Town Square

Post a New Topic

Nothing wrong with DADT

Original post made by Resident, Another Pleasanton neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2010

I just saw a post about urging senators to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with DADT. Given that it is such a controversial issue (gay rights), I feel that it is not harmful to have a policy where you simply don't disclose your sexual preference in the military. Our military personnel should focus on their job exclusively and not be concerned about whether someone is homosexual or not - again, since people are divided on this issue.

I am all for gay rights, I voted against prop. 8, and I did not vote for McCain, but I don't see anything wrong with DADT. Perhaps someone can let me know what the arguments against it are?

Comments (23)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by unclehomerr..
a resident of Downtown
on Dec 1, 2010 at 1:44 pm


We're afraid they'll want to wear camo tutu's and lipstick.

unclehomerr..


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Martin
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 1, 2010 at 2:20 pm

Being black was a controversial issue for our armed forces. Wouldn't it have been great if black people weren't so obviously black, then instead of allowing black men to fight alongside white men, and eat in the same canteens (gag!) we could have just used Don't Ask, Don't Tell there, too.
And if women weren't so obviously female, instead of integrating women to some degree in the armed forces, we could have just told them to keep their femaleness (gag!) quiet.
Wouldn't it be great if all 'questionable issue' human traits were the kind that could be hidden? We wouldn't have had to legally integrate black people and women into the armed forces.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by b
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 1, 2010 at 2:31 pm

Because good soldiers who want to serve their country are being kicked out of the armed services for a really dumb reason.

And it's mean.

And discriminatory.

And not what our nation is supposed to stand for.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Cholo
a resident of Livermore
on Dec 1, 2010 at 6:24 pm

I can't imagine any responsible American voter that doesn't know what the arguments are for/against DADT?

How come you bothered to vote if you don't know the issues?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 1, 2010 at 11:21 pm

Martin:

I understand your point, but I think being openly gay in the military would be different than being a woman or black. Why? Well, you must share bathrooms, sleeping quarters.

Women would probably not feel comfortable having to shower in the same facilities as men, or sleeping next to them, right? So how is that different from a guy not feeling comfortable sleeping next to another guy who is openly gay?

I do not justify the anti-gay feelings, but they are there and cannot be ignored. For the safety and comfort of our military personnel, I believe it is better if sexual orientation is kept confidential. Women will share bathrooms, showers and sleeping quarters with other women and men will share showers, etc, with other men, and they should be able to do so without having to worry about who is homosexual.

Again, a woman would probably not be comfortable showering in front of a guy, so how is showering in front of another female who likes females any different? Same goes for guys.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Martina
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 8:39 am

Hmm...we need Thought Transmitters. I am a heterosexual female. I could sleep next to most men and not have a sexual thought about them, because I am physically attracted to only a small fraction of the men I come in contact with. So, a homosexual woman showering next to me may or may not be attracted to me. How can I know whether to feel uncomfortable or not?
We need a way to know people's thoughts. The military may be working on this. We may find out that even people who identify as heterosexual have the occasional thought that could be classified as 'homosexual'. Then what? And how about bisexuals? They can't sleep or shower with anybody!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 9:22 am

Good for you Martina. But I am sure most females would not feel comfortable having to sleep or shower with guys. In fact, my cousin (female) who is in the military says they have separate quarters for guys and women. If you are OK sharing sleeping facilities and showering with guys, good for you, but don't expect everyone else to feel the same way.

Being uncomfortable showering in front of, or sleeping next to, a person of the opposite sex has nothing to do with whether people are attracted to each other or not. How many guys do you know would be comfortable with letting females walk through the bathrooms when they are using the urinals? Again, depends on the guy, but there is a reason we have separate bathroom facilities for men and women.

And if you are perfectly comfortable sleeping next to, or showering in front of, another female who happens to like females, good for you, but again, don't expect everyone to feel the same way. Some may be quite uncomfortable, and do we really want our military staff to be uncomfortable and worrying about this kind of stuff? I do not, I want the military staff to focus on their job, especially when they are in a war zone.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Martin/a
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 11:18 am

If you don't know if someone's gay, then you have to wonder, "Is that person looking at me showering and just thinking your basic, average, everyday heterosexual thoughts... OR are they thinking homosexual thoughts, like they want to jump me, NOW!"
Wouldn't you rather know, so you can scream, "No! Stop! Don't even THINK those thoughts about me!"?
If we don't know who's gay, anybody and everybody could be guilty of looking at us 'that way,' you know, and secretly wanting our bodies.
I'd rather know so, while I'm showering, I can modestly turn my back (wait, my butt is cute-that won't work) and put out my hand in a STOP formation and say, "I know you're gay and therefore you want me, badly. Please turn so you can't see my cute butt."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Agree with b
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 11:52 am

"Posted by b, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, 21 hours ago

Because good soldiers who want to serve their country are being kicked out of the armed services for a really dumb reason.

And it's mean.

And discriminatory.

And not what our nation is supposed to stand for."

Exactly. And I'd add that to ask someone, especially a serviceman/woman overseas and away from their family, to be forced to NOT talk about their family and friends when others can openly talk about the family and friends they are missing; to live in fear that their fellow soldiers will overhear them talking to a loved one or see an email to/from a loved one, to feel that they must lie or create a phony name to cover up ("don't tell") when speaking to a loved one on the phone... that all of this is inhumane, when they are making sacrifices on OUR behalf.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Martin/a
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 12:51 pm

First of all, Resident, I give you credit for your polite responses when I've been so sarcastic. You are obviously a secure person. Secure people do not become rude when discussing an issue and I admire you for that.
I just noticed that you contradicted yourself in your last post. You wrote "being uncomfortable showering in front of a person of the opposite sex has nothing to do with whether people are attracted to each other or not."
Okay, so women showering with women shouldn't be a problem. They are the same sex.
You wrote, "whether people are attracted to each other or not" has nothing to do with being uncomfortable showering together. Lesbians showering with non-lesbian women works then, according to you.
But wait! Then you write, "And if you are perfectly comfortable sleeping next to, or showering in front of, another female who happens to LIKE females, good for you, but again, don't expect everyone to feel the same way."
So it IS about "People being attracted to each other"!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Lisa
a resident of Canyon Oaks
on Dec 2, 2010 at 2:28 pm

I think the fight or flight reaction of humans in a war zone cannot be derailed by worrying about whether a colleague may or may not be admiring their biceps. I think the bullet headed their way will temporarily focus their minds.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 2:44 pm

Martin/a:

I don't think I am contradicting myself.

Call it old fashioned, but that is the way I see it, and that is the way I am sure many see it. It takes a very strong individual to be comfortable showering in front of, or sleeping next to, a person of the opposite gender, or in front of/next to, someone from the same gender who acts like the opposite gender - even if no physical attraction exists between them.

I would rather not know that the person of the same gender as me, who is sleeping next to me, whom I am showering in front of, is homosexual. My (female) cousin sees it that way too, and she is already part of the military. It is the military personnel we should focus on. No one, especially during war, should be forced to be uncomfortable when showering, going to the bathroom, sleeping. We need our military staff to focus on on thing only: their job.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Agree with b
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 3:31 pm

Resident said "We need our military staff to focus on on thing only: their job." I agree totally. Stop forcing our dedicated military personnel who also happen to be gay to have to worry constantly about being "outed and ousted" and let them concentrate on their job.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 5:05 pm

Agree with b:

OK, so to make everyone happy and so that no one is uncomfortable, let's have a repeal of DADT, BUT:

We need the military to have 4 separate quarters: one for heterosexual women, one for heterosexual men, one for homosexual men, one for homosexual women.

That way the heterosexual men and women do not have to be uncomfortable when sleeping or using the shower. And that way the gay men and women who feel discriminated against will no longer feel this way.

Is this a good compromise? It may be costly but definitely necessary if a repeal of DADT moves forward.

Otherwise, repealing DADT and forcing people like my cousin to be uncomfortable can only mean trouble for the military.

Again: you would never ask a heterosexual man and a heterosexual woman to share a shower, or sleeping quarters, right? So why would you ask a heterosexual man and a homosexual man to do so? Or force a heterosexual female to shower in front of a homosexual female?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Martin/a
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 7:33 pm

Let's not forget our bisexual soldiers.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Tormentor
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 2, 2010 at 10:29 pm

Wouldn't having separate quarters for homosexual women and homosexual men equal in effect to putting heterosexual men and women in the same quarters?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Really?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 3, 2010 at 6:20 pm

I am wondering why the concern over "feeling comfortable" while sleeping/showering in the same quarters with gay service men and women. Haven't they already been sleeping/showering in the same quarters? Are they in some kind of danger?

The DADT is about discrimination and this kind of treatment is acceptable for people who are sacrificing their lives for our country? Aren't military personnel heroes for upholding all Americans' freedoms, yet not their own fellow soldiers?


How funny that there would be such a worry over homosexuals and feeling "uncomfortable" when the real threat comes from heterosexuals. Now here is a DADT that we should be outraged over! Web Link


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ernest
a resident of Amador Estates
on Dec 3, 2010 at 11:25 pm

Clearly, have many rapists in the military is not a pressing problem for the American public. We have our priorities.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Just in case
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 3, 2010 at 11:49 pm

...folks are too lazy/too pressed for time to click on the link provided by Really?, here is an excerpt from the article he/she references:
"Experts offer many theories for the causes: that military culture is intrinsically violent and hypermasculine, that the military is slow to identify potential risks among raw young recruits, that too many commanders would rather look the other way than acknowledge a breakdown in their units, that it has simply not been made a high enough priority. "A lot of my male colleagues believe that the only thing a general needs to worry about is whether he can win a war"

So, wow, incredible to read that the threat of sexual assault/feeling of "discomfort" doesn't come from solely from "same-sex" advances in the barracks, but from hypermasculine advances on female soldiers and perhaps just too much testosterone floating all about, perhaps some of it enhanced by artificial steroids?




 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 4, 2010 at 6:31 am

Just in case:

For women, it continues to be tough in the military, and we certainly do not need to add to that the fact that they may now be forced to share showers and sleeping quarters with someone who, although may be of the same gender, acts like a guy in her sexual preferences.

I read arguments about discrimination, how this is all about making gays feel better and not feel discriminated against. That is all fine, but what about the rest? Are we seriously going to make some happy at the expense of the rest? It is just as valid for my female cousin to ask NOT to be placed in the same sleeping quarters or forced to take showers in front of, homosexual women, than it is for a gay person to ask that his/her sexual preferences be known and respected.

I have been reading about it, and it seems that (I could be wrong but that is what I read) DADT (which passed under democrat Clinton) was a way to allow gays to serve in the military. So it was a good thing, but the gay community wants more. Fine, but again, don't do it at the expense of the rest.

You want DADT repealed? Go ahead, but make accomodations for the many heterosexal men and women who do not want to be forced to share quarters with homosexual men and women.

Will any of the people in favor of repealing DADT ever dare ask a woman to get dressed, or shower in front of a man? Would you really force her to do so? Wouldn't that be considered sexual harassment? So why would forcing a woman to shower or dress in front of a homosexual woman be any different?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 9, 2010 at 4:01 pm

The repeal failed:

Web Link

While I don't usually side with republicans, I am glad they successfully interfered with the repeal of DADT


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Oak Hill
on Dec 9, 2010 at 5:04 pm

Being neutral in this matter, I have a simple question: If you were pinned down in a fire fight, who would you prefer to provide cover fire while you attempted to haul your butt out of there???

1. Straight rifleman/woman

2. Gay rifleman/woman

By the way, how many of you have served in the military with both...

Yep, I have, with no problems, and this was many years ago before DADT was even a thought in someone's mind...

As long as you carry out your assignment in the mission, as far as I'm concerned, you can be whatever "sexual" you prefer...

Just my opinion...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by mooseturd
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Dec 18, 2010 at 3:28 pm

mooseturd is a registered user.

Dear Resident,
The repeal didn't fail. It passed.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Measure BB could pay to connect Dublin Boulevard to Livermore
By Tim Hunt | 6 comments | 1,418 views

Me, Mother & Eleanor Roosevelt
By Roz Rogoff | 7 comments | 1,080 views

“…and all I ask of dyin’, is to go naturally” *
By Tom Cushing | 14 comments | 1,055 views