English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If we go to an openly gay military and a straight man is propositioned by his room mate and becomes offended and harms his room mate, who is at fault? The one who started it with the proposition or the one who ended it by defending himself? That is why men and women in the military now do not room together, because they are sexually attracted to one another. If the military is openly gay will we have to have 3 different kinds of housing, men, women, and gay, so that everyone is seperated from those they are sexually attracted to?

2007-03-14 12:49:35 · 5 answers · asked by jim h 6 in Society & Culture Cultures & Groups Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender

Tanya B: In todays military women and men have seperate living areas so that when a soldier goes to thier "home" in the evening they can relax without worrying about thier roomate hitting on them. If you have open gays in the military they have lost that privacy unless the gays have thier own sleeping areas. If you are going to allow men who are attracted to men and women who are attracted to women to sleep in the same rooms as the people they are attracted to, what would be the point in continuing to seperate the heterosexual men and women?

2007-03-15 12:19:22 · update #1

Also, by the way, I do understand this situation. I was in the miltary for 10 years living in military barracks. I know how these people think. You can sit around all day long and say this should happen and that should happen, but I've been there and I know what WILL happen.

2007-03-15 12:24:09 · update #2

5 answers

If a female hits on a male does he have the right to harm her? Or if a male hits on a female does she have the right to harm him? NO!! This is so unbelievably obvious. Although I commend your efforts at making some great point you have fallen solidly short. Seriously, good for you, you don't agree with homosexuality. I hate to be the one to tell you, but nobody cares. At least when you are out and about speaking out against something you don't understand, try to make a valid point.

2007-03-14 19:46:31 · answer #1 · answered by T 4 · 3 0

If someone commits an act of violence that is not in self-defense, then that person is at fault.

Just the same way that "He said I was ugly." will not stand up in court as a defense for assaulting a man, there is nothing about a gay proposition that excuses violence against the person asking. Now, if the gay man had sexually assaulted him, he is completely in the wrong. But if he makes a simple proposition and the straight man becomes offended and harms him, how is that defense? The same doesn't apply to men and women- could you imagine how many men would go to jail because they came onto a woman who got offended and harmed them? Is that fair? Of course not- and it's not fair for a gay man who asks and then gets beat down for that to be at fault.

I've got a secret for you: the military isn't about sex; it's about war and serving your country. Men and women are separated today because of old, long-standing traditions that thought it was indecent for men and women to share the same quarters. That's all; just our history. I expect people sharing the bunks to do their jobs, and in their off time, if they can find someone who wants to get it on, be it gay or straight or whatever, go for it. Or if that is unacceptable (I don't know; is straight sex in the army between people punishable?), then all sex is banned, and it ain't a problem.

I guess I fail to see how an openly gay military is any different from a secretive one in terms of what's going on in the beds.

Hope that helps.

2007-03-14 20:00:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Australian military allows gays. There were/are several openly gay civilian contractors, working closely with the military- so this was just formalizing it.

At the time the change was made, the sexual harassment laws were beefed up. SO- if a gay member propositions a straight, a rejection MUST be respected.

ANY continued advance toward that particular member is a violation of the sexual harassment guidelines.

2007-03-14 19:56:35 · answer #3 · answered by Alan 6 · 0 1

perhaps the protection stress ought to be solely gay. That way there could be no orphaned infants or widows! i comprehend a number of of noticeably inspired gay adult males. All that camraderie and P.T. and those snappy uniforms... The military in finished of seamen and the Marines are "women" military has a number of of "grunts". I recommend what's the adaptation? Is it no longer discrimination the two way?

2016-09-30 22:37:48 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Looks like "Tanya B" just blew your azz outta the water! LOL! I'll just echo on her response. When is physical harm ever an appropriate response to being hit on...no matter what the gender? Get real...and don't join the military.

Oh, and I'm gay and served in the military. I never hit on a straight member.

2007-03-14 19:55:15 · answer #5 · answered by Charles 5 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers