Again, Keith, your homophobia is showing. Most gays do not fit your homophobic stereotypic ideas of flamboyancy and transgenderism. Many, in fact, are more "macho" and muscular than many heterosexuals, and that is especially true among lesbians, who I love and respect deeply.
Gays already serve, and make fine, well behaved, heroic soldiers, and are well practiced at hiding and surpressing their sexuality, unlike many straight soldiers who go around bragging about thier sexual conquests, being vulgar, and showing sometimes lewed "affection" in public. The existing Military Code of Conduct will be more than adequate for any isolated behavioral incidents which may arise. On 12/19/10, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > No question, I see this issue from a different perspective than I believe > most do here in HP. > > I don't see the DADT repeal as being all that significant, and although I > agree with Rob and his assessment, I also think that there is a major > component to all of this, that Rob, or anyone else in the group has touched > upon. > > The military does not allow for ANYONE, and this will include heterosexuals > as well as homosexuals, to wear their sexuality openly, or to broadcast > their sexual likes or dislikes publicly. In other words, NO ONE in the > military can be or will be identified by their sexual proclivities or sexual > identification, which is a common factor in the Gay community. This is > where so many in the Gay community are mistaken. > > The military will boot out a service member who is an admitted > adulterer. Service members who are into any type of > sado-masochistic activities and make them public will be summarily > discharged. Those service members who are into "swinging" and have multiple > sexual partners, and who make that aspect of their lives public, will be > shown the door and discharged. All branches of the service will not > condone any member who bases his or her lifestyle upon their sexual > identiy. > > Nothng has changed. > > Just as important, the military does in fact have and embrace a "Macho" > image. This is requisite for combat. Yes, there are women in the service > but not in combat arms. The lifestyle is tough, rugged and most of the time > uncomfortable. The stereotypical Gay male will not be condoned. The combat > units of the Army and Marines are all male and all the males talk about > doing their girl friends as they charge the enemy with cigars hanging out > their mouths; not penises. This is the image that our military > cultivates. It is good for morale, it is good for unit cohesiveness, and > most importantly, it is but one component of what makes our military the > mightiest in the world. Again, this image is not going to change. > > -- > Thanks for participating in the Google Group, Historical Pictorial, which is > the premiere men's forum on the web; focusing on historical media, and > discussions of contemporary issues as well as our chronicled past! > > For options and help, please visit the group at: > http://groups.google.com/group/Historical-Pictoral > -- Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. Have a great day, Tommy -- Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. Have a great day, Tommy -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
