is going to have sex in warzones/on ships.

Having sexual encounters with someone doesn't necessarily distract a person to the point where they can't still do their duties. However, if one of those personnel got pregnant, then they certainly cannot perform their duties for at least a little bit of time. The chance of pregnancy only occurs with heterosexual relationships.

And along with all this, homosexuals are currently serving alongside heterosexuals now. There is no reason to assume that homosexual relationships would somehow become more prevalent just because they allowed to serve openly. In fact, we can't even predict how many homosexuals that aren't already serving pretty openly right now will decide to share their sexuality with those they serve with. I would guess that there are certainly some who would just stay in the closet, whether from fear of physical harm or that they may not be able to serve openly long or from just fear that such a revelation may ostracize them from their unit/division.
 
Peh, the universal rule is that it is only gay if they kiss.
 
spud_meister said:
Tell me, if a gay man is showering with a straight man, are they likely to have sex?
Click to expand...

CaptainCourtesy said:
This is the crux of the issue. With a straight male-straight female combination, you have two people who's sexual orientation are compatible, possibly leading to sexual activity. When you combine a straight male and a gay male, these sexual orientations are not compatible for sexual activity.
Click to expand...

does every unit only get issued one homosexual, then? :roll:
 
cpwill said:
does every unit only get issued one homosexual, then? :roll:
Click to expand...

Probably. For starters, gays account for only 5-8% of the population. Second, most gay soldiers will probably not come out even when the policy is lifted. The chances of having two openly gay soldiers in the same unit is likely very small.
 
I personally never entered the military because I am homosexual and I was afraid of being outed. I consider myself just as American as anyone else and just because I'm attracted to me doesn't make me less of a patriot or a soldier.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
This is the crux of the issue. With a straight male-straight female combination, you have two people who's sexual orientation are compatible, possibly leading to sexual activity. When you combine a straight male and a gay male, these sexual orientations are not compatible for sexual activity.
Click to expand...

so then it should be OK for straight male - lesbians to shower together?
 
OscarB63 said:
so then it should be OK for straight male - lesbians to shower together?
Click to expand...

Straight men and gay women don't shower together now. They also don't use the bathroom together, even in most civilian places. Straight men and gay men do shower together now in the military. The only difference there is between having DADT and allowing gays to serve openly is that some of the men, that might not have known before, might find out that one of the guys they are showering with is gay. This still doesn't change any rules against sexual harassment or sexual assault. It also doesn't change how some of the guys might react if one of the gay guys hits on another guy in the shower. It also wouldn't change any rule against sexual activities within certain areas, including communal showers and living spaces, whether it is gay or straight sex.
 
To the OP, who claims to have never seen this argument raised by conservatives before. Well, you need to get out more sunshine. :)

It's the most obvious argument against special treatment. It the same as those that want to provide special treatment in public schools to transexuals, gays, etc.. In fact, when I first took on the issue of gay rights, I prefaced the entire argument that it wasn't gay rights, it was gay special rights that was an issue. There really isn't much of a qualified argument against this posiiton you raise, and the only one I've seen as deliberately credible is that which you've seen here, and that is, how often would it occur; or, more accurately, given the demographocs, it is unlikely to become a major problem not able to be dealt with, with existing policing procedures.

To one other point you raise, and not to nit pick, but judging by your position on homosexuality, I assume that you are in the camp that agrees it's innate, and immutable? If so, then I find it puzzling that, (As someone that seems reasonable) you find contempt for homophobia. I suggest that this seems outwardly contradictory, unless you have another explanation for your distain? Is it not entirely consistent to attribute rooted homophobia as equally innate, and immutable as homosexuality? I see no inherent disassociation from either trait, as it is expressed in the genome. (Assuming of course that homosexuality is indeed innate)


Tim-
 
Hicup said:
Is it not entirely consistent to attribute rooted homophobia as equally innate, and immutable as homosexuality? I see no inherent disassociation from either trait, as it is expressed in the genome. (Assuming of course that homosexuality is indeed innate)
Click to expand...

This is an interesting question. It deserves it's own thread.
 
I think the military needs to start doing official gay testing, just to be sure the ranks don't get too limp-wristed. Here is a good method.

orion-albums-misc-stuff-picture67112993-yaho-my-son-gay.jpg
 
OP, you do realize that the reasons for separating men and women in showers and bathrooms isn't to prevent consensual sex, but rape, right? It isn't because supposedly soldiers who have sex are worse soldiers. I've seen no proof to back up that claim. And why would anyone presume that showering with a heterosexual is somehow going to drive a gay man wild? Very few gays ever have attraction to heterosexuals. These questions must be answered, because the notion that gayness will somehow infect the other soldiers. In order to even ask the question, you first must prove that homosexuality will somehow harm the cohesion of the unit.

Unless you start with the position that homosexuality is a detriment, then this is a non-issue. And since there is nothing to back up a claim of homosexuality causing harm to military personnel, you cannot then move to whether or not it's alright to force people to keep secrets about themselves. It's absurd, and unless you believe homosexuality to be wrong of its own accord, everyone knows it.
 
rudygetsplenty said:
I am a staunch defender of gay rights. I view opposition to gay marriage with contempt. However, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" is the only reasonable way I can think of to make this work. Consider:
Straight men in the military are prohibited from showering, dressing, or bunking with their female counterparts (and vice versa, of course). The reason for this is clearly that the men's sexual interest in the women would be a distraction to the men (yes, vice versa, but let's not pretend sexual desire affects women the same as it does men), and would prevent them from focusing on their jobs. Indeed, even with the separation, prostitution and rape have been a problem since introducing women to the military; but it is understandable and right that we work to overcome these issues, to allow women to serve.
If we allow gays to serve openly, we are allowing them to consort with the objects of their sexual attraction in a manner that heterosexuals are not allowed to. Why is it ok to let gay soldiers do this but not heterosexuals? Are we to believe that homosexuals are sexually evolved to the point where their sexual attraction does not affect their performance as a soldier? We clearly feel that heterosexual soldiers are not capable of such a separation. Frankly I don't, if I were showering with a bunch of women, it would affect my ability to perform (as a soldier, hehe).
So please, if somebody has a rational rebuttal, I'm all ears.
Click to expand...

okay just to step away from the showering thing - becuase its really drawn out....

soldiers live military lifestyles.
how can you be in the closet, but have your family live on base with you?
how can a woman have her wife and children get military housing or man and his husband do the same?

straight soldiers get to marry and have children.

its also the issue of covering it up. you talk about your partners at work. you put up a poster of an attractive celeb on your wall.

think about how many times a day you make comments that respond to your sexuality.....then imagine trying to hide that
 
I don't get the shower sex thing. Do military folk generally shower in pairs? If there are three or more people in the shower, it seems unlikely that two of them will just randomly start getting it on with an audience, and if two people want to sneak off by themselves to have sex, separate showers for men and women won't stop them.

Anyone with even marginal self control can share a shower with someone of the opposite sex or orientation without it affecting their job. Is there some reason we shouldn't expect at least a little discipline from our esteemed soldiers?
 
Even stating the scenario of a "gay man" and a "straight" man in the shower together is already wrong. People are not just their sexuality and it's unfair to reduce the situation to just that. They are full human beings with emotions, intelligence, a complex life history, morality, and not to mention a set of military rules enforced upon them.

The whole shower scenario just goes to show that people don't understand human sexuality at all. Maybe the entire military should shower in individual stalls, if that's the case. Cause you know... two exposed crotches MUST mean that sex is going to happen!!
 
CriticalThought said:
You do realize that 19 other countries have been able to integrate openly gay men in their militarys without having to worry about this, right? What makes America different? Why is this such an issue?

Also consider these points..

1. Even college students can share dorm rooms with gay roommates.
2. Gay men already use the showers at civilian gyms and pools alongside heterosexual men.
3. Gay men in the military who have kept their sexual orientation secret have been able to shower alongside heterosexual men and perform their job admirably and professionally for their country and there is no indication they would do otherwise if they were out.

You are making an issue out of a nonissue.
Click to expand...
I was going to post a reply, but what you said summed it up. Well said.

The US military already works with NATO forces, which are an integrated force with homosexuals in the ranks.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
This is the crux of the issue. With a straight male-straight female combination, you have two people who's sexual orientation are compatible, possibly leading to sexual activity. When you combine a straight male and a gay male, these sexual orientations are not compatible for sexual activity.
Click to expand...

Pfft, what a bunch of liberal nonsense.
 
Hey guys, we won this one already ;)
 
We ALL know what's going to happen once you are free and clear for openly homosexual persons to serve.

"I was denied promotion because I am GAY"

"My eval was negative because of bigotry"

Think I'm wrong? You're lying to yourself.

Also, when I joined in 95, there was a big push to promote female Chiefs. Had three Female AC Chiefs at NAS Corpus, 1 was **** hot and knew her stuff, 1 was clueless and had NO BUSINESS in kahkis. Everyone knew it, no one said a thing. The other was just there, taking up space.

Same thing will happen here as well, there will be people pushed through that shouldn't Just Cause they are homosexual.

It's a pity, but that's what happens when social engineering is forced on the military.
 
You are over exaggerating, those LGBT members of the military deserve the respect to be acknowledged, and know that they don't have to hide their loved ones in fear of losing their jobs. That is what this is about, respecting soldiers, it is not about social engineering, it's about respecting soldiers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom