The State of the Union Address (no-clap edition)

[Espy]

My wife says the women weren't treated any worse during training.

So I wonder if Gay folks are going to get separate bunks like women during boot.[/QUOTE]

Probably not, but you are the one who made the comparison, not me.

 

[tegid]

My wife says the women weren't treated any worse during training.

So I wonder if Gay folks are going to get separate bunks like women during boot.[/QUOTE]

separate but equal, right?[/QUOTE]

WTF??

He's saying that homosexuals are in greater risk of hazing from their peers than women because they sleep with these other men who would do the hazing.

Seriously, sometimes you're so bent on seeing subtle or obvious discriminations against gays that you won't see when someone is making a point of protecting or giving fair chances to homosexuals.

 

[Hailey Knight]

And in any case, this doesn't mean when you sign up you have to fill out your sexual preferences. It just means you won't get kicked out of the army if it's discovered you're gay. You're not compelled to tell, but you're not punished for failing to keep it a secret.

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

 

[Bubble181]

That's exactly what they did, buddy. Of course, that's 1862 we're talking about :-P

 

[tegid]

I don't know where you read anyone advocating separate bunks for gays. (In this thread... Maybe someone defended this in the old don't ask don't tell thread, can't remember)

 

[Charlie Don't Surf]

That's exactly what they did, buddy. Of course, that's 1862 we're talking about :-P

Doesn't make it right.

I don't know where you read anyone advocating separate bunks for gays. (In this thread... Maybe someone defended this in the old don't ask don't tell thread, can't remember)

My wife says the women weren't treated any worse during training.

So I wonder if Gay folks are going to get separate bunks like women during boot.[/QUOTE]

I'm making fun of the idea of that.

 

[tegid]

That's fine, I guess. It just seemed like you were making fun of it because someone was entertaining the idea, which I think is not the case.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

 

[Bubble181]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

See, you're doing it wrong. If you're gay, you *like* getting shot in the backside.

....No?


...Oh pfuh. :-P

 

[Espy]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

Wow. So you want us to separate gays from straights? Thats what hitler did. I guess you must agree with him then.

Did I do that right?

 

[Krisken]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

Wow. So you want us to separate gays from straights? Thats what hitler did. I guess you must agree with him then.

Did I do that right?[/QUOTE]
We should ask Anita Dunn

 

[Espy]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

Wow. So you want us to separate gays from straights? Thats what hitler did. I guess you must agree with him then.

Did I do that right?[/QUOTE]
We should ask Anita Dunn [/QUOTE]

Or any of my relatives... I swear if I hear one more person say that Obama is doing what Hitler did I'm going to go bananas. BANANAS I TELL YOU.

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

y'know, if I was gay and in the army I think I'd like separate bunks. It'd make it a lot easier to know who I can hit on without getting shot in the back during the next live fire exercise.

Wow. So you want us to separate gays from straights? Thats what hitler did. I guess you must agree with him then.[/QUOTE]

I said if I was gay. I'm not gay, so I don't agree with Hitler. But if I was gay . . . oh boy, I'd be agreeing with him hardcore.

 

[tegid]

So you're saying that Hitler was gay or rather that gays are like Hitler?

 

[Kitty Sinatra]

I'm saying if I was gay, I'd shoot Hitler in the backside. But I'm not gay, so I'd shoot Eva Braun in the backside while Hitler watched.

 

[tegid]

AH! Agreeing.

 

[Bubble181]

Or any of my relatives... I swear if I hear one more person say that Obama is doing what Hitler did I'm going to go bananas. BANANAS I TELL YOU.

Obama is leading a country. Hitler was leading a country! They're clearly doing the same thing!

Also, they both breathe*, are both non-aryan, both hiding their place of birth (Austria and Kenya :-P), and both Satan-worshipping Evil Masterminds bent on the destruction of the Free World.

Did I do that right?


*supposedly

 

[Chazwozel]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.

 

[Krisken]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

 

[Iaculus]

hahahah you actually changed your name to The Lovely Boner, amazing, I approve.

---------- Post added at 04:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:19 AM ----------

Also WOOO OBAMA SAYIN HE GONNA END DON'T ASK DON'T TELL ALL RI-

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/01/eugene-robinson-someone-at-white-house.html
Robinson and NBC White House Correspondent Savannah Guthrie were talking about the President's commitment to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell with Chris Matthews. As to whether or not it's really going to happen, Guthrie said: \\\\\"The proof will be in the pudding. Is this something they try to move forward with with all deliberate speed. Are they going to slow walk it? So, I think in the coming days and weeks we'll know how serious they are about it.\\\\\" That's exactly right. We'll now soon.

Then, Robinson added, \\\\\"What I heard this morning from somebody at the White House was probably not this year. But, maybe we would be hearing from military brass at some point.\\\\\"

I think Don't ask, Don't Tell actually serves as protection for gays in the military. No offense to any of those in the service, but a lot of military type folk aren't exactly the most tolerant of all people. New recruits are often hazed and treated like shit, as are women. This is going to definitely be interesting if it comes into effect.[/QUOTE]

All it does these days is mean that they can be booted out if they're openly gay, which gives bigots some nasty leverage to use against them. An absence of DADT does not mean 'must ask, must tell' if they don't want to.

DADT may be better than what the US had previously, but I can't see any downside to scrapping the ban altogether.

 

[Chazwozel]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.

 

[Krisken]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.[/QUOTE]
I don't see why they would. From what I've gotten from people who have served, they didn't give a shit if the guy a bunk over was gay or not so long as they did their job. Sure, you'll have a few closet homophobes, but that comes with any change. At least this way there will be consequences for attacking bunkmates unprovoked.

 

[Iaculus]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.[/QUOTE]

Soldiers've been sharing showers with gay guys for a while now. Also public bathrooms in civillian life, dorms if they ever spent time at a youth hostel...

All this does is acknowledge that fact.

 

[Chazwozel]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.[/QUOTE]

Soldiers've been sharing showers with gay guys for a while now. Also public bathrooms in civillian life, dorms if they ever spent time at a youth hostel...

All this does is acknowledge that fact.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I guess you do have a good point with the civilian bathroom/dorms etc...

 

[Covar]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.[/QUOTE]
I don't see why they would. From what I've gotten from people who have served, they didn't give a shit if the guy a bunk over was gay or not so long as they did their job. Sure, you'll have a few closet homophobes, but that comes with any change. At least this way there will be consequences for attacking bunkmates unprovoked.[/QUOTE]

There are anyway. I'm sorry you're not getting any Hate Crime prosecution but attacking a fellow soldier unprovoked results in consequences regardless of the reason. Don't Ask Don't Tell doesn't prevent the victim from going to his superiors, only from going to their superior and stating "They kicked the crap out of me because I like to suck other men's cock."

 

[Krisken]

The answer isn't to make gays even more alien and different in the eyes of everyone. It's to treat them equally, and punish the small-minded people that "haze" or harass them based on their sexual preference. When the army was first allowing African-Americans, I bet they were in risk of hazing. Do you think the right move was to make all-black regiments or platoons?

Sounds good. So when your platoon finds out you're gay, they can soap/sock beat you in your bunk while you sleep.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because it's better to keep it a secret, have others find out, beat you, and then not be able to report it because of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".[/QUOTE]

I'm not against getting rid of don't ask, don't tell. I'm just curious whether or not they're going to implement separate bunks like they already do for women.[/QUOTE]
I don't see why they would. From what I've gotten from people who have served, they didn't give a shit if the guy a bunk over was gay or not so long as they did their job. Sure, you'll have a few closet homophobes, but that comes with any change. At least this way there will be consequences for attacking bunkmates unprovoked.[/QUOTE]

There are anyway. I'm sorry you're not getting any Hate Crime prosecution but attacking a fellow soldier unprovoked results in consequences regardless of the reason. Don't Ask Don't Tell doesn't prevent the victim from going to his superiors, only from going to their superior and stating "They kicked the crap out of me because I like to suck other men's cock."[/QUOTE]
You obviously haven't thought this through. Telling the superior they got the shit kicked out of them will lead to an investigation. The investigation reveals the guy got beat up because he is gay (which the people who get in trouble for beating the guy up for will tell the investigators). Thus, the gay man gets kicked out for being gay. His choice is either stay quiet and risk physical harm or talk and risk losing his job and benefits. Shitty options.

Or were you playing the role of the ignorant?

 

[Espy]

You obviously haven't thought this through. Telling the superior they got the shit kicked out of them will lead to an investigation. The investigation reveals the guy got beat up because he is gay (which the people who get in trouble for beating the guy up for will tell the investigators). Thus, the gay man gets kicked out for being gay. His choice is either stay quiet and risk physical harm or talk and risk losing his job and benefits. Shitty options.

Or were you playing the role of the ignorant?

Just to point out, I know guys who have been beat up by hicks for "being gay" when they aren't gay. Even if the guys say, "Dur, we beat him up cuz he's gay" that doesn't get you kicked out of the military because it doesn't prove anything.

 

[Krisken]

You obviously haven't thought this through. Telling the superior they got the shit kicked out of them will lead to an investigation. The investigation reveals the guy got beat up because he is gay (which the people who get in trouble for beating the guy up for will tell the investigators). Thus, the gay man gets kicked out for being gay. His choice is either stay quiet and risk physical harm or talk and risk losing his job and benefits. Shitty options.

Or were you playing the role of the ignorant?

Just to point out, I know guys who have been beat up by hicks for "being gay" when they aren't gay. Even if the guys say, "Dur, we beat him up cuz he's gay" that doesn't get you kicked out of the military because it doesn't prove anything.[/QUOTE]
It does put you under a microscope. Then you can have a dishonorable discharge if you're caught lying to your superior.

 

[Espy]

You obviously haven't thought this through. Telling the superior they got the shit kicked out of them will lead to an investigation. The investigation reveals the guy got beat up because he is gay (which the people who get in trouble for beating the guy up for will tell the investigators). Thus, the gay man gets kicked out for being gay. His choice is either stay quiet and risk physical harm or talk and risk losing his job and benefits. Shitty options.

Or were you playing the role of the ignorant?

Just to point out, I know guys who have been beat up by hicks for "being gay" when they aren't gay. Even if the guys say, "Dur, we beat him up cuz he's gay" that doesn't get you kicked out of the military because it doesn't prove anything.[/QUOTE]
It does put you under a microscope. Then you can have a dishonorable discharge if you're caught lying to your superior.[/QUOTE]

Of course it could but I think you are overestimating the army's desire to kick out gays. According to ARMY WIFE of ESPY (tm) it's really not something most concern themselves with unless you go out of your way to flaunt it. Honestly, I think you are both right, both are possibilities, but Covar is hardly being ignorant any more than you are being cynical. You are both expressing realistic possibilities.

 

[Covar]

It also need to go up to a DoD level investigation before any judgement is passed.

But Krisken is right, The Army is just full of ignorant, homophobic, assholes who love nothing more than kicking the ever-living shit out of any fellow soldier who they suspect might play for the other side and watching them get kicked out of the military faster then you can spell gay, because they tried to report it.

I was just being ignorant before, I should have payed better attention during the annual Don't Ask Don't Tell briefing I received in December. Looking back we did go over everything and it was just like that.

 

[Espy]

LOL, I forgot you were Guard too. You and your damn personal experience.

 

[Covar]

LOL, I forgot you were Guard too. You and your damn personal experience.

Reserves yea. Right after the Don't Ask Don't tell briefing we received our Sexual Harassment and Assault Training (shortening titles to fit on the training schedule always leads to amusing results)

 

[Espy]

LOL, I forgot you were Guard too. You and your damn personal experience.

Reserves yea. Right after the Don't Ask Don't tell briefing we received our Sexual Harassment and Assault Training (shortening titles to fit on the training schedule always leads to amusing results)[/QUOTE]

Sorry, sorry, reserves. Gotta love all those fun classes. Just going to the family briefing stuff is painful.

 

[Krisken]

You obviously haven't thought this through. Telling the superior they got the shit kicked out of them will lead to an investigation. The investigation reveals the guy got beat up because he is gay (which the people who get in trouble for beating the guy up for will tell the investigators). Thus, the gay man gets kicked out for being gay. His choice is either stay quiet and risk physical harm or talk and risk losing his job and benefits. Shitty options.

Or were you playing the role of the ignorant?

Just to point out, I know guys who have been beat up by hicks for "being gay" when they aren't gay. Even if the guys say, "Dur, we beat him up cuz he's gay" that doesn't get you kicked out of the military because it doesn't prove anything.[/QUOTE]
It does put you under a microscope. Then you can have a dishonorable discharge if you're caught lying to your superior.[/QUOTE]

Of course it could but I think you are overestimating the army's desire to kick out gays. According to ARMY WIFE of ESPY (tm) it's really not something most concern themselves with unless you go out of your way to flaunt it. Honestly, I think you are both right, both are possibilities, but Covar is hardly being ignorant any more than you are being cynical. You are both expressing realistic possibilities.[/QUOTE]

This looks pretty clear cut to me.

\"This law requires the Department of Defense to separate from the armed forces members who engage in or attempt to engage in homosexual acts; state they are homosexual or bisexual; or marry or attempt to marry a person of the same biological sex,\" said Cynthia Smith, a department spokeswoman.

Source here
In 2008, 619 service men and women were kicked out, 94 of which are linguists.

Yeah, I'm being cynical.