Don't ask, Don't tell

[wombat2u2004]

Wasn't Alexander's regiment of Companions made up completely of gay soldiers ??? Paired off as one young and one old soldier who fought together, slept together, learnt from each other ????
Wom

[Catherinedana]

I'm still baffled as to how someone's sexual orientation affects their ability to do anything that they are trained or prepared to do. Misconceptions about what to expect from homosexual men is the main problem here, in my belief. I had a gay friend who was an absolute monster of a man, a bouncer in a bar in NYC and he always said, "Just because I'm gay that doesn't make me a pansy!" and it was the absolute truth!

[Cataholic]

Somehow, I have managed to work my entire adult life and never had my sexual preference come up. I suppose one could say that being in combat is different...and of course it is. BUT, if I were on the front line, or close to it, my sexual thoughts would be, uh, minimal. That staying alive thing would be a tad bit more important.

Some might say that living in close quarters would be the issue. Ok. Maybe it is. But, if I don't have sexual urges for all the men I see every day, and, presumably, they don't either, why would a gay man or woman in the military be any different?

This is a sexual preference....it is such a small part of who anyone is. If being gay is going to cause the military to fall apart, cause in-fighting, breed mistrust (whatever the homophobes are claiming will be the result) why is it ANY different than any other phobia? Racism? Elitism?

If someone has a problem with gays being in the military, maybe that person should choose another career choice.

[Lady's Human]

Wasn't Alexander's regiment of Companions made up completely of gay soldiers ??? Paired off as one young and one old soldier who fought together, slept together, learnt from each other ????
Wom

I just did a quick search on that. I had never heard that about the companions, and even the wiki link doesn't mention anything of the sort.

As to eliminating don't ask don't tell, it has nothing to do with the ability of the soldiers, it has everything to do with the personalities of soldiers, especially young soldiers, and the ability of the army to form soldiers into teams.

I truly hope that the authors of this policy are ready to accept the blood on their hands when this is implemented, because it isn't going to be pretty.

[smokey the elder]

I believe there are military SOPs for hetero relationships. Could these not be adapted to include all relationships? Male/female relationships are not problem-free (re: the Marine who allegedly murdered his pregnant girlfriend/fiancee/SO.)

I think homophobia is just silly on the face of it. What are straights/heteros afraid of anyway? That a gay person is going to steal one's SO? That's about how much sense it makes to me.

[Lady's Human]

I believe there are military SOPs for hetero relationships. Could these not be adapted to include all relationships? Male/female relationships are not problem-free (re: the Marine who allegedly murdered his pregnant girlfriend/fiancee/SO.)

I think homophobia is just silly on the face of it. What are straights/heteros afraid of anyway? That a gay person is going to steal one's SO? That's about how much sense it makes to me.

Personal relationships are not just SOP material, the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is very specific about interpersonal relationships.

It's very difficult to explain to someone who hasn't been through basic training (Real basic training, not the BS courses you can go to for a fee to see what it's like, taught by REAL army sergeants.......LMAO) how dangerous this could be. Soldiers who volunteer to be on the pointy end of things are not exactly your run of the mill people, it is an intensely alpha male environment, and soldiers will take things into their own hands if there's someone who they don't think fits into their team.

To quote a tanker, you're in the field for weeks on end with four guys in a small space, how would you like it if you thought the loader who's staring at the TC's butt for weeks on end was checkin you out? Ain't gonna deal with that, bro.

[Catherinedana]

To quote a tanker, you're in the field for weeks on end with four guys in a small space, how would you like it if you thought the loader who's staring at the TC's butt for weeks on end was checkin you out? Ain't gonna deal with that, bro.

Then the problem is here. . .and it's a matter of prejudice and wrong-thinking, caused by some irrational fear? Who knows. Does everyone out there who is not gay really believe that a gay man has no control over his sexual urges? In a word, ridiculous.

[Lady's Human]

It may be ridiculous to you, but there are many, many things in the military a civilian would find ridiculous.

[Catherinedana]

It may be ridiculous to you, but there are many, many things in the military a civilian would find ridiculous.

I am absolutely clueless regarding military life and responsibilities so I guess I can only speak from my own civilian and very liberal up-bringing. Guess that's why it doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps having such a diversity of people in my life has made me immune to some of the differences? I just can't think in that direction. . . and sometimes it is very hard for me to hear others speak negatively about people because of beliefs or orientations or making sweeping, all-inclusive statements like the one I quoted previously. ?Sometimes I forget that my experience is not everyone's experience. My bad, as they say.

[Puckstop31]

Then the problem is here. . .and it's a matter of prejudice and wrong-thinking, caused by some irrational fear? Who knows. Does everyone out there who is not gay really believe that a gay man has no control over his sexual urges? In a word, ridiculous.

To answer this and all the similar comments....

It doesn't matter if it's 'irrational'. All that matters is that it WILL happen. There is simply no way to explain what it means to be part of a team on the pointy end of the spear unless you have been there. ANYthing that takes focus off the mission is a hazard. Are there other things, not related in any way to DADT that cause lack of focus? Sure. Is it a good idea to add another in one fell swoop? Probably not.

LH mentioned a story about a tanker.... I was an armor crewman (tanker) most of my military career. LH is right. There is little like the need to act as one as there is in a tank crew. The crew needs to act in harmony to get the job done. Personally, I would have no problem with a open homosexual on my crew, as long as he was just another guy in the crew. If they want to shove their sexuality around, problem. But that's just me. I worked with other, otherwise OUTSTANDING soldiers, who would have a huge issue with having gay crewmembers.


__


Like I said in my original couple of posts... In the long term, this is probably a good thing as long as it is implemented slowly and on the forces terms. Because, as has been said, this has ZERO to do with the physical or mental ability of homosexuals to perform the job. Its about what it does to team dynamics.

[wombat2u2004]

Wiki is that not reliable Kev.
If you read the histories of Alexander, he actually formed that crack fighting regiment out of handpicked gay men (and of course in those days, especially in Greece / Macedonia, gay men were a majority).
The idea was.......that the men of that regiment were paired off....one old, but experienced soldier, and one young inexperienced soldier who was much fitter. The two became lovers, and actually protected each other in battle.
The whole system was based on that pairs teamwork. This regiment often surrounded Alexander, and were his elite bodyguards, and were used mainly for skirmishing and Alexanders protection. They were different from the other regiments that Alexander used on the field in the formation of the phalanx, where 12' long sarisas (thrusting spears) were used. The Companions, not being a part of the main phalanx were much lighter armed, and employed swordsmen, stone slingers and light cavalry.

[Cataholic]

As to eliminating don't ask don't tell, it has nothing to do with the ability of the soldiers, it has everything to do with the personalities of soldiers, especially young soldiers, and the ability of the army to form soldiers into teams.

Don't gay people do 'teamwork'?

[Lady's Human]

Don't gay people do 'teamwork'?

Not even remotely the point.

Anything which the members of the team can't handle (personality quirks in particular) becomes dangerously abrasive, and frequently leads to confrontation. Confrontation in teams which are full of people trained to kill people and break things gets ugly rapidly.

[LokiDog]

I have a solution. End all war on the planet. That way we would have no need for the military in any form. Just service organizations to respond to natural disasters and such.

But aside from that - people are people, gay or straight, black or white...
PEOPLE should have the right to pursue any occupation they desire.

[Lady's Human]

But aside from that - people are people, gay or straight, black or white...
PEOPLE should have the right to pursue any occupation they desire.

In an ideal world, yes.

But in an ideal world, we wouldn't need the military.

As an aside, does that mean my wife, who has a minor physical disability, should be able to be a soldier if she wants?

Or should I be able to be an F-15 pilot, despite the fact I wear glasses?