Sounds like change is coming...

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

As put forth numerous times...there is currently sexual harassement regs for folks saying inappropriate things and staring. Common sense says that those things done by a homosexual would also be grounds for harassement charges.

The barring of blacks and women from jobs they could physically do was due to attitudes of those stopping them from serving, the same way that barring gays from jobs they can physically do is attitude based. It doesn't matter whether blacks don't have a choice or women don't have a choice, what matters is the road block is based on the attitudes of those in power.

It is great that someone knew twins where one became gay and one remained straight, however things like cancer, alcoholism, and other genetic diseases predispositions have been shown in just one in a set of twins, if I remember from a NOVA show I watched on twins (I am a twin, so I had a vested interest). There was speculation on why, but it could have been environmental influences.

Researchers are still looking at causes of sexual orientation, whether biological, prenatal hormones, prenatal stress, birth order and other stuff. The American Psychaitric Association has stated "some people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person’s lifetime." They go on to state "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."

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.

Well if we want to play the it's not a choice game let's reexamine why we deem homosexuality as acceptable human behavior if you are so inclined.

The following article was written several years ago but is fascinating in that it is revealing of a possible master gene regarding sexual preference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03cell.html

While it refers to fruit flies it is important to take note that fruit flies do share quite a bit of genetic code with humans although the difference is quite substantial. If such a master gene is in existence in fruit flies as is suggested in this article then one can reasonably assume that it exists in humans and that it is a mere matter of time before it is identified and manipulated.

The article also gives a brief description of how the environment affects sexuality and how rejection has an influence on future sexual behavior in the fruit flies.

The mere fact that there could be a master gene would allow one to infer that a homosexuality is indeed a sexual disorder. Whether one chooses to have it corrected is not what I'm interested in discussing.

 

[bubblehead]

...how rejection has an influence on future sexual behavior...

So, there are higher incidences of homosexuality in the aviation community couldn't resist..

 

[a2b2c3]

The mere fact that there could be a master gene would allow one to infer that a homosexuality is indeed a sexual disorder. Whether one chooses to have it corrected is not what I'm interested in discussing.

I hate this arguement. Our gene's make up a lot of who we are. Our hair color, eye color, how tall we'll become, our chances for disease... So if you're saying that we can fix homosexuality by changing gene's, how long before we can fix other problems? Should we make everyone into a blond hair, blue eyed, aryan master race while we're at it?

If you open gene therapy to force a "cure" for homosexuality, where does it stop?

 

[bubblehead]

If you open gene therapy to force a "cure" for homosexuality, where does it stop?

Boy... the religious right would love this.

 

[Spekkio]

This thread is getting ridiculous.

If a gay guy was eying me, I would not like it, much like I wouldn't like it if some unattractive woman was eying me. But, being an adult, I would handle it maturely.

I was trained by a gay guy for my job prior to joining the Navy. I thought nothing of it until he straight up offered me a blowjob one day. I declined and explained to him as politely as possible that I'm straight and have no interest in men. He never brought it up again, so I didn't feel the need to tell my boss about it. I also don't think it means gays need to be barred from the workplace, be it civvy or military.

Was it uncomfortable? You bet. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that being more uncomfortable with being hit on by a gay guy than being hit on by a woman came from the fact that being hit on by the same sex makes you question your masculinity, like "omfg what am I doing that he thinks I could possibly be interested in men?!?!?" which I ultimately realized is stupid.

The only difference is that the Navy has explicit rules forbidding fraternization, whereas the employer I worked for did not. Ergo, you give people the opportunity to follow the rules, and punish them accordingly if they don't. It's as simple as that.

The only legitimate issue is that straight men/straight women/gays/lesbians all have to share berthing and showers, so it does present more potential for bad situations than sharing a cubicle with someone from 9-5 for a few weeks.

 

[exhelodrvr]

I hate this arguement. Our gene's make up a lot of who we are. Our hair color, eye color, how tall we'll become, our chances for disease... So if you're saying that we can fix homosexuality by changing gene's, how long before we can fix other problems? Should we make everyone into a blond hair, blue eyed, aryan master race while we're at it?

If you open gene therapy to force a "cure" for homosexuality, where does it stop?

That's already available via selective abortions.

 

[navy09]

Call me an old fashioned, beer drinkin' good ole boy, but i can't stand fags and I don't give a damn what anybody thinks. When did society start telling me how to think

You from the south?

You're a military officer. Get used to the idea, some of the guys you went through flight school with were gay, some of the IPs you flew with were gay, and many of the sailors that will serve under your command will be gay.

Deal with it.

 

[HercDriver]

Well if we want to play the it's not a choice game let's reexamine why we deem homosexuality as acceptable human behavior if you are so inclined.

The following article was written several years ago but is fascinating in that it is revealing of a possible master gene regarding sexual preference.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03cell.html

While it refers to fruit flies it is important to take note that fruit flies do share quite a bit of genetic code with humans although the difference is quite substantial. If such a master gene is in existence in fruit flies as is suggested in this article then one can reasonably assume that it exists in humans and that it is a mere matter of time before it is identified and manipulated.

The article also gives a brief description of how the environment affects sexuality and how rejection has an influence on future sexual behavior in the fruit flies.

The mere fact that there could be a master gene would allow one to infer that a homosexuality is indeed a sexual disorder. Whether one chooses to have it corrected is not what I'm interested in discussing.

Help me out here. Earlier you said it was a choice (proven by your empirical "twins" evidence), and that you had ammo about it being genetic. Now you post a link showing evidence it could be genetic.

And why would you say "disorder" for homosexuality, vice trait...is being blonde a disorder? You also seem to think environment equals who you hang around with; that could be one of many factors, but the jury is still out. I'm guessing you think it is a choice because gays hang around other men who have an interest in (insert gay stereotypical behavior), vice watching hockey.

Just trying to understand your two seemingly opposing viewpoints.

 

[mastbump]

You from the south?

You're a military officer. Get used to the idea, some of the guys you went through flight school with were gay, some of the IPs you flew with were gay, and many of the sailors that will serve under your command will be gay.

Deal with it.

haha

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

Help me out here. Earlier you said it was a choice (proven by your empirical "twins" evidence), and that you had ammo about it being genetic. Now you post a link showing evidence it could be genetic.

And why would you say "disorder" for homosexuality, vice trait...is being blonde a disorder? You also seem to think environment equals who you hang around with; that could be one of many factors, but the jury is still out. I'm guessing you think it is a choice because gays hang around other men who have an interest in (insert gay stereotypical behavior), vice watching hockey.

Just trying to understand your two seemingly opposing viewpoints.

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.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

You from the south?

You're a military officer. Get used to the idea, some of the guys you went through flight school with were gay, some of the IPs you flew with were gay, and many of the sailors that will serve under your command will be gay.

Deal with it.

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

 

[MasterBates]

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

No shit.

 

[exhelodrvr]

Is it reasonable for a heterosexual to feel uncomfortable when in close quarters (i.e. roommates on deployment, next bunk over, common shower rooms/restrooms) with a homosexual of the same gender?

Personally, I believe that this falls into the same category as whether it would be reasonable for a heterosexual to feel uncomfortable when in close quarters (i.e. roommates on deployment, next bunk over, common shower rooms/restrooms) with a heterosexual of the opposite gender.

I think the answer is yes, and if so, then the policy should remain DADT.

However, it seems pretty clear that no one is using that criteria for this decision, and so the openly gay policy is going to happen at some point in the not-too-distant future. So figure out how you are going to deal with it if you are one of those people who will feel uncomfortable.

 

[Spekkio]

Is it reasonable for a heterosexual to feel uncomfortable when in close quarters (i.e. roommates on deployment, next bunk over, common shower rooms/restrooms) with a homosexual of the same gender?

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.

 

[scoober78]

They do it to show dominance among one another, so basically its another way of fighting. Totally different and very un-natural...

I admit, that I don't know enough about it to really get in the weeds as to causes etc...but...does it matter why animals do it? I mean do causes really matter at all? Seems to me if it occurs in nature, that would be the definition of "natural".

If that isn't it...what definition of natural are you guys using? Seems like it means something more like "normal". Understand that I'm not arguing the normative...lots of things occur in nature that are strange as hell and aren't the behavior of the majority, but normal doesn't mean the same thing as natural.

For example...transgender births are natural, however, they are far from normal.