The LGBT Military Shower Debate
Quote: ams288Definition of bigotry:
Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust, hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's opinion, ethnicity, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.
Wow, that sounds exactly like the way you guys treat Christians, Mormons, social conservatives, etc. Thanks for identifying your behavior!
Sexuality is a hot topic, and I wouldn't be surprised if I'm overridden and this thread is locked. However, there is something worth value here. If we can keep on it, then we'll see where this goes. But this sniping back and forth is verging on violating the "Attack the writing, not the writer" rule.
Take a breath. Recalibrate. Resume.
Quote: Beethoven9thQuote: ams288Definition of bigotry:
Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust, hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's opinion, ethnicity, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics.
Wow, that sounds exactly like the way you guys treat Christians, Mormons, social conservatives, etc. Thanks for identifying your behavior!
Glad to see you've accepted that it wasn't a personal insult against you and that I was just calling a spade a spade.
Quote: Face/sigh. Don't make me regret making this a thread =/
Sexuality is a hot topic, and I wouldn't be surprised if I'm overridden and this thread is locked. However, there is something worth value here. If we can keep on it, then we'll see where this goes. But this sniping back and forth is verging on violating the "Attack the writing, not the writer" rule.
Take a breath. Recalibrate. Resume.
Okay - I'll take a break for a bit.
I feel like I've already won the battle anyways.
Sure, now I know that it's not against forum rules to call someone a "bigot" as you did here:Quote: ams288Glad to see you've accepted that it wasn't a personal insult against you and that I was just calling a spade a spade.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/off-topic/17450-the-lgbt-military-shower-debate/#post340326
Since there are no repercussions for calling someone a "bigot", don't whine when I come back at some point & do the same to you. ;)
Why? Because you called someone a "bigot" without getting suspended?Quote: ams288I feel like I've already won the battle anyways.
Quote: ams288You are absolutely bigoted against gays.
Personal insult. Three-day suspension.
Happy Saint Patrick's Day!
Should openly gay men be allowed to be pediatricians? Massage therapists? X-ray technicians? TSA agents?
Same question for 'closeted gay men'?
And the talk went to SHOWERING WITH GAYS
My comment and question.....is showering the least of out worries. Whether its gays mixed in with men or women mixed in with men.....doesnt this lead to distraction. And in the military....doesnt distraction cost lives?
I admit I was never in the military....so I ask people who were actually serving our nation.
But if a man falls in love with a woman or another man in their troop......even without reciprocation....just gets a crush on them from afar.
When in combat....does looking out for the one you love, the one you fantasize about marrying when the war is over,......put the rest of the troop in jeopardy?
So if you are in a foxhole, and youhear a shot, and your eyes shoot to the man or woman you love to see if they are ok....losing a split second to focus in on seeing where the shooter is.....are you putting your fellow soldiers at greater risk.
Is there room for "falling in love" or having sexual feelings, for a fellow soldier in your troop.It happens in the workplace...why couldnt it happen in the field of combat.
I am not even worried about simple showers....I am worried about loss of lives.
( i am not sure if "troop" is the correct word so forgive a novice....but you get the idea)
Yes there are hetrerosexual male friends that might be concerned for each other as "best friends".....but bringing love and sexual attraction takes it to a whole new level.
Again I am just talking hypothetically...since I never was in the military, never was in combat....I am just going by my observance of human nature.
Quote: SOOPOOB9--- if I may ask you a few questions to extend this concept....
Should openly gay men be allowed to be pediatricians? Massage therapists? X-ray technicians? TSA agents?
Same question for 'closeted gay men'?
Sure, I don't see why not, as long as people aren't forced to go to any of them. In djatc's case, he and the rest of the guys were literally forced to shower with a gay guy, and that made them feel uncomfortable. It's the same type of discomfort a woman would feel if she had to shower with an unknown heterosexual man (even if he wasn't attracted to her), yet nobody would ridicule the woman for that.
*In the above list, TSA agents are a little different, although my problem is with the TSA in general, not just the gay agents.
Quote: WizardPersonal insult. Three-day suspension.
Happy Saint Patrick's Day!
I am not quarrelling with your rules. So I can avoid similar fate....I ask
if the person said
in my opinon you are bigoted against gays
or
you appear to be bigoted against gays
or
you are speaking like a bigoted person
is that better? I understand using insults like idiot, moron, or you can say"you are a moron" or "in my opinion you are a moron"......and no matter how you say it....it is an insult.
it seems we throw around the word bigot so much here on the surveys..
But to say that the military isn't professional enough to deal with a small contingent of gay members alongside the opposite sex is ludicrous. It's not like soldiers are not human. Most soldiers have family at home that they have to worry about. Army members have internet access. Should we prohibit communications with home especially if another family member is having issues? Isn't that distracting? Everyone has issues.
The fact that the people in your troop is gay (and always has been, thanks to don't ask, don't tell) should have no bearing in your line of work. When "don't ask, don't tell" was the rule of the day, did that prohibit relationships within the army? No. It was just hidden. Feelings would have been just the same.
It's a pile of manure, this gays in the military thing. Gays WERE in the military, and they still are. And America still has the best military in the world.
Quote: boymimboDoes distraction cost lives? Of course it does!!!
But to say that the military isn't professional enough to deal with a small contingent of gay members alongside the opposite sex is ludicrous. It's not like soldiers are not human. Most soldiers have family at home that they have to worry about. Army members have internet access. Should we prohibit communications with home especially if another family member is having issues? Isn't that distracting? Everyone has issues.
The fact that the people in your troop is gay (and always has been, thanks to don't ask, don't tell) should have no bearing in your line of work. When "don't ask, don't tell" was the rule of the day, did that prohibit relationships within the army? No. It was just hidden. Feelings would have been just the same.
It's a pile of manure, this gays in the military thing. Gays WERE in the military, and they still are. And America still has the best military in the world.
But we will never know if a man in love with another man put that man ahead of the troop...and lives were lost.
We have no idea if a man was in love with a woman, or vise versa.....and put the wellbeing of the other ahead of the troop.....losing lives by being distractied for a second or 2.
I agree it has been going on....secretly.....but were lives lost over that added distraction.??
Yes there are other "distractions" in life.....does that mean all distractions go. No limits? Its ok to bring video games on the battlefield and play them during the night in a foxhole. Or is it ok to have music headset on in the battle field...or is THAT distraction too much. All distractions are valid because some distactions exisit? Not very logical.
Quote: Beethoven9thSure, I don't see why not, as long as people aren't forced to go to any of them. In djatc's case, he and the rest of the guys were literally forced to shower with a gay guy, and that made them feel uncomfortable. It's the same type of discomfort a woman would feel if she had to shower with an unknown heterosexual man (even if he wasn't attracted to her), yet nobody would ridicule the woman for that.
*In the above list, TSA agents are a little different, although my problem is with the TSA in general, not just the gay agents.
So if I understand you correctly, the consumer has the right to know if his pediatrician/ x-ray technician/ massage therapist/ is gay or not? Before you get undressed for that x-ray you believe you have the right to ask the technician if he is gay?
I guess I am different from you. I do not care what the professional who is taking care of me does in his or her bedroom.
You know by now I am an anesthesiologist. Heterosexual. Would you feel comfortable with your 18 year old daughter undressing in front of me? In front of a gay male anesthesiologist? Heterosexual woman? Gay woman? I see people splayed out naked everyday. You do your job. You make people feel as comfortable as possible given the circumstances. You treat the person with all due respect. Just like I would expect from the gay military member who is showering with his straight brothers...
B9-- do you not have a single gay friend? No gay relative that you could get some insight from? Just asking.....
Quote: BuzzardLet's see. My wife is in greater danger, 2 other soldiers are in greater danger. Anybody doubt I'm gonna save Josie first ???
Couldn't you say the same thing about someone in the unit who you didn't get along with versus your best buddy in the same unit. Who you more likely to save first?
1948 .... "It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin."
Of course things remained about the same until the Korean war.
Quote: LarrySI am not quarrelling with your rules. So I can avoid similar fate....I ask
if the person said
in my opinon you are bigoted against gays
or
you appear to be bigoted against gays
or
you are speaking like a bigoted person
is that better?
Attaching the word "bigot" to another member in any way risks getting a suspension. If the member you're referring to really is speaking like a bigoted person, then his words should speak for themselves. You don't need to point it out. If you really want to shed light on somebody's bigotry then lead him down a line of questioning where he is cornered into making bigoted statements.
But for example if someone said..."the problems in this world always seems to be caused by jews".....and I say "you are an antisemite and dont deserve an exchange."
I have called a name...and I would be censored for a period of time.
now saying "you are an idiot" in response to that person would be name calling....a general slur not attached to anything specific..
so far I think I get it....and if I have to take a suspension for recognizing someone as a bigot or antisemite , or racist, based on their words....its better than name calling and calling them an idiot or moron....and I will sit it out.
thanks for the clarification....it avoids a PM in the future asking WTF happened.
However in this case, if you are saying that there is no evidence that anything bigoted was said....and the word was just thrown out there for no reason.......but in other cases where bigoted words were used....it would be ok to use the word in response.....that seems more reasonable
either way, i respect the rules and regs
Do they have many urinals?Quote: Dicenor33Europe has unisex restroom now. No signs for males, females only.
Quote: SanchoPanzaDo they have many urinals?
sure
Quote: wizardImage removed by management. Formal warning given that this is a family-friendly site.
Quote: LarrySOk I just wanted to clarify. Those are the rules and thats that.
But for example if someone said..."the problems in this world always seems to be caused by jews".....and I say "you are an antisemite and dont deserve an exchange."
I have called a name...and I would be censored for a period of time.
That is correct. You can say the statement doesn't deserve a response, but calling the person making the statement an anti-Semite will get you a suspension.
Quote:However in this case, if you are saying that there is no evidence that anything bigoted was said....and the word was just thrown out there for no reason.......but in other cases where bigoted words were used....it would be ok to use the word in response.....that seems more reasonable
As the above example should show, for purposes of forum rules, it doesn't matter whether the insult is true or not.
For example, recently one member said another member was "not a nice guy." I received a lengthy argument, with numerous examples, illustrating how the alleged victim truly wasn't a "nice person." We admins have better things to do than to conduct an investigation behind every alleged insult. They simply are not allowed, even if blatantly obviously true. The only permissible insult is to insult yourself.
Quote:either way, i respect the rules and regs
At least one person does.
Calling an anti-semite "anti-semite" is a personal insult? I'm super confused now. So someone can make vile racial comments, and if you say that they are racist, you are the one who gets suspended??? If they said the racist things, then they obviously are fine being called a racist.
This can't be right, can it?
Quote: LarrySI am not quarrelling with your rules. So I can avoid similar fate....I ask
if the person said
in my opinon you are bigoted against gays
or
you appear to be bigoted against gays
or
you are speaking like a bigoted person
is that better? I understand using insults like idiot, moron, or you can say"you are a moron" or "in my opinion you are a moron"......and no matter how you say it....it is an insult.
it seems we throw around the word bigot so much here on the surveys..
Mission, in a thread I had started a while back, stated that comparing someone to something is not the same as stating they are that "something"…therefore, based on that, you could say "You are acting like a bigoted person" without being sanctioned
But the military, where people are VOLUNTARILY joining, and are FORCED to shower there shouldn't be gay people in the shower with you. You can say "get over it" but no the guy or girl is putting their lives on the line for us so they deserve to have their views followed.
Quote: FinsRuleThis can't be right, can it?
It's right. In the case of somebody coming here and quoting Mein Kampf, remember that admins can, as a last resort, play the dictator card and nuke anybody for any reason they wish.
+1Quote: Lemieux66I take a middle of the road approach. If there are situations where showers are voluntary(such as school or sports locker rooms) then showering together is fine.
But the military, where people are VOLUNTARILY joining, and are FORCED to shower there shouldn't be gay people in the shower with you. You can say "get over it" but no the guy or girl is putting their lives on the line for us so they deserve to have their views followed.
No, didn't say that. But if the consumer somehow finds out that his health care provider is gay, then he has every right to say goodbye. Patients shouldn't be literally forced to see such a person if it makes them feel uncomfortable. (The same way it made djatc and the other guys feel uncomfortable, yet they had no say whatsoever in the matter, which is wrong.)Quote: SOOPOOSo if I understand you correctly, the consumer has the right to know if his pediatrician/ x-ray technician/ massage therapist/ is gay or not? Before you get undressed for that x-ray you believe you have the right to ask the technician if he is gay?
It would depend if my 18-year-old daughter felt uncomfortable in any of those circumstances. If she did, then so would I.Quote: SOOPOOYou know by now I am an anesthesiologist. Heterosexual. Would you feel comfortable with your 18 year old daughter undressing in front of me? In front of a gay male anesthesiologist? Heterosexual woman? Gay woman?
That brings me back to my point in a previous post. I don't get why it's so unreasonable to have gays shower amongst themselves. I can't understand why people were so progressive when it came to changing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" tradition, yet they all of a sudden become staunch upholders of tradition when it comes to the showering thing. Just separate gays and non-gays the same way we separate men and women. No one ever ridiculed women years ago for wanting separate showering facilities, so I don't get the double standard.Quote: SOOPOOJust like I would expect from the gay military member who is showering with his straight brothers...
An actual relative or friend? No, but I've worked with gays and gone to school with them before. I've also worked with and gone to school with religious people. (I don't belong to either group myself.)Quote: SOOPOOB9-- do you not have a single gay friend? No gay relative that you could get some insight from? Just asking.....
Regarding religious people, I'd say that maybe 10% of the religious people I've known in my life were outspoken in their views. However, even though I actually agree with them on most issues, such behavior is totally inappropriate in public. OTOH, when it comes to gays, I'd say that at least 50% (probably more like 60-70%) were outspoken in their views, which again is totally inappropriate. But in a sense, I consider that worse because that's exactly the type of behavior which they decry.
I guess my issue is, gays always want to have it both ways. Like that bill that got vetoed in Arizona. They kicked, screamed, and raised holy hell about "discrimination", yet I don't recall any of these people speaking out against that gay business owner who refused service to Susanna Martinez simply because he didn't like her political views. Now that's hypocrisy.
+10Quote: djatcI'm still not changing my opinion on the topic, right or wrong. Why should some of us have to bear the burden of this problem? I don't have a problem with whatever type of sexuality as long as it does not hurt anyone or break the law. I just don't want to have be in close quarters with someone who cannot control their hormones if males turn them on in a very private setting.
Quote: Beethoven9th
I guess my issue is, gays always want to have it both ways. Like that bill that got vetoed in Arizona. They kicked, screamed, and raised holy hell about "discrimination", yet I don't recall any of these people speaking out against that gay business owner who refused service to Susanna Martinez simply because he didn't like her political views. Now that's hypocrisy.
So any group which shows inconsistency can be discounted?
Hilarious.
Quote: rxwineSo any group which shows inconsistency can be discounted criticized?
Fixed.
I guess whole shower example is that the based on the idea that people don't want to need to be nude around folks who find them sexually attractive. Not an unreasonable idea. However, what are the implications of such a policy?
"It is unjust to be forced to be nude with someone who might find them sexually attractive."
I think it would mean all Homosexuals and Bisexuals would need their own individual locker rooms.
First, the easy example, a bisexual:
-They can't be in a locker room with anyone since conceivably they could be attracted to anyone male or female.
Second, a homosexual:
-They can't be with the opposite gender because that would be unjust to the homosexual as they possibly an object of desire for the heterosexual folks.
-Similarly they can't be in a locker room with heterosexual members of their gender since that would be unjust to the straight folks.
-Lastly, they can't be in a locker room with homosexual members of their own gender since that would be unjust to anyone in that room.
I see two logical remedies:
-All people should have individual dressing rooms
-All people should learn that being nude around someone who is interested in your gender is not problematic so long as they don't make any unwanted advances.
Modesty makes plenty of sense in many cases. At our core most folks are only slightly more restrained than apes. Having rules helps our society function better. And that should be the fundamental goal of all societal rules, to help the society function better. Exclusion of groups of people almost always limits the value of free markets and human beings in general.
It is more costly to teach people to shoot using whichever eye they are best with. However the military is better off because by not excluding people without the "proper dominant eye" we get more soldiers, and in turn more effective soldiers. Similarly, I would guess the least costly course of action is to try to teach everyone to behave themselves properly in delicate situations and be open-minded about differences. I would much rather have someone covering my back in a firefight (man or woman, gay or straight) than no one at all.
Edited: formatting and spelling
Quote: endermikeFirst, the easy example, a bisexual:
-They can't be in a locker room with anyone since conceivably they could be attracted to anyone male or female.
Second, a homosexual:
-They can't be with the opposite gender because that would be unjust to the homosexual as they possibly an object of desire for the heterosexual folks.
-Similarly they can't be in a locker room with heterosexual members of their gender since that would be unjust to the straight folks.
-Lastly, they can't be in a locker room with homosexual members of their own gender since that would be unjust to anyone in that room.
I see two logical remedies:
-All people should have individual dressing rooms
-All people should learn that being nude around someone who is interested in your gender is not problematic so long as they don't make any unwanted advances.
Nice breakdown. It shows how absurd the rationale behind this kind of segregation can become.
Quote: Beethoven9th
That brings me back to my point in a previous post. I don't get why it's so unreasonable to have gays shower amongst themselves. I can't understand why people were so progressive when it came to changing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" tradition, yet they all of a sudden become staunch upholders of tradition when it comes to the showering thing. Just separate gays and non-gays the same way we separate men and women. No one ever ridiculed women years ago for wanting separate showering facilities, so I don't get the double standard.
What makes you think having gays shower together is a solution. You have a group of people that can look at each other in a sexual manner. Can even have sex.
Isnt it conceivable that a gay man doesnt want to shower with a man that finds him sexually attractive. You make the assumption that all gays want to shower together. Thre are heterosexual men that dont want to be looked at sexually by other men, and there are gays that in this vebue doesnt want to be looked at sexually.
I think gays would be just as uncomfortable. Heck if all the gays shower together there is actually a chance of rape.
This isnt a friggen gay bathouse....its the army..people are focused on doing their jobs....supposedly.
Quote: LarrySWhat makes you think having gays shower together is a solution. You have a group of people that can look at each other in a sexual manner. Can even have sex.
Gays are 2-3% of the population, so it's a solution for the rest of the 97%. Also, I don't know of any incidents (documented or otherwise) of a gay guy in the military complaining about another gay guy making him feel uncomfortable.
Naaahhhh, not much of a double standard there, eh?Quote: endermikeSecond, a homosexual:
-They can't be with the opposite gender because that would be unjust to the homosexual as they possibly an object of desire for the heterosexual folks.
Discounting the fact that there isn't a special lesbian only shower, it's the same principal. They wouldn't like it.
Quote: Lemieux66Discounting the fact that there isn't a special lesbian only shower, it's the same principal. They wouldn't like it.
Exactly. I don't understand why it's OK for some people to feel uncomfortable (i.e., women), but not OK for others (i.e., men).
And worst of all, this comes from the crowd who claims to stand for "equal rights"!
Quote: Beethoven9thExactly. I don't understand why it's OK for some people to feel uncomfortable (i.e., women), but not OK for others (i.e., men).
And worst of all, this comes from the crowd who claims to stand for "equal rights"!
It's a woman's world. If they find it appropriate, men are looked at as bigots and pigheaded if they don't agree.
Quote: Beethoven9thRegarding religious people, I'd say that maybe 10% of the religious people I've known in my life were outspoken in their views. However, even though I actually agree with them on most issues, such behavior is totally inappropriate in public. OTOH, when it comes to gays, I'd say that at least 50% (probably more like 60-70%) were outspoken in their views, which again is totally inappropriate. But in a sense, I consider that worse because that's exactly the type of behavior which they decry.
And I'd say you pulled those numbers out of your behind. :p
Quote: ams288And I'd say you pulled those numbers out of your behind. :p
Yeah, I guess you know my personal experiences better than I do. *facepalm*
OUCH!.....I didn't see where he said he was raped by Trannys or Homos.Quote: s2dbakerI'm sorry that you were raped by the transgendered or homosexual people. Maybe if you work out a little more, you can fight off those advances.
If it happened DJ I'm sorry to. If you need to talk about it i'm here, but this would explain the Mazda Miata, or not, Perhaps you trying to lure some gay's into your car and enact revenge.
Gays in the Air Guard? I thought that's what the Navy was for?
It may be hard to find a few good men in the military but on the other hand it may be good to find a few hard men.
I know If I was the cutest guy in the squadron during a military battle, I would want a few gay's around, they might save me first. Saving Ryan's(Axels) Privates.
Seriously I have no problem with gay guys. I have had friends and relatives who are gay. I will admit I look at them a bit diffident, but I really don't give a ___ .I can suck it up while having to take a shower with them.(ok that came out wrong)
If I had a son I would not let him Shower with known gay men PERIOD. Would you? If not why?
Nor would I let him spend the night as a gay mans house. Would you? If not why? If any parent says yes, they are lying or messed up in the head.
Just like I wouldn't let my daughter stay at some str8 guys house.
Quote: AxelWolfIf any parent says yes, they are lying or messed up in the head.
I've been called worse.
Quote: FaceI've been called worse.
The question is were you rightly called so ?
