Repeal of DADT

Huh...so not ONE word about this from the GLBTEIEO group on here? Why is that? I mean, to the conservative gays I know, this was a pretty big deal and something to be celebrated.

My theory is that anything 'masculine' is viewed with contempt by the 'gay main stream'...oh yes, we are all up in arms over gay marriage (civil unions are just completely out of the question of course..>MUST be "MARRIAGE") but taking up arms for your country? that's soooo passe', right?

not a whisper from any of you?

wow...

well! whether you 'approve' of it or not...

congratulations on this milestone!

 

May be because we (gay military folks) are busy accepting this emotionally (and celebrating). This isn't the kind of thing that leads to instant expressions which most 'straight' people could actually relate to. Give it time... you'll hear more from us than you will likely want to.

Like I said, most people are out in the REAL world (not that the internet isn't a part of reality) taking this all in. They'll be posting on the internet more heavily in the coming days/weeks.

Nah... "masculine" is sexy and interesting to MANY gay people. And believe me, the military is full of "masculine" (gay/straight). It's just that the 'internet' isn't the place where most of us are sharing our views right now.

Seriously, I'm quietly but eagerly paying attention to my actual military unit, to see even the most subtle effects on my troops. I'm sure the gay troops are excited/relieved, but we all are carefully regarding this major change in our social culture. The training leading up to this was VERY good... but now we're putting all of that into 'action', in real-time. In general, I'd say that it feels really really good!!

And the straight troops are taking it all in stride; in fact, there is a heightened atmosphere of calmness in my unit. I see them joking about it already. That's a good sign around there.

LOL!! Not really; it's more like.... YAY!!!

Thank you, and thank you America!!!

 

As a gay conservative, I am largely indifferent to this issue. I still think we should defer to the military, but Obama is Commander in Chief...he is the boss of the military as the President, and thats how it should be. His word should be law. The military is not it's own government...it is subordinate to the civilian population, and the President is the voice of that population.

That being said, gay support for this is not as universal as the media might have you believe. I do know gays in the military who think this is a bad idea...that it will cause more problems than it solves.

 

I have to agree here. Masculine-anything is coveted in the gay community. If you put two identical-looking gay men together and ask random homos which one is hotter, they will almost always go for whichever is more masculine. While a lot of gay men are effeminate, they are mostly attracted to masculine men.

 

There WILL be 'some' problems at first; but the military is about solutions which lead to proper function. And as we know from history, the military has frequently led the way in implementing social-solutions to what the civilian sector often views as being insurmountable problems. This feels a lot like the time where 'women' started becoming a major component of the military (but better overall). This seems to be taken more in-stride than that was.

It's not that I'm not concerned about problems (they will come), but I'm out here in the trenches... charged with working the solutions. I can tell you or anyone (civilian or military) this change is not being pursued in some blind fashion. It was well thought-out and people are STILL thinking.

 

This is amazing!

 

Is that true? I thought the opposite was the case.

 

To all you guys currently serving...Congratulations.

I wish it had happened 30 years ago.

 

Thank You!!

 

No way. If you are gay and masculine, you already have an advantage in the gay dating arena. A lot of gays make a big show about wanting someone who is "cultured" or "refined" or whatever...but sexually, they are attracted to masculinity. This is so common it has become a cliche. They might settle for a fruity guy that they like a lot, but all other things being equal, they prefer masculine men.

There are exceptions. There are masculine gays that like effeminate guys, but they are few and far between.

 

There weren't any conservatives celebrating this abomination. Homosexuals and their gullible supporters were celebrating openly, and America's enemies abroad celebrated among themselves, but no conservative worthy of the name is foolish enough to see this as anything but poisonous to military morale.

 

Interesting to know.

Then conservatives need to shut up and get over themselves. Real conservatives aren't religious bigots-- they're believers in individual liberty.

 

What you mean, of course, is that conservatives need either to pretend to see the Emperor's royal finery or to be "re-educated" so they can "see" it like the Emperor's fawning subjects.

Obviously, but like leftists, faux conservatives conflate liberty, which cannot exist without rectitude, with license, to which rectitude is inimical.

 

You want rectitude, pursue it yourself. You have no right to abridge others' liberties. The government should not promote your definition of sexual righteousness any more than it should mine. But as long as it's in that business it has to promote them equally.

You don't need reeducation, you just need to stop worrying about other people's bedroom manner.

 

You don't, you won't have liberty either. Enjoy.

And neither have I proposed to, obviously.

This is too nonsensical to bother trying to unravel.

No, you need to stop worrying that someone, somewhere, may be so rude as to see perversion for what it is, and to be so impolitic as to call a spade a spade in public.

 

You define perversion how, exactly? You deny homosexuals the same respect offered to heterosexuals because of...? The bible? I hope you aren't that pathetic. A loving, consensual, stable relationship is just that, and no one relationship is any more perverted than any other to an objective observer interested in human happiness, liberty, and moral beauty... at least not by your truly perverted metrics.

 

You are spot-on correct! Bravo!

 

You are correct again! All of this "going-after" homosexuality and homosexuals, is typically hypocritical and unjust. People won't even clean up their own moral-failings... yet, they see extreme and unwarranted value in pursuing and attempting to change or affect "homosexuals"; it is apparently INSANE ARROGANCE in motion.

 

I expect this to be a total non-factor in the long run. I don't see a whole lot of gay people suddenly rushing to join the military. I think this was more about having something to complain about than anything that was honestly intended to be used. In other words, protesting just for the sake of protesting even if you have little to no use for the spoils of the outcome.

 

I reasonably happy to tell you, that I've know a significant number of homosexual people who were/are in the military. Being in the military isn't something that homosexual people clamor to do, not anymore than heterosexual people. Homosexual people (like most others who join the military), join for a variety of reasons not associated with their 'sexuality'.

The significance of DADT being repealed, is that less-than-ever... one's sexuality is matters. Being "gay" or "straight" doesn't define one's value as a soldier (alone)... but it is part of what defines an individual (and that is very important).

There is no more rush today, than there has ever been... but I've known more than a few gay troops in my military career, which is 3+ decades long now.

Your 'thinking' is faulty. You need to 're-think' your view here period.

Okay, you keep 'thinking' that. (Sigh.)

 

Any compulsion motivated by enmity with conscience. Obviously that casts a far wider net than even sexual perversion in general, but most people don't go that extra perverted mile by proudly declaring their perversion and insisting that others see it as acceptable.

No I don't. They deny that to themselves by that very profession.

You have no idea what that means.

 

gay men are still men

they will hump anything that breathes

 

Haha! Well, I guess that generalization always applies in the aggregate.

I think you'd make a very interesting teacher, lol.

 

Show that your definition applies universally to homosexual relationships. I'm not even sure how it'd apply to any relationship (except, perhaps, a rebound relationship after a break-up).

Furthermore, please elucidate this whole 'love' thing for me. My profound ignorance betrayed me. How does it work again? How can I, like you, develop an omniscient awareness of gays and their relationships so that I, too, can tell that they're all lying?

 

You might as well glue your eyes shut and then demand I show you that the sky is blue.

Your problem isn't what you don't know, it's what you "know for sure" that just ain't so, and don't dare to disbelieve because you're emotionally invested in the lies you've been taught.