Don't ask, don't tell, don't persueFollow

I'm nice. I give my husband one half of the bathroom counter. All the drawers and cabinets are mine, though.

Hrm

Edited, Oct 10th 2011 6:09pm by Jophiel

because all male on male sexual violence is due to homosexuality...

All arguments against DADT Repeal have nothing to do with DADT Repeal. This is easy!

Edit: Actually, twelve pages and I can safely say that all discussion about DADT has nothing to do with DADT.

Edited, Oct 10th 2011 8:28pm by lolgaxe

What does this mean, gay men are raping women? I'm lost.

I kinda said just the opposite. See, I said a guy would NOT get away with raping a woman in the military. I do agree that a man will be less likely to come forward, though.

I think what gbaji is saying that american soldiers are more likely to rape than their allied counterparts. In fact, the only thing stopping the gay rape was DADT.

Trust him, he's an expert on these things

I was referencing both. You're purposely trying to make a non existing difference. If you want to deny the fact that people can't openly talk about sex without repercussions, then so be it. Just don't project your ignorance unto others.



Easy, I'll break it down by categories.

A. Sex/sexual:

1. A woman is not authorized to participate in every role as a man can. I don't know of any action which has a ***** requirement. If a man can't meet the standard, then he is either recycled, re-classed or kicked out. So, if a woman can meet those standards, then why is she not allowed to participate?

2. A woman is authorized to have longer hair along with other aesthetic and uniform rules and regulations that is not applicable for a man.

3. In certain environments, sexual encounters are only authorized to married couples. So, if you're single, no sex for you.

4. Married servicemen or people with dependents get paid more money

5. #4 doesn't apply to homosexual couples (except for children)

6. Just the other day, our local translators were moved from one unit to another unit for being too attractive and being a "distraction".


B. Religion

1. People of certain faith can be authorized to have facial hair.

2. People of certain faith can be authorized to wear different head gear, i.e. Turbans, Kippas.

3. Previously in some of my training environments, Jews were given alternate choices of food (Kosher). If you weren't Jewish (had to have had "Jewish" on your dog tags), then you didn't have that option.

4. Previously in some of my training environments, time was made on Sundays for people to attend Church. If you chose not to go to Church or worshiped on another day (Wednesday/Friday)then you didn't have that time off.

5. The military only acknowledges certain religions, therefore there are not Chaplain representation or practices for those religions not acknowledged.

C. "Fat" People

1. The Army has height and weight standards that if you don't make it, you must get tapped for body fat percentage. If you don't make tape, then you can get chaptered. It doesn't matter if you meet every physical requirement (which many do) and the best at your job, you can get kicked out. Just like LolGaxe said with vaginal sex, this is typically only used on "dirt bags" that we want out anyway, but it's still a rule. Even if you meet the body fat percentage, you will more than likely be treated like trash, openly in your face.

2. Along that note, from my PERSONAL OBSERVATION, women seem to be affected the most. Unless you're a skinny track star, you will be taped. If she has a J-Lo booty, Beyonce thighs and/or Shakira hips, then she probably wont make height and weight. Now, she isn't treated the same way as the dude that's a fatty-fat-fat-fat, but she's sweating during weigh in.

D. Nationality/skin color/ethnicity/family background

1. Your nationality and/or family relatives might prevent you from obtaining a clearance which is important for positions/jobs.

2. Foreign born citizens can't be the Commander-in-Chief

3. People of certain nationalities will be more desired to do any foreign local activities/positions.



I'm sure there's much more than I'm not thinking about, these are just what came to mind.



No. The compromise was that no one was going to ask or pursue your sexuality, not that it was ok to be gay. Once again, if it were "ok", then you wouldn't be kicked out. There's a difference between being "openly gay" and gay. If SGT Smith was caught kissing another woman on the sly, that isn't the same as being "openly gay".



Read above.



No where did I mention "civil unions". I'm talking about marriages. A heterosexual man is bound to the same marriage laws as a homosexual man. They are the same exact argument. I'm saying exactly what you're saying.According to your logic, the repeal of DADT is equal because it affects both sexes equally. That's the same argument that I've used for SSM. The difference is that I acknowledge the difference between equality and fairness. They are equal, but not fair.

You agree with me.



How is that logical? Are you separated in the work office because of plumbing? What's the difference? How is sitting on a chair different from sitting on a chair?



Read above. That is not a logical explanation. Our plumbing doesn't change outside the shower. So why are we segregated in the showers but not outside the shower?

No, being the U.S. military is adequate justification for taking away someone's freedoms. As I said, if people don't like it, then there should be a plan to change the foundation, not nit-picking certain things. That only makes it worse.



? What? men room with men, women room with women. I'm not sure what you don't believe.





Learn to read?



That's true in or out of the military. Most men are not willing to admit to being raped.



It's the only reason.



Because of DADT. How does anyone know that you're a couple? Many barracks forbid people of the opposite sex in there without being signed in and/or door being opened. If you're a ****, you can do whatever you want in your own privacy. A **** can request to change out roommates with his "battle buddy" and it CAN get approved. If his "battle buddy" is a female that is highly unlikely to happen.

That's how that's discrimination. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

Two unrelated topics.

I just can't figure out what peeing in the middle of an office has to do with showering.

No, the fact that it's the military allows it the latitude to take away someone's freedoms; it doesn't provide the justification. If they decided tomorrow that Catholics have to sleep on the floor or Asians aren't allowed to eat four days out of seven, it wouldn't be allowed "because it's the military!" without some strong justification as to why this is required. On the other hand, if they had some stellar reason, it could be potentially allowed whereas a private employer wouldn't ever get away with it.

Maybe you should read the quoted text I was referring to instead of just word-vomiting defenses.