How does one's sexuality relate in any means to one's combat skills. Does this also refer to any branch of the military (desk job, chefs, etc).
2007-01-22 07:39:38 · 11 answers · asked by sunnyd_137 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I believe the great majority of soldiers are uneasy with the idea of being around other men who would love to have sex with them. It's plain and simple.
You can't make exceptions based on the assumption that someone who initially has a desk job will always work under those conditions. In wartime, able bodied soldiers are often in short supply.
My views regarding modesty and gender division have softened somewhat since moving to Europe. Here in my gym, a WOMAN regularly comes into the men's locker room to clean up the showers, while we are showering or changing clothes. I think this would be unheard of in the U.S. However I'm still not very comfortable with a woman being in the locker room, so imagine how some soldier would feel about having to share a foxhole with a gay comrade.
Maybe if gays want to really be part of combat units, they should consider what the ancient Greeks did:
"According to Greek legend, the Sacred Band of Thebes was an army of 150 pairs of homosexual lovers, or a total of 300 men. It was believed that the strong bond between lovers would cause them to fight even more fiercely than an army of ones family or tribe. And that a warrior would rather die in battle than disgrace his lover. They fought valiantly and fiercely in battle for nearly thirty-three years."
2007-01-22 07:57:14 · answer #1 · answered by pachl@sbcglobal.net 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It refered to all military personnel. The military theory behind gays in the military was, they were high risk. They would compromise their security rather than be exposed. They would solicit sex amongst the very youngest and most vulnerable military personnel. They were considered a demoralizing factor among young, barracks residents.
Combat skills plays little part in this problem other than young individuals who become victim to a homosexual predator, may decide to try out his newly developed combat skills on the perpetrator.
2007-01-22 08:54:39 · answer #2 · answered by briang731/ bvincent 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It has nothing to do with a persons combat skills. I could really care less whether or not someone I'm serving with is gay. There are a lot more gay people in the military than people think.
2007-01-22 08:29:34 · answer #3 · answered by Paul P 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It used to be no gays. Then it was changed to "don't ask don't tell". Personally, I think the reason behind it is this. You have a group of guys, trained to kill, and some are, like it or not, homophobic. There isn't a difference in anyone ability to fight but to blatantly announce a phobia could put a great many people in danger of gay bashing. The idea behind it is to protect people against a few prejudiced, narrow minded individuals that can cause a real problem with their stupidity.
The first answer is your best bet, I just reread it.
2007-01-22 07:43:35 · answer #4 · answered by Centurion529 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It was a political compromise. Clinton had promised during the 1992 campaign that he would end the discrimination of gays in the military. After he was sworn in and attempted to live up to his promise the republicans, as well as the joint chiefs, freaked. The ridiculous compromise they came up with basically says that you can be gay and in the military as long as no one knows about it.
2007-01-22 07:45:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
People in the military bunk together, and normally people don't like those who are potentially sexually interested in them at close quarters.
Basically, the policy exists for the same reason that barracks, bathrooms, showers, etc. are not co-ed.
Right or wrong, that's part of the reason.
2007-01-22 07:42:35 · answer #6 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. The idea is gays can't serve in the military and the military can't ask. I hope they don't fix this policy, because I am counting on 'coming out' in order to avoid the draft once the neo-libs start it up again.
Hey, better to be GAY than CANADIAN!
2007-01-22 07:44:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think there is no basis. No difference in combat ability or desk or cooking skills.
2007-01-22 08:48:07 · answer #8 · answered by Leah 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Political Correctness
2007-01-22 07:44:10 · answer #9 · answered by credo quia est absurdum 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The basis was Little Billy Clinton's need to make everyone happy. As usual, however, he ended up making no one happy.
No question about it - ol' Billy is a real piece of work!
2007-01-22 07:45:36 · answer #10 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋