Sounds like change is coming...

[navy09]

Lot of first hand experience coming from such a salty midshipman.

You don't think there are gay flight students or IPs?

Or squadron COs for that matter? If you think they're not everywhere, you're wrong. That's not salt, it's common sense.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

With DADT, people are doing this right now. The only difference if DADT is repealed is that these people can openly admit to being gay without violating the UCMJ.

Go back and read my post earlier:

As it stands, if a gay guy is in the shower with you and neither of you know each others sexual orientation - no harm no foul.

As soon as someone walks in that everyone knows is gay, how comfortable are they going to feel? Whether he is "checking them out" or not?

Again, could a male walk into a female locker room/berthing and say that it's ok for him to take a shower because he isn't "checking anyone out"?

 

[swerdna]

Just because they can be openly gay doesn't mean that they will be.

Besides, anyone who's prior service knows what I mean when I say that we all knew who the homosexuals were. Nobody cared then, and I'm sure nobody will care now.

Professionalism doesn't care for sexual preference.

 

[MasterBates]

I'm current service, and I knew who A gay was, and was NOT a fan of having to get dressed in front of him every day.

 

[HercDriver]

Environment equals everything you grow up in. Pretty self explanatory in my opinion. How you're raised and the type of people you hang out with are included in the environment you grow up in. Your environment has an effect on your sexuality(article mentions it as well). Do I believe it's still a choice? Yes. Because if there is a master gene and it can be changed as it can in fruit flies then one still chooses to stay that way. Admittedly there are a number of variables that have not all been laid out yet.

Disorder or trait it is detrimental to the advancement of the species in that while some may be fully physically capable of reproducing by this trait they will be little inclined to do so. As for traits that are disorders. Sickle-cell anemia is a perfect example. It's good for preventing malaria but decreases life expectancy.

I think people should have the choice. There are a lot of things still to be examined in relation to a master gene. Until the research is completed it's hard to say this or that. Nonetheless I stand firmly beside my belief that the environment has an affect upon a person regarding sexuality and that choices are made whether it is a climactic moment of YES or NO or a long process leading in one direction or the other.

I hope that clears up the confusion a bit for you.

Well, the article makes it clear it is genetic, not a choice. Your saying master gene=ability to alter it (at least in humans) is not supported by the article. And even experts don't agree on whether it is the environment, prenatal stress, hormones in the mom, or a host of other things that cause it or trigger it. Fine if you think it is the environment, but you make it out to be too simple, IMO. Environment could be emotional (stressors or lack of stressors in family), physical environment (raised by strong mother or strong father), or a host of other things. And we really don't have much control over our environment until we get beyond childhood, and perhaps the trigger has already occured. It isn't a choice at that point. If it were simply choosing, I'm sure many who are gay would probably choose the simpler life of being like everyone else. Most kids desperately desire to fit in, so commond sense dictates choices on behavior different from everyone else would limit most kids from pining after their best friend.

So we do agree on some things...it is genetic, and could be triggered by environment. Neither your arguments, nor the article suggests anything beyond that, so we will agree to disagree.

 

[swerdna]

Well, the article makes it clear it is genetic, not a choice. Your saying master gene=ability to alter it (at least in humans) is not supported by the article. And even experts don't agree on whether it is the environment, prenatal stress, hormones in the mom, or a host of other things that cause it or trigger it. Fine if you think it is the environment, but you make it out to be too simple, IMO. Environment could be emotional (stressors or lack of stressors in family), physical environment (raised by strong mother or strong father), or a host of other things. And we really don't have much control over our environment until we get beyond childhood, and perhaps the trigger has already occured. It isn't a choice at that point. If it were simply choosing, I'm sure many who are gay would probably choose the simpler life of being like everyone else. Most kids desperately desire to fit in, so commond sense dictates choices on behavior different from everyone else would limit most kids from pining after their best friend.

So we do agree on some things...it is genetic, and could be triggered by environment. Neither your arguments, nor the article suggests anything beyond that, so we will agree to disagree.

Both of these arguments are leaving many varients out. Nobody knows what causes humans to be "gay" or "straight." And one of the most recent (though actually oldest) schools of thought is that there is no such thing. Sometimes people are just attracted to people regardless of the sex.

Promoting the species is also untrue as many "homosexuals" have fathered/mothered children. In fact, the idea of a homosexual was created in the mid 18th century, coupled with the acts/identities transformation. The classic example was sodomy. People might comit acts of sodomy, but they were not considered sodomites.

 

[swerdna]

Lot of first hand experience coming from such a salty midshipman.

At least the "salty midshipman" understands the notion of professionalism. As for your "environment equals everything" argument, it is totally baseless. I am guessing that is just your opinion, unless you happen to be a PhD or subject matter expert.

Also, this is the first and only time in my life I've heard of humans being compared to fruit flies of all things. If you leave an apple out for a few days, will humans lay eggs on it? Will the human eggs hatch and create more humans? Maybe if we examine the fruit fly genetic sequence we can "cure" homosexuality and grow humans from old apples.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

At least the "salty midshipman" understands the notion of professionalism. As for your "environment equals everything" argument, it is totally baseless. I am guessing that is just your opinion, unless you happen to be a PhD or subject matter expert.

Also, this is the first and only time in my life I've heard of humans being compared to fruit flies of all things. If you leave an apple out for a few days, will humans lay eggs on it? Will the human eggs hatch and create more humans? Maybe if we examine the fruit fly genetic sequence we can "cure" homosexuality and grow humans from old apples.

What do I not understand about professionalism? Why don't you inform me? So the environment isn't everything around you that affects you?

You've obviously never taken a course that had anything to do with genetics. The type of fruit fly I'm referring to is the Drosophila melanogaster which in fact is widely used for genetic research. Do some research for yourself regarding genetics and the Drosophila melanogaster as it relates to humans before you post bullshit that reveals your obvious ignorance of the subject.

 

[HueyCobra8151]

lol, "You don't agree with me, therefore you are unprofessional."

 

[Bster]

No doubt there will be some issues and some awkwardness when this policy changes, but that doesn't necessarily mean the policy shouldn't be changed. After all, there were issues with the integration of blacks and women. Sex and sexual discussion doesn't belong in the military workplace, so when these issues come up, hopefully we can act as professionals and treat the issues like we would with straight individuals. If I find a male and a female having sex in a fan room, I would be just as pissed off if I found two guys going at it.

Well said Commodoremid!

 

[Spekkio]

As it stands, if a gay guy is in the shower with you and neither of you know each others sexual orientation - no harm no foul.

So because you can stick your head in the sand like an ostrich it's ok? I don't buy it, and I personally feel more paranoid wondering who/if anyone is gay than flat out knowing.

 

[nittany03]

So because you can stick your head in the sand like an ostrich it's ok? I don't buy it, and I personally feel more paranoid wondering who/if anyone is gay than flat out knowing.

So do you break out in a cold sweat every time you have to use a public locker room at the Y or some gym? I bet there's more of a chance you might have to breathe the same air as a gay guy there than onboard USS Boat.

You're entitled to your opinion, but realize the argument you're making here.

 

[desertoasis]

Having just spent the last hour reading this entire thread, I have a few ideas.

1. Why not just cut DADT down to DA? Superiors are not allowed to ask a servicemember about his or her sexual orientation, but the member is allowed to discuss it, at his or her own peril (for lack of a better word, someone help me out here). My guess is that the straight members will find it a little easier to adjust by virtue of being able to tell the first guy that comes parading into the squad bay in assless chaps to keep it to himself, and the gay members can gauge the probable reaction of their coworkers and either tell or not tell, but its NOT something that can be extracted.

2. Environment does not equal everything. That is a one-sided interpretation of a many-sided argument. Being raised in Haight-Ashbury in the 1960s does not necessarily make you a drugged-up hippie (though I will willingly concede that it probably was a tremendous help down that ice-covered oil slope), but it's not a foregone conclusion. After all, college graduates are not always academics or qualified for the job they occupy, and GED earners are not always deadbeats or convicts. How you are raised has a LOT to do with it. It's the classic nature vs. nurture argument, and the answer is that both contribute to the bigger picture.

3. Read Alfred Kinsey's 'Sexual Behavior in the Human Male', probably the best sexual study of human males to date. It will knock you on your ass, and give you some insights into the sexual behavior of people 50 years ago...now think about how that has changed today. People are not as polarly gay or straight as you may think. YOU may even be a little gay and not even know it.

4. It is absolutely no one's business in the Fleet whether I am gay or straight, unless I choose to make it their business. I can't think of any situation where I would feel compelled to tell someone in the fleet my sexual orientation if I was any sort of professional. Even now, I see no need to share with the forum that I'm straight, because I can't see what is has to do with my performance of my job as a flight student. It is a question and answer that can and should (or even must) be quickly and easily dismissed. That's what professionals do.

5. Mods, thanks for keeping the thread open past that LOSLOAR douchebag's comments. It was unnecessary, rude, and I for one saw it exactly for what it was; stirring the pot for no reason. Kudos to everyone else who thought the same thing.

 

[Spekkio]

So do you break out in a cold sweat every time you have to use a public locker room at the Y or some gym? I bet there's more of a chance you might have to breathe the same air as a gay guy there than onboard USS Boat.

You're entitled to your opinion, but realize the argument you're making here.

No, and I suppose I didn't say what I was trying to say. Point was, the fact that someone is openly or silently gay makes no difference to me. It's very easy to recognize when someone is staring at you in that way, regardless of whether or not they have disclosed their sexual orientation, and it's even easier if they are openly gay. If they do, you politely tell them to knock it off. If they persist, you go to your CoC.

I'm really curious what women think about this issue because it seems that a big portion of the problem arises from the fact that most men have very little experience of getting hit on by someone in whom he has no interest, whereas any reasonably attractive woman has to deal with this sort of thing on a regular basis.

 

[GroundPounder]

A neighbor's kid was 6 when I moved in to my first duty station; he was slightly effeminate and displaying more "feminized" traits when playing with other kids, and in his interests. By the time I left 3 years later, it had become more pronounced. We still keep in touch with his mom, and about 4 or five year ago when he was 19 he came out to his parents. I'm unsure when he made his "choice"; perhaps while watching Transformers or Thundercats.

+1

Think about it this way, what do you find attractive in a woman? For me, I find long staright hair to be the most attractive, I don't remember ever deciding that I like that, I just always have. I'd be willing to bet that most people have things that they just like, and can't give you a reason why, they just do.

I had a friend that had a son, and from the time that he was about 4 or 5 it was obvious that his interests were more in line with being gay than straight. He's 20 and quite flamingly gay, and you would never convince me that he choose to be that way.

Even though that I don't think that people choose to be gay, I still beleive that having openly gay people serve is problematic for many reasons. The Masterbates situation being the obvious example where he was probably told to deal with it, where if it were a simular situation involving a M/F action would be taken, and the person bringing the complaint would not be ignored.