I tried to express this in college recently, but was shouted
down by my “open-minded” liberal classmates.
I know, it’s hard to believe, but
they would not let me express my concerns.
Instead, their collective viewpoint was roared at me from red faces that
refused to acknowledge my opinion, much less my right to speak it. I waited for the commotion to die down, doing
my best to try to absorb what the eight or so different voices were
saying. I then tried again to state my views
on the matter and was again silenced by the bellowing and screeching of the
mob.
 |
| My classmates flaunting their epic debate skills. |
I considered introducing all of them to Chief Bing. I’m certain he could have taken control of
that room fast, quick, and in a hurry. I
realized, though, that would play right into their hands. You see a common liberal ploy is to yell and
holler at someone until that person loses their cool and shouts back at which
point the liberals all stop and point and a say, “Look how angry he is, he
refuses to listen, he’s probably violent, he wants to kill babies and rape the
planet, let us flee to Starbucks.” But I
digress…
Here is the point I tried
to make that day… The military, and I
can speak speak
firsthand with regards to the Navy, does not currently have the capability to fairly
and responsibly quarter gay military members.
Men and women cannot share a berthing on a ship because of
the risk of extracurricular activities (you know, bow-chicka-bow-bow). So what
do you do with the gays and lesbians? In
bullet format, here are the options and why they won’t work:
- Put all of the gay men in the same berthing. For the same reason you cannot mix men and women (bow-chicka-bow-bow), you can’t put all of the gay men in the same living/sleeping space. The same holds true for the lesbians. Perhaps some of you think, “Well, they have something to prove, so they’re not going to do anything irresponsible that could hurt what they’ve fought for.” In 1994, USS EISENHOWER received the first 60 women assigned to a combat ship. 15 were transferred during the following cruise for becoming pregnant. 25% didn’t give a crap about what the women before them had spent decades fighting for. The IKE is called The Love Boat to this day.
 |
| You should let your bangs grow... about eight inches. |
- Mix the gays with the straights. Picture yourself in your bedroom getting
ready for bed or preparing for a shower.
Now picture there is someone from the opposite sex ironing three feet
away, or perhaps they innocently brush up against you trying to get to their
bed. A ship’s berthing is a cramped
space. I’ve heard the argument, “Straight
guys think they’re better looking than they really are.” Well, that’s a bunch of crap. First, let me tell you that after six months
at sea even the truly ugly girls don’t look bad. That may sound shallow, but it’s true. Second, I have known some women who were
uglier than I am that had incredible bodies; they don’t have to look at your
face while you’re standing there in your underwear or toweling off after a
shower. By the way, an ugly woman with a
great body is called a Butterface… as in, everything looks good, butterface
(but her face). There is another expression
in the military, “Wrap a flag around her head and do it for your country,”
meaning don’t worry about how she looks, just get some. I didn't make these things up (nor do I appreciate their sentiment). The military is a different world that might shock some. If straight people think, talk, and act this
way, and we’re supposed to treat homosexuals as equals… well, you can do the
math.
- Give them each their own room. What we’re talking about now is called a stateroom. First, there are very few one-man staterooms on an aircraft carrier, much less the smaller ships. Second, since enlisted people make up the bulk of the Navy, we can surmise that statistically they will make up the bulk of the gays as well. There is ONE enlisted person who sleeps in a stateroom, and that is the Command Master Chief. In fact, very few officers get one-man rooms. There isn’t room for this option. Besides, if you start giving the homosexuals one-man rooms then you'll have EO issues with the straight folks who are crammed into berthings with over 100 other Sailors. Yes, over 100.
 |
| A typical alcove in a berthing space is so small you have to go outside to change your mind. |
 |
| Stop right their soldier!!! You CANNOT wear a thumb ring in uniform! |
With all of that said, I feel gays should be allowed to
serve in the armed forces.
Surprised? If you are then you
did the same thing my liberal classmates did and presumed to know my
opinion. Gays should be allowed to serve
in the military. Openly. However, I think the military owes it to service members, gay and straight alike, to create policies that are fair to
all. Putting an openly gay man in a
berthing with straight men has the same potential to disadvantage, or even
endanger, that person as it does to make the others uncomfortable. “Gay” and “lesbian” are unique sexual
orientations, and it is not fair to treat them like they are not.
Perhaps service on ships is not viable. Maybe we should just let them serve in the
Air Force where everyone gets their own hotel room, HDTV, high-speed internet
connection, and butler. I don’t have the
answer to this one. I can say that what
we’ve done wasn’t the right answer for anyone involved in the military except
the Commander in Chief… who won more votes.
Bookmark My2Cents on Delicious
I'm not talented enough to lay out all the arguments I'd like to make, so I'll just share what the father of Modern Conservatism, Barry Goldwater had to say on the subject. http://republicans4freedom.net/2011/05/17/conservatisms-pro-gay-roots-mr-conservative-barry-goldwater-on-gay-rights/
ReplyDeleteFirst, to all who pass this way... Frank is more than talented enough to make his own arguments. He just thought it would be clever to throw Barry G. at me.
ReplyDeleteNext, I don't disagree with anything in that article...
I do find it amusing that in March you referred to Goldwater as a turd in the punchbowl by today's conservative standards, and now you're calling him the father of modern conservatism.
Convenient.
Anyway, the federal government dictating integration of openly gay military service makes about as much sense as allowing them to dictate educational benchmarks and standards of learning... oh, wait, they do that too. And so effectively might I add.
I don't recall using those words. What I believe I said was Barry would be rejected by most of today's conservatives because of the positions he took as he got older and didn't have to worry about reelection. He also worked for public education a few years back, even going so far as to help deliver petitions to the AZ SOS's office. I confess to a grudging admiration for the courage he showed in taking those public stands. Yet a group of "conservatives" here in AZ wanted to strip his name from the GOP HQ Bldg. in AZ because he had the temerity to disagree with their "truth".
ReplyDeleteSo, Chief, I'm not throwing BG at you; I'm making a simple observation of fact. Clearly, we're all entitled to our own opinions on this issue, and I could never agree on discriminating against an entire group of American citizens because of their sexual orientation. As trite as it may sound, I DO have many gay friends and none of them has ever made an approach to me or anyone else I know who is straight.
*Disclaimer: Being unfamiliar with USN terms, I may instead use incorrect or army terms, but I'm not doing it to be rude.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I'd like to say that LGBTQ people have already been serving in all branches of the military. All of the issues that you list (berthing, showering, spending long durations in close quarters) have been happening. Serving as long as you did, there's a very good chance that you yourself showered, were seen naked, spent time with and even shared quarters with closeted gay sailors. Was there a breakdown in unit discipline? Did it affect the quality of your service, the effectiveness of your units or your fleet? In all of your years in the Navy, did I personally care only that our servicepeople do their best. If anyone acts inappropriately, breaks discipline or wilfully neglects their duties, such as the behavior you mentioned (getting pregnant purposefully to be relieved of duties/sent home, though the fathers onboard should have acted more appropriately also; men are more than just sex-driven mindless beasts who can't help themselves when women are around, correct?), they should be reprimanded accordingly. Duty before booty and all that. I wouldn't expect the repeal of DADT to excuse any inappropriate behavior; to me it's just being able to, for example, say 'my bf/gf/wife/husband/*term' and not be drummed out for it. I'm reading here that showering/sharing quarters with gay sailors is ok and long as you don't know they're gay. So the best place for LGBTQ people to serve in the Navy would be on shore? Boats/ships would serve to be too problematic logistically. How about Medics? Would they be banned from Medical positions due to the intimacy (and possible nudity) involved in a physical or examination? Training and Boot camp should be separate as well, so all training schools, quarters, units and any other groups all the way through would be standardized. Should they be allowed to earn rank? Wouldn't taking orders from homosexual officers cause dissention if the sailors felt uncomfortable with their command, or felt that perhaps the officer's judgement was questionable because of their homosexuality? Would having all-LGBT subs, boats, ships, whatever be a more feasible solution in your mind?
There are many nations around the world that allow LGBT military personnel to serve openly: Australia, New Zeland, Ireland, England, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Israel, the Netherlands, France, South Africa....that's just off the top of my head. To my knowledge, none have Gay-only/straight-only berthing, units or showers. After years of allowing open service, it's a non-issue. How do you think those countries make it work?
Whoops, part of that jumped, here's the repair:
ReplyDelete"....Was there a breakdown in unit discipline? Did it affect the quality of your service, the effectiveness of your units or your fleet? In all of your years in the Navy, I'm sure you served alongside LGBT sailors and not knowing their sexuality, praised them and were proud to serve with them. In regard to our forces, pre- and post-DADT, I personally care only that our servicepeople do their best. If anyone acts inappropriately, breaks discipline or wilfully neglects their duties...."
I served five years in the Navy, two and a half of which was at sea on three different aircraft carriers. Yes, that was a lot of time at sea in five years! I am a straight male, and I spent deployments in berthings as small as 14 men, up to 120 men. Never once did I feel there was an issue with gay men, and there were a few which were obviously gay. The reason there wasn't a problem is we didn't talk about it or make an issue out of it in any way. One of the guys who worked for me was gay. I knew it, as did everyone else who knew him, but it was never discussed and never an issue. He was one of the best on our team and was treated just the same as everyone else.
ReplyDeleteDon't ask Don't Tell was brilliant in my opinion. It allowed us to focus on job, and not our sexual orientation. In fact, sexual orientation was never an issue, period. Now that DADT has been repealed orientation has become a hot-topic of debate, creating tension throughout the military. There are now problems such as sailors refusing to bunk next to gay sailors, how to control/monitor fraternization, discrimination/harassment issues, berthing logistics dilemmas, etc. None of these were problems existed with DADT.
My biggest problem with the big stink that has been raised about DADT is what place does sexual orientation have in the workplace anyway? Regardless of your occupation (strippers aside) sex and sexual orientation should not be discussed at work. I now work as an insurance broker, and not once in the five plus years I've been here has a colleague felt the need to declare their sexual orientation. So, why is it so important for homosexual members of the military to make sure everyone knows their preference? I don't get it. Focus on your job, and do what you want when on leave, end of story.
Personally, I think the recent issues regarding homosexuals in the military matter more to politician hoping for reelection than it does to the men and women of the military. Yes, there is a small percentage of those that strongly opposed DADT for whatever reason, but most don't care whether the person next to them is gay or straight. They just want that person to do their job and watch their back.